edigree of Moses and Aaron,
according to "the heads of their fathers' houses,"--- an epithet which
indicates a subdivision of the "family," as the family is a subdivision
of the tribe. Of the sons of Jacob, Reuben and Simeon are mentioned, to
put Levi in his natural third place. And from Levi to Moses only four
generations are mentioned, favouring somewhat the briefer scheme of
chronology which makes four centuries cover all the time from Abraham,
and not the captivity alone. But it is certain that this is a mere
recapitulation of the more important links in the genealogy. In Num.
xxvi. 58, 59, six generations are reckoned instead of four; in 1 Chron.
ii. 3 there are seven generations; and elsewhere in the same book (vi.
22) there are ten. It is well known that similar omissions of obscure or
unworthy links occur in St. Matthew's pedigree of our Lord, although
some stress is there laid upon the recurrent division into fourteens.
And it is absurd to found any argument against the trustworthiness of
the narrative upon a phenomenon so frequent, and so sure to be avoided
by a forger, or to be corrected by an unscrupulous editor. In point of
fact, nothing is less likely to have occurred, if the narrative were a
late invention.
Neither, in that case, would the birth of the great emancipator be
ascribed to the union of Amram with his father's sister, for such
marriages were distinctly forbidden by the law (Lev. xviii. 14).
Nor would the names of the children of the founder of the nation be
omitted, while those of Aaron are recorded, unless we were dealing with
genuine history, which knows that the sons of Aaron inherited the lawful
priesthood, while the descendants of Moses were the jealous founders of
a mischievous schism (Judges xviii. 30, R.V.).
Nor again, if this were a religious romance, designed to animate the
nation in its later struggles, should we read of the hesitation and the
fears of a leader "of uncircumcised lips," instead of the trumpet-like
calls to action of a noble champion.
Nor does the broken-spirited meanness of Israel at all resemble the
conception, popular in every nation, of a virtuous and heroic antiquity,
a golden age. It is indeed impossible to reconcile the motives and the
date to which this narrative is ascribed by some, with the plain
phenomena, with the narrative itself.
Nor is it easy to understand why the Lord, Who speaks of bringing out
"My hosts, My people, the children of Israel" (
|