tradition as to the meaning of the word, as is proved by the disagreement of the Rabbis: and, secondly, which is fatal to the meaning "armed," there is no trace of a verb Chamash, e, or of any cognate verb, signifying "to arm," either in Hebrew, or any of the cognate dialects. The word, whether Chamushshim, Dp, according to the common reading, or Chamushim, on, according to the Spanish manuscripts, must be derived from a verb Chamash, p. If the derived word signify "armed," then the verb must signify "to arm." But no such verb exists, nor any thing like it, in Hebrew or any other Semitic language. Then "arm" cannot be the meaning. Moved especially by the last consideration, Gesenius and Knobel have sought for a meaning which will not only suit all the places where the word occurs, but also admit of a

5

Semitic etymology. Gesenius gives, “acres, strenui, alacres ad pugnandum," or, as it is in Robinson's translation, " fierce, active, eager, brave in battle." Knobel prefers "marshalled in order, in companies, as distinguished from disorderly, straggling." Both reject the sense "armed." The two great Jewish authorities, Onkelos and Aben Ezra, explain the word to mean "girt," i. e. the long garments girt up, which will apply either to travelling or to war.

5 Comment, in loc.

The greatest authorities, therefore, Jewish and Gentile, reject that sense on which D. C.'s difficulty entirely depends.

BISHOP COLENSO, CHAP. X. The Institution of the Passover.

D. C. finds great difficulties with regard to the institution and first celebration of the Passover. He thinks it impossible "that in one single day the whole immense population of Israel, as large as that of London, was instructed to keep the Passover, and actually kept it;" first, because it was impossible "to convey the command, with its minute particulars, to each individual household in one day-or rather in twelve hours, since Moses received the command on the very same day on which they were to kill the Passover at even, Exod. xii. 6.” "Having so large flocks and herds, 'even very much cattle,' Exod. xii. 38, many of them must have lived scattered over the large extent of grazing ground required under their circumstances," occupying, according to D. C.'s calculation, a space of at least thirty-five square miles. Now supposing, for the sake of argument, that D. C.'s assumptions are true; that the command was given and the Passover celebrated on one and the same day, and admitting that Israel was scattered all through Goshen, and that Goshen was equal to

not merely thirty-five but to sixty square miles, there would be no impossibility of transmitting the message to them. Their descendants in Poland are said to have had a method of transmitting important information through a much larger extent of country than Goshen, in a very few hours. They mounted a man with the message on a good horse; he galloped off to the next congregation and delivered his message to the Rabbi. The Rabbi immediately sent off a fresh messenger on a fresh horse; and so on, until, in a very few hours, the news was communicated to all the Rabbis. Each on the receipt of the intelligence assembled his own congregation in the Synagogue, and made known to them the tidings received; and thus money was raised, and petitions adopted and despatched to the right quarters often before the dreaded decree had left the Government office. In like manner, if D. C.'s supposition about "the same day" were true, the Israelites in Goshen might be informed in time. Suppose that some of the scattered Israelites were fifty miles distant from Moses, messengers thus despatched could with ease arrive in five hours. Those nearer would receive the directions in less time. If the command was given to Moses at five in the morning, and an hour elapsed before Moses and the Elders could send off the messengers, the most distant could still receive the command by eleven o'clock in the forenoon, which would leave ample time to

make the necessary preparation. But why should we limit the time to twelve hours? The Lord might have commanded Moses at the beginning of the fourteenth day; that is, as the Hebrews began their day at evening, at least twenty hours before the Passover was to be killed. The most distant might therefore be informed twelve or fifteen hours before the time, and might prepare and keep the Passover. Even every individual male might be informed; for we doubt not that the whole nation was on the alert, and had for weeks been waiting for the signal to go forth. The first message, Exod. iii. 7, 8, was, that God saw their affliction and would deliver them, and bring them into the promised land. Each successive plague would increase their attention, and keep all the dispersions of Israel in continued excitement, waiting for the order to move. The communication of the command was, therefore, not impossible, even on D. C.'s hypothesis, but comparatively easy.

But then, says D. C., it was impossible that they could have the necessary number of lambs -that would require a flock of two millions of sheep, and that again would require four hundred thousand acres of pasturage. But, if modern writers be correct as to the situation and extent of Goshen, stretching from the Pelusiac branch of the Nile along the Mediterranean to the borders of Palestine one way, and to the Desert and the Red Sea on the other, there must have

been much more than four hundred thousand acres of pasturage; so that on this score there is no difficulty. Besides, D. C.'s calculation of the two hundred thousand lambs required for the Passover, is made on the supposition that there were only ten persons to each lamb. But why, if lambs were scarce, might not fifty or even one hundred persons have joined to partake of one lamb? There is nothing in the Law to forbid it. D. C. says that "Josephus (de Bell. Jud. vi. 9. 3) reckons ten persons on an average for each lamb." But if D. C. will look again, he will see that Josephus does not make ten the average; but says there were never less than ten men, οὐκ ἔλασσον ἀνδρῶν δέκα. The Rabbinic law did not allow less than ten, because that number is, according to tradition, necessary to make a congregation (Minian). But there is no limit the other way, except the size of the lamb. According to the Mishna, the law was satisfied by each person eating a morsel of the size of an olive. Now, a lamb of one year old could easily be cut into fifty or one hundred such pieces. If companies of ten required two hundred thousand lambs, companies of fifty would require only forty thousand, and companies of one hundred only twenty thousand.

But in D. C.'s calculation there is another false assumption; and that is, that lambs in our sense of the word, the offspring of sheep, are

E