has copied from Wilkinson's work on Egypt, (see Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 40, Eng. translation). It is taken from a tomb at Beni Hassan, and represents the arrival of strangers, who have come to Egypt with presents in their hands, and with their property carried on asses. "The number 37 is written over them in hieroglyphics. All the men have beards, which was contrary to the custom of the Egyptians, although very general in the East at that period. It is usually introduced in their sculptures as a peculiarity of foreign uncivilised nations." On this Hengstenberg remarks, "Some believe that this painting has a direct reference to the arrival of Jacob with his family in Egypt. On the contrary, Wilkinson observes that the expression captives," which appears in the inscription, makes it probable that they are some of the prisoners of whom so many were taken captive by the Egyptians during their wars in Asia. But in his more recent work, he considers this circumstance as no longer decisive, inasmuch as the contemptuous expressions common among the Egyptians in speaking of foreigners, might account for the use of this word. In fact it speaks very decidedly against their being prisoners, that they are armed. Whether this painting has a direct reference to the Israelites will, of course, ever remain problematical, but it is at any rate well worthy of notice, since it furnishes proof that emigration with women and children took place in very ancient times."

Joseph directed his brethren to introduce themselves as shepherds, not only in spite of the fact that shepherds were an abomination to the Egyptians, but on that very account. His reason for doing so is apparent. In the occupation of his brethren there was the surest guarantee that their national and religious peculiarities would not be endangered or destroyed, and that they would not be absorbed by the Egyptians. The hatred and contempt which the Egyptians cherished towards the shepherd caste, as existing monuments attest by many a characteristic sign, may be traced to the fact that agriculture, with its regular and methodical habits, was the sole support of the Egyptian state, and that the irregularities of a nomad life must have appeared to a pedantic Egyptian to be rude and barbarous in the extreme. It is interesting, however, to find traces in the Pentateuch of the different stages in the growth of that fanatical hatred, which the people of Egypt ultimately cherished towards every

thing foreign. When Abraham sojourned in Egypt there was no appearance of this dislike; in Joseph's time all shepherds were an abomination to the Egyptians, and it was necessary that Joseph should be naturalised by marrying the daughter of an eminent priest. But the fact that such a marriage could take place is a sign, that the hatred and antipathy towards all that was foreign, which prevailed in the time of the Exodus, had not yet reached its highest point.

Pharaoh's readiness to consent to the request of the brethren may have been dictated by political motives, as well as by a wish to gratify Joseph. He may not improbably have hoped that by the settlement of a powerful and devoted tribe in the border province he would secure a desirable bulwark against the devastating incursions of the Bedouin robbers of the desert, and also against the other nations of the East, from whom Egypt, with its tempting treasures, had always much to fear.

(5). For the situation of the province of Goshen, see Gesenius Thes. s. v., Robinson i. 76 sqq. (London Ed. 1841), Hengstenberg ut sup. p. 42, sqq., Eng. tr., Ewald ii. 52, sqq., and Tischendorf, de Israel. per mare rubrum transitu, Lips. 1847, p. 3, sqq. Goshen was undoubtedly the most easterly border-land of Egypt. Jacob sent Judah thither before the rest (Gen. xlvi. 28). There the procession halted until Joseph had obtained the king's permission (chap. xlvii. 1). And the Israelites asked for a grant of this province that they might not come too closely into contact with the Egyptians, who hated their mode of life (xlvi. 34). It is evident from Ex. xiii. 17, and 1 Chr. vii. 21, that Goshen bordered on Palestine and Arabia, and the history of the departure of the Israelites in the Book of Exodus shows that it was not far from the Red Sea. The following data help to determine the western boundary of Goshen:-It extended as far as the Nile (Ex. ii. 3; Num. xi. 5; Deut. xi. 10), and the Egyptian capital of that day was not far distant (Gen. xlv. 10, xlvi. 28, 29; Ex. ii. 5, 8), though the name of the capital is nowhere mentioned in the Pentateuch. The searching investigations of Bochart (sedes aulae Ægyptiacae ad Mosis tempora, opp. s. p. 1099, seq.) and Hengstenberg (Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 44, 45), lead to the conclusion that it was Tanis (or Zoan), near to the mouth of the Tanitic arm of the Nile. This supposition is strongly confirmed by Ps. lxviii. 12, 43, where God is said to have wrought

his signs in Egypt in the field of Zoan, i.e., in the Tanitic nomos; and there is an unmistakeable intimation of this in the Pentateuch, where Hebron is said to have been built seven years before Zoan of Egypt, (Num. xiii. 23). This expression, Zoan of Egypt, implies not merely that it was one of the oldest cities in Egypt, but that it held the highest rank, in other words, that it was the capital of Egypt. Moreover, it must not only have been well known to the Israelites, but it must also have stood in very close relation to them.* If we add to these scriptural data the statement of Josephus, Arch. ii. 7, 6, that Pharaoh gave up Heliopolis to Jacob and his children, "we shall probably come very near to the truth," as K. v. Raumer says, Beitr. Zur. bibl. Geogr., p. 1, "if we assume that the land of Goshen was the strip of cultivated land which runs from Heliopolis, on the south-west, towards the north-east, and is bounded on the east by the Arabian desert, and on the west by the eastern arms of the Nile," i.e., very nearly the same ground which is now covered by the province of es-Sharkîyeh (the eastern land); see Robinson, i. 76. The only question that could arise here is whether the Tanitic arm itself, or the Pelusiac arm, which is a little further to the east, formed the western boundary. As we do not read that the Israelites crossed the Nile either when they entered Egypt or when they left, the decision of this question would depend upon the size of the Pelusiac arm, whether it was as small then as it now is (which seems very probable, from the nature and appearance of the ground, Robinson, i. 549), or whether it was once navigable, as some have inferred from Arrian iii. 1, 4, but without sufficient reason (Robinson, ut sup.).

These results are supported by the accounts which are given of the nature and fertility of the land of Goshen. From Gen. xlvi. 34 it appears to have consisted of pasture-land, and in xlvii. 6 it is described as one of the most fruitful of the provinces of Egypt. These two features are seldom found together, but in this district we have them both. Part of the land is steppe, which is only suited for pasture, whilst the rest consists of the most fertile soil, and is watered by the overflowing of the Nile. With regard to the productiveness of the province of es-Sharkîyeh, even at the present time, Robinson says (i. p. 78, 79):

*The author retracts this opinion afterwards; see 3 40, 2.-Tr.

"In the remarkable Arabic document translated by De Sacy, containing a valuation of all the provinces and villages of Egypt in the year 1376, the province of the Shurkiyeh comprises 383 towns and villages, and is valued at 1,411,875 dinars—a larger sum than is put upon any other province, with one exception. During my stay in Cairo I made many enquiries respecting this district, to which the uniform reply was that it was considered as the best province in Egypt. Wishing to obtain more definite information, I ventured to request of Lord Prudhoe, with whom the Pasha was understood to be on a very friendly footing, to obtain for me, if possible, a statement of the valuation of the provinces of Egypt. This, as he afterwards informed me, could not well be done, but he had ascertained that the province of the Shurkiyeh bears the highest valuation, and yields the largest revenue. He had himself just returned from an excursion to the lower parts of this province, and confirmed, from his own observation, the reports of its fertility. This arises from the fact that it is intersected by canals, while the surface of the land is less elevated above the level of the Nile than in the other parts of Egypt, so that it is more easily irrigated. There are here more flocks and herds than anywhere else in Egypt, and also more fishermen. The population is half migratory, composed partly of Fellahs, and partly of Arabs from the adjacent deserts, and even from Syria, who retain in part their nomadic habits, and frequently remove from one village to another. Yet there are many villages wholly deserted, where many thousands of people might at once find a habitation. Even now another million at least might be sustained in the district, and the soil is capable of higher tillage to an indefinite extent. So, too, the adjacent desert, so far as water could be applied for irrigation, might be rendered fertile, for wherever water is there is fertility.'

We find another name for "the land of Goshen," in chap. xlvii. 11, viz., "the land of Raem'ses," Sept. Paμeoon. The socalled land of Raem'ses is generally distinguished from the city of Raem'ses, which was built at a later period (Ex. i. 11). But there is no ground for this distinction, as Hengstenberg in particular has shewn (Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 49, seq., note Eng. tr.) Raem'ses is undoubtedly the name of a city in every other place in which it occurs (Ex. xii. 37; Num. xxxiii. 3, 5); and there is no reason to suppose that the city was not in

existence at the time of Joseph; for Ex. i. 11 does not refer to the first building of the city, but to the fortification of it. "The land of Raem'ses" was evidently the land of Goshen, of which the chief city was Raem'ses. The question as to the city actually referred to and its situation, will come under examination in connexion with the history of the Exodus.

6. The fact that the aged patriarch presumed to bless the king of Egypt, and thus, in a certain sense, to assert superiority, is to be accounted for not merely from his greater age, but also from the impulse and encouragement given to Jacob by the consciousness that he was called of God to be a blessing to the nations (Gen. xii. 2). Jacob's blessing was a return and compensation for the kindness shown by Pharaoh to the house of Israel; and we see here the type of the true relation, in which Israel was to stand to heathenism in all their future intercourse. Pharaoh offers earthly goods to the house of Israel, and Israel in return blesses him with the spiritual blessing of the house of God. We may notice, in passing, the importance of the account of Jacob's age, which is introduced at this point apparently in so accidental a manner. For, were it not for the statement here made by Jacob, we should lose the chronological thread of the patriarchal history, and that of the Old Testament in general would thereby be completely destroyed.

7. The historical importance of the emigration of the house of Israel to Egypt is evinced by the fact, that when the covenant was made by God with Abraham (vol. i., § 56), this was announced to him by revelation as a necessary part of the divine plan. At the same time it was expressly declared to him that the settlement in Egypt would not be permanent (chap. xv. 14), and this was repeated to Jacob in the vision at Beersheba (chap. xlvi. 4). The design of the emigration was made known to Abraham: namely, that it was necessary as a transition from pilgrimage in the promised land to the full possession of the whole. In like manner the Lord said to Jacob in Beersheba (ver. 3): "fear not to go down into Egypt, for I will there make of thee a great nation." The two things are most intimately connected, for Israel (even if we look merely at outward circumstances), could not have obtained complete and sole possession of the land until it had become an organised nation. Canaan was already inhabited by other tribes, and they must necessarily be driven

VOL. II.

B