their having stolen the sacred utensils, acknowledges, that the Egyptians, so far from victoriously chasing them into Syria, were compelled to return home, being discomfited by a violent tempest.

Now, when opposed to the narrative of Moses, which they all more or less incidentally corroborate, what reliance can be placed upon writers, who thus perpetually contradict themselves, who had a motive to falsify the truth, and of whom the very earliest flourished more than twelve centuries after the event?

4. But, if we be compelled to adopt the narrative of Moses, so far as it relates to the emigration of Israel contrary to the will of the Egyptian government and even from the pagan accounts it is difficult to believe the contrary; for, when the idle tale of the leprosy is exploded, it is not easy to imagine why the court should wish to banish a large body of subjects, whose laborious utility in the public works had confessedly been felt during many years: if, I say, we be thus far compelled to adopt the narrative of Moses; we then pledge ourselves rationally to account for a fact of this description.

The Hebrew legislator himself declares, that the finger of God was conspicuously and miraculously exerted throughout the whole affair. But, if it be contended that Moses was a mere self-commissioned lawgiver who affected a divine power which he did not possess, this solution of the knot must of course be relinquished. How then did he at length induce Pharaoh to consent to that, which

he had long so pertinaciously refused? Adequate force he possessed not, to compel assent; courtinterest he had none after an exile of forty years, to conciliate it: accordingly, the narrative doés not convict itself of falsehood by representing him to employ either the one or the other. He makes a simple and peremptory demand; which, in the first instance, Pharaoh just as peremptorily rejects. Yet, in the end, the king is obliged to submit ; and Moses triumphantly carries his point.

If we exclude the intervention of divine agency, how shall we account either for his conduct or for his ultimate success? There seems to be a knot in the affair, which God alone can untie.

IV. The Israelites are now liberated from their Egyptian thraldom: let us attend their footsteps, and mark the conduct of their leader.

1. On quitting the land of Goshen, his obvious line of march was across the isthmus of Suez: and, when once that was passed, he had his choice of turning, either to the right into the desert, or to the left into Palestine. Each of these plans had its peculiar difficulties: and all, that a mere statesman could do, were to select the smaller evil.

Moses was at the head of six hundred thousand men, besides women and children: but this enormous host was an undisciplined rabble, utterly unfit for war, and completely dispirited by a long slavery. The land of Palestine was known to be a good country, and was very well adapted for the settlement of the people: but then all the

southern part of it was already occupied by a race distinguished for their military prowess, the warlike Philistine, who were the brethren of those formidable Palli or Shepherds that had so long trampled upon them in Egypt; and even the Canaanites, who were spread over the other districts, could not be expected tamely to resign their territories because they might be convenient to the Israelites. If Moses therefore had resolved to turn to the left, he must of course have anticipated an immediate war and the result of the experiment it was not very difficult to foresee. Would it then be more eligible to turn to the right, and to advance into the great Arabian desert? If this plan were adopted, the question then would be, how such a multitude was to be fed. Moses himself well knew the country, by having resided in it for the space of forty years he would know therefore the utter impracticability of supporting near two millions of human beings, even for a few weeks, in a region, thinly occupied by the wild Arabs, and capable of being traversed only by caravans. His choice, consequently, of difficulties was this: on the left, war without any reasonable hope of success; on the right, the certainty of perishing by famine.

Bad as the prospect was, there can be little doubt, I think, that a politician would have preferred fighting to starving: though it is altogether incomprehensible, on any human principles of action, how Moses could have entertained such a project as that of conducting the Israelites out of Egypt, without previously well considering whither

he would lead them. His determination however was made for the desert, on the sufficiently obvious ground, that, if he led them through the way of the land of the Philistines, they would repent when they saw war and would return to Egypt.'

For this purpose, instead of directing their march towards the northern side of the isthmus, he proceeded along its southern side; and thence skirted what Herodotus calls the Arabian mountain, keeping it of course on his right hand. His first encampment was at Succoth; and his next at Etham, which lay in the edge of the wilderness and nearly at the point of the western tongue of the Red Sea.3 Here, as he had determined for the desert, we might conclude, that he would advance with an inclination to the south-east. But, instead of this, when he was now free at least from all danger of being overtaken by the Egyptians, he adopted a movement even yet more extraordinary than any of his previous operations. So far from advancing by the route, which he himself had formerly taken when he fled from Pharaoh into the wilderness, he suddenly turned about; and, coasting the western side of the Red Sea, he encamped before PiHahiroth between Migdol and the sea, overagainst Baal-Zephon which lay on the opposite shore. The result of this movement was, that he ran into the very jaws of danger: for, by thus turning, he both gave the Egyptians an opportu

Exod. xiii. 17, 18.

3 Exod. xii. 37. xiii. 20.

2 Herod. Hist. lib. ii. c. 5.

4 Exod. xiv. 2.

nity of overtaking him, and effectually precluded all human possibility of his own escape. His course, after this unaccountable turn, lay southward so that, after he had quitted Etham, he continued to advance along a narrow plain, bounded by the Red Sea on the east and confined by the rugged Arabian mountain on the west. Here he was discovered by the Egyptians; who, like himself, immediately entered the same defile from the north, and who, from their knowledge of the country, felt now secure of their prey. Finding himself pursued, he pressed forward as far as the nature of the place allowed him to do: and this brought him to Pi-Hahiroth between Migdol and the sea, where he halted and encamped. The reason of his halting was, because it was locally impossible to advance any further. Pi-Hahiroth or the mouth of Hiroth, as its descriptive name sufficiently points out, can only be identified with a remarkable opening through the precipitous mountains, which runs westward from the sea into the interior of the country. It is at present dry, in consequence of the gradual recess of the waters; but it still bears decisive marks of having once been a creek or inlet of the sea. By Ptolemy and Antoninus, this mouth or aperture of Hiroth is denominated Clysma; by the Arabs, al Kolsum; and, by the modern natives of the country, Bede or Bedea: words universally expressive of its having been anciently covered with water. Moses therefore, by bringing himself into such a situation, had the Red Sea on his left hand, the precipices