Egypt was the natural birth of the nation, the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai was the religious consecration of the new-born infant; its regeneration to a higher life. But as God never demands without giving, so he never gives without demanding. And therefore, when Israel entered upon the privileges of the covenant-nation, and obtained possession of the gifts and goods, the promises and hopes of the covenant, it necessarily undertook the duties of a covenant-nation, and submitted to the commandments, the restrictions, and the sacrifices which such a relation involved. The conclusion of the covenant was therefore accompanied by the giving of a law, which defined the privileges and prescribed the duties of the covenant-nation. This law also conferred upon Israel a constitution, suited to its vocation and its future destiny, by which its internal organisation was completed, its external distinctions defined, and its safety ensured. The events attendant upon the legislation and the conclusion of the covenant ushered in the second step in the onward progress of the nation, namely, the determination of the peculiar constitution, which was henceforth to regulate the course and development of the history of Israel, in other words, the establishment of the theocracy. The mediator of the covenant and the agent in the foundation of the theocracy was Moses, the man of God (1).

But the development of the nation was not yet complete. In the first step of this stage in its history, Israel had received its natural freedom and independence; in the second, its sacred dedication and covenant. One thing was still wanting, however, which was an essential pre-requisite to the actual realization of the whole of these, viz. a country suited to its natural and spiritual character, its position, and its destiny. In the third step of its national history this want was satisfied, and it obtained possession of the land, which the providence of God had selected as the arena on which the covenant-history was to run its course, and

which the mercy of God had already promised to the fathers. The divine hero, by whom Israel was led through conflict and victory to the possession of this treasure, was Joshua, who continued and completed the work which Moses had begun.

The condition and possessions of Israel now embraced all that was requisite, to sustain and exhibit a national existence devoted to God, by the side of the other nations, which were at enmity against God. Country and people, laws and promises, constitution and worship were given; and they contained the germs of all their future development. This brings us to the commencement of the fourth step in the history of the covenant, which we find in the existence of a nation entrusted with the task of working out its peculiar nationality. Hitherto the operations and gifts of God had stood in the foreground. But the time had now arrived, when the works of Israel in performance of the covenant were to stand prominently forward; when Israel might, and should have shown, that the gifts, and leadings, and revelations of God, which it had hitherto received, it could now use and apply for itself; and when it should have taught the way in which this could be done. Again and again, however, it forsook the path of the covenant; and God had continually to interfere, and by punishment and chastening to save and heal. Surrounding nations were employed to execute his sentences, and Judges were afterwards sent as his messengers of salvation.

(1). The second step of this stage was indisputably the most important and eventful. We must, therefore, examine it with. especial care. In doing so we shall divide it into two parts. The first will contain an account of the historical foundations, on which the theocracy was based, and the circumstances amidst which the legislation, that established it, was completed. The second will consist of a systematic analysis of the legislation itself.

The sources from which our knowledge of the first two steps must be derived are the last four books of Pentateuch. As cri

tical and exegetical aids we recommend especially the works already mentioned (in Vol. i. § 14-20), of Hävernick, Ranke, Hengstenberg, Welte, Keil, Rosenmüller, and M. Baumgarten. In addition to historical works of a more general character, the following monographs deserve particular notice: Warburton's divine legation of Moses; Fr. Hauff, über Mose's welthistorische Bedeutung (Studien der evangelischen Geistlichkeit. Würtemberg vi. 2 p. 3 sqq.); E. Osiander, Blicke auf Moses (Christoterpe, 1837 p. 77 sqq.); Patr. Fairbairn's Typology of Scripture, vol. ii., the Mosaic period, Edinburgh, 1847.

SCENE OF THE HISTORY.

Compare the aids mentioned in Vol. i., § 15. 2; also Léon de Laborde et Linant, voyage de l'Arabie pétrée, Paris, 1830, and Léon de Laborde, Commentaire géographique sur l'Exode et les Nombres, Paris and Leipzic, 1841-4, as well as the works named in Vol. iii., § 2 and 23.

§ 10. An immense tract of desert stretches along the north of Africa, commencing at the coast on the north-west, and running not only through Africa, but into Asia as far as the steppes of the Euphrates. The only interruption which it meets with is from the Nile, whose fertilising waters flow completely across the desert, and have produced a fruitful oasis, which bears the name of Egypt, and is one of the most ancient and important of all the civilized lands, that have figured in the history of the human race. By far the larger part of this desert, towards the west, consists of low land, and is known by the name of the Sahara. The portion immediately bordering upon Egypt is called the Libyan desert. On the other side of the Nile, at the point where the sand regains its supremacy, the Arabian desert commences, and stretches thence to the Euphrates. This eastern division, which is much smaller than the other, is hilly, and is

intersected or bounded by mountain ranges, which vary in extent, and on which there are here and there fertile spots, proportioned in size to the springs which produce them. For some distance the breadth of the Arabian desert is considerably diminished by the Red Sea, which reaches almost as far as the Mediterranean. This enormous bay is formed by the Indian Ocean, and terminates in two smaller gulfs, which enclose a portion of the Arabian desert, and give it the character of a peninsula. Both of these gulfs receive their ancient, as well as their modern names, from towns which stand, or have stood, in the neighbourhood. The western arm was formerly called the Heroopolitan gulf, the eastern the Elanitic; at present the former is called the gulf of Suez, the latter the gulf of Akabah. The mountains of Idumea (Mount Seir) stretch from the Elanitic gulf to the Dead Sea, intersecting the Arabian plateau from north to south, and dividing it into two unequal parts. The western half (the smaller of the two), including the mountains of Idumea, has been known since the time of the Romans as Arabia Petræa. This name is not derived from the rocky nature of the soil, as is commonly, though erroneously, supposed, but from the strong city of Petra in the land of the Edomites. Under the last of the Emperors Arabia Petræa was called Palæstina tertia. The name was given on correct geographical grounds, the whole district being apparently an integral part of the mountainous region of Palestine (the provinces of Judah and Ephraim were named Palæstina prima, and Galilee, with the country beyond Jordan, Palæstina secunda). It was also designated Palæstina salutaris on account of the healthy nature of the climate in the mountains of Edom. The northern boundary of Arabia Petræa, from the mouth of the Pelusiac arm of the Nile as far as Gaza, is formed by the Mediterranean Sea; from Gaza to the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, it is bounded by the mountains of Judah, which are already known to us by the name of the

mountains of the Amorites (Vol. i., § 40. 4). Towards the south, it runs between the two arms of the Red Sea, and terminates in the promontory of Ras-Mohammed. The larger or eastern half of the Arabian desert, to which the Romans gave the name of Arabia deserta, commences on the other side of the Idumean mountains. It stretches eastward as far as the Euphrates, northward to Damascus, running by the side of the fertile highlands of the country beyond Jordan (§ 42), and southward to a considerable distance into the heart of Arabia proper (Arabia felix.) The last-named portion of the Asiatico-African desert, and also the portion first referred to (the Sahara with the Lybian desert) lie altogether beyond the province of our history, the first stage of which belongs to Egypt, the second to Arabia Petræa, and the third and fourth to Palestine. Palestine has already been described (Vol. i., § 38-43). The only portion of Egypt with which we are concerned is the eastern part of the country, viz., the province of Goshen, for which see § 1. 5, and § 37-42. It only remains for us to take a survey of the characteristics of Arabia Petræa. At present, however, we shall content ourselves with the most general features. A more particular description will be given, as the history brings the different localities under our notice.

§ 11. In the heart of the peninsula, which is enclosed by the Heroopolitan and Elanitic gulfs, somewhat towards the south, rise the mountains of Sinai (Jebel el Tur), from which the whole country has received the name of the peninsula of Sinai. Sinai consists of a nearly circular group of mountains from forty to sixty miles in diameter. The average height of the mountains composing this group is six or seven thousand feet above the level of the sea, about 2000 feet above the surrounding valleys and plains. Two of the highest points are almost in the centre of the range, Sinai itself (Jebel Musa, 7097 feet high) and Mount Catherine (Jebel el Homr, 8168 feet). As soon as the traveller