promises was unceasingly displayed, and instead of that comparative barrenness, which prevailed to such an extent that, after many decennia of apparently vain hope and patience, and unanswered faith and prayer, there was only one solitary representative of the covenant, there was now granted a productiveness of so remarkable a character, that in a few centuries there was every prospect of the fulfilment of the promise, that the seed should be as the sand which is upon the sea shore.

But Canaan, at that time, was not the land in which the promise could be fulfilled without interruptions. Israel could not possibly have grown to a great and independent nation there. And, what is quite as important, they would have been unable to maintain their national and religious peculiarities intact, amidst the temptations and attacks of a hostile principle. The elements most needed to promote their growth and bring it to perfection were not to be found there, nor would they have been educated in the school, which was best fitted to train them for their subsequent obligations.

Canaan was then in the possession of numerous tribes, who regarded the land as their own. Even Abraham had felt himself cramped in the movements of his establishment (Gen. xiii. 6); Isaac had constantly to retire before the powerful inhabitants by whom he was surrounded (Gen. xxvi.), and in the time of Jacob the difficulties must rather have increased than diminished. If, therefore, the house of Israel had remained any longer in Canaan, they would have encountered the greatest obstacles to their ever becoming a large and independent nation. If their numbers had rapidly increased, it would have been impossible for them to stand entirely aloof from the Canaanites, as they hitherto had done. In such a case, they must either have made war upon the inhabitants, in order to maintain a footing in the land (and it would not be difficult to foresee the disastrous issue if they had); or they must have scattered themselves over the neighbouring countries, and then they would have lost their national unity and degenerated into a number of separate nomad hordes; or thirdly, and of this there would be the greatest fear, they would have intermarried and mingled with the Canaanites, until they were completely absorbed by their superior numbers. But the maintenance of their religious peculiarities would have been even more difficult, than that of their national independence. The

religious eclecticism of the Canaanites, their readiness to adopt the forms of the Israelitish religion without its spirit (of which we had an example in the case of the Sichemites), and the seductive influence, which the worship of nature exerted upon that age and would certainly have exerted upon the Israelites, if they had come into closer contact with the inhabitants of the land, would all have combined to produce a result that would have been destructive of the very foundations of Israel's destiny. None of these dangers existed in Egypt. There they could become a great nation without any difficulties or obstructions, and without the least interference with their national and religious peculiarities. And, what was of no little importance, they had opportunities there of making many provisions for their future wants as a nation. First of all, the land of Egypt furnished them with a plentiful supply during the existing famine, and such was the fertility and extent of Goshen that there was no occasion for them to be scattered, and no inducement to the members of particular tribes to separate from the general body. There was no fear of their mixing with the Egyptians and giving up their national and religious integrity. The hatred which the Egyptians cherished towards every foreigner, and the contempt in which shepherds especially were held, furnished an indestructible safeguard against any such danger. As Goshen was just as well fitted for agriculture as it was for grazing, it naturally induced them to combine the pursuits of farming, gardening, and vinegrowing with those of their earlier nomad life, and thus fostered a taste for that mode of life, which was afterwards to form an essential part of their national existence. In the midst of the science, civilisation, and industry of Egypt, Israel was in the best school for that general culture, which they would afterwards require. Their intimate acquaintance with the Egyptian modes of thought, which looked at life in all its outward manifestations and ramifications from a religious point of view, may have served to enrich in many ways even the religious views of the Israelites. And the symbols of the Egyptian worship set before them a completely developed form of religious life, which was the product of laws of thought that are universally inherent in the human mind, and therefore was not merely applicable to Egyptian pantheism, but could also be adopted as a welcome support to the worship of the Israelitish theism, if only it could be animated,

purified, and modified by the Israelitish principle. In like manner the Egyptian constitution, with its strict rules and excellent organisation, furnished the model which, with modifications to suit the altered circumstances, was afterwards adopted in the Israelitish state. And lastly, "Egypt was the seat of the strongest worldly power, and therefore furnished the best instrumentality for the infliction of such severe sufferings as would awaken in the minds of the Israelites a longing for deliverance and a readiness to submit to their God; whilst, at the same time, it offered a splendid field for the manifestation of the power and justice and mercy of the God of Israel in the rescue of His people and the judgment of their enemies" (Hengstenberg, Pent. i. 362). The importance of the two elements last mentioned, and their necessary connection with the counsel of God, are apparent from the fact, that they are expressly mentioned in the revelation which was made by God to Abraham (chap. xv). Thus Israel obtained the character of a redeemed people, which was of such great importance in its future destiny, and Jehovah then showed himself to be, what he was to continue to be in a constantly increasing degree, the Redeemer in Israel.

(8). We reserve the inquiry respecting the dynasties which ruled in Egypt at the time when the children of Israel were sojourning there, and into the connection between the Hyksos and the Israelites, till we arrive at the period of the Exodus from Egypt, in order that we may not anticipate, or enter into separate discussions of subjects which are closely connected.

ADOPTION OF JOSEPH'S SONS.

§ 2. (Gen. xlvii. 27-xlviii. 22).-Jacob lived seventeen years in Egypt, and reached the age of 147. A short time before his death he sent for Joseph, and exacted an oath from him, that he would not bury him in Egypt, but by the side of his fathers in the promised land. Joseph then introduced his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, and, in virtue of the promises made to him by God, Jacob formally adopted and solemnly blessed them (1). Joseph had placed the elder son Manasseh at

Jacob's right hand, and the younger, Ephraim, at the left; but Jacob crossed his arms, and pronounced the blessing with his right hand upon Ephraim's head, and the left upon that of Manasseh. Joseph, supposing it to be an oversight, complained of his doing so; but Jacob, instead of making any alteration, explained to him that the greater blessing and the more numerous posterity would belong to the younger. The Patriarch then turned to Joseph, and, as a proof of special affection, presented him with a piece of land which he had once conquered from the Canaanites (2).

(1). We have already remarked, in the previous section, that the chosen seed had now reached the close of one of the stages of its history. The family was complete, and the basis was laid for the development of the nation. In a certain sense, too, this was a type of the absolute close of its entire history, when its course as a nation should be finished, and the basis laid for its worldwide destiny. This type, as we have seen, was chiefly displayed. in the fact, that the idea of Israel's appointment, to be the medium of salvation to the nations, was here partially and temporarily realised, whilst the ultimate fulfilment would be permanent and universal. In Joseph, as the noblest product of the family life, and as the representative of his house to the heathen, Israel had become the saviour of Egypt. But it was evident that the salvation, which Israel brought to the heathen at that time, wast only a passing one, and did not exhaust the promise; for this had spoken of salvation for all the nations of the earth, whereas the present fulfilment of that promise reached merely to one among the nations. The family life of Israel could only impart a blessing to one people, and that blessing was limited in force. and extent. The full and unlimited blessing for the whole world could only be realised, when the national life of Israel was also complete. The Israelites, therefore, had not reached the goal, when the first stage of their history drew to a close. The development of the nation was now to recommence, but on a larger scale, and furnished with fresh powers and different means.

Joseph had already stept beyond the contracted limits which hedged in the chosen seed, that he might carry a blessing to the

heathen. His path led him to a freer, more lofty, and we might almost say, a universal standpoint. In him Israel reached an eminence, on which the limited character of its subsequent development prevented it from standing long, and from this point it came down to the humble position assigned it, that it might afterwards attain to something infinitely higher and more glorious. Joseph's exaltation was followed by humiliation in his sons. He led them himself to his father, that by his blessing he might consecrate them to this. He bore them away from the posts of honour which were open to them in Egypt, that they might return to the humble shepherd-life which his brethren led. They were not to perpetuate the idea represented by their father, but to unite with his brethren in originating a new development. This act of Joseph denoted a return to a condition of exclusiveness, the transition from the first stage to the second in the history of Israel. It is a proof of Joseph's faith, gives us an insight into the plans of God, and manifests the harmony which God had determined to establish between the subjective and objective elements of that history.

Jacob's treatment of the sons of Joseph denoted two things: the restoration of the house of Joseph to the family of Israel, and the adoption of the two grandchildren to the position and privileges of children. The former was requisite, since their father Joseph had been naturalised as an Egyptian, and therefore had broken the outward ties which bound him to his family. Of the importance and effect of this we have spoken already. But, as Joseph had become the deliverer of his father's house in consequence of his leaving it, his return to it was to secure to him a larger measure of its blessings, and therefore Jacob adopted his two sons. The right to do this he founds upon the fact, that God had appeared at Bethel (vol. i. § 75) and given him the double blessings of posterity and the promised land (chap. xlviii. 3, 4). "Therefore," said he, "thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, shall be mine as Reuben and Simeon." The privilege possessed by the sons of Jacob above the grandsons consisted, as we have already had occasion to remark, in the fact that the former were the founders of closely organised tribes, and the latter of merely subordinate families.

This act of Jacob's is generally regarded as a virtual exclusion of Reuben and Simeon from the rights of primogeniture, and