-

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA BELONGING TO THE CLASS OF THE EARLY
PROPHETS. GROUNDS OF THE CREDIT TO BE ATTACHED TO AN
HISTORICAL WORK. - DIFFERENT AUTHORITY ASCRIBED, BY POR-
TIONS OF THE JEWISH NATION, TO THE PENTATEUCH, AND ΤΟ
THE OTHER OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS.-VIEWS, ON THIS HEad, of
THE SAMARITANS, THE EGYPTIAN JEWS, THE SADDUCEES, AND THE
CARAITES. QUESTION CONCERNING THE WRITER OF THE BOOK
OF JOSHUA. QUESTION CONCERNING THE TIME OF ITS COMPOSI-
TION. REASONS FOR REFERRING IT TO THE AGE OF SAUL OR
DAVID.CORRUPT STATE OF ITS TEXT. ITS DESIGN, TO GIVE
AN ACCOUNT OF THE CONQUEST AND PARTITION OF THE HOLY
LAND. DIVISION OF ITS CONTENTS INTO FOUR PARTS. - REFER-
ENCES OF THE WRITER TO EXISTING INSTITUTIONS AND MONU-
MENTS. - PROBABILITY OF THE HISTORY.-CREDIBILITY OF
RELATIONS OF SUPERNATURAL EVENTS. - SURVEY OF THE CON-
TENTS OF THE FIRST TWELVE CHAPTERS, COMPREHENDING AC-
COUNTS OF THE FIRST ORDERS OF JOSHUA, OF HIS SENDING
SPIES INTO JEricho, - -OF THE PASSAGE THROUGh the Jordan,
OF THE ORIGIN OF THE NAMES of GIBEAH-ARALOTH AND GILGAL,

--

ITS

OF THE APPA

- OF THE CEASING OF THE SUPPLY OF MANNA, RITION OF THE "CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST,". - OF THE CAPTURE AND SACK OF JERICHO, OF THE CRIME AND PUNISHMENT OF ACHAN, OF THE CAPTURE OF AI AND MASSACRE OF ITS INHABITANTS, OF THE ERECTION OF AN ALTAR UPON MOUNT EBAL, AND ACCOMPANYING CEREMONIES, OF THE TREATY FRAUTHE GIBEONITES, OF THE BATTLE AT MAKKEDAH, AND STOPPING THE COURSE OF THE SUN AND MOON, -AND OF THE SUBJUGATION OF THE WHOLE SOUTHERN AND NORTHERN DISTRICTS.. - LIST OF THE CONQUERED CITIES.

DULENTLY OBTAINED

BY

In the course of my remarks upon the Canon, I had occasion to bring to view an old phraseology of the Jews, arranging their collection of sacred books under

the threefold division of "the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa." How ancient this division was, we cannot say; but it was current at least as early as the time of Jerome and the later Talmudists.* We have given our attention to the Law. We now proceed to a book, which belongs to the second class, that of the Prophets. The Prophets are divided into the Early and the Later; the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings, being comprehended under the former designation; those of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve Minor Prophets, under the latter.

In treating the question of the Canon, I also urged the remark, that the authority to be ascribed to each individual book, belonging to the Jewish collection, called by us the Old Testament, presents a question to be tried upon its own merits; and that there is no good ground for the opinion, that, merely in virtue of being found in that collection, a book is to be received as an authoritative teacher of faith or practice, or to be acknowledged as having any thing whatever of a supernatural character. I now go further, and say, that the degree of credit, due to the contents of a book found in that collection, is to be determined by what we may be able to learn of its author, and the circumstances of its composition. A book of history, for example, has come down to us from antiquity. If we accept the narrative which it contains as true, it is because, having ascertained its author, we have become satisfied, that he had means of acquainting himself with the truth, as well as that he designed to record the truth, honestly and exactly, for his readers; or, at least, because, without being able to ascertain the writer, we are satisfied, that the work was composed at a time

* Vol. I. pp. 39, 40.

Ibid. pp. 21 - 23, 41, 42.

when sufficient means of becoming acquainted with the exact truth were accessible, and under circumstances which would have caused it to be rejected and to go into oblivion, if in any thing important it departed from that truth. If we are satisfied, that a history was written by a contemporary of the facts narrated, or by one who lived a short time after that of their alleged occurrence, it comes to us, provided other circumstances are favorable, with a high degree of authority. If we are not able to ascertain this, the great ground of credit fails. If, on the other hand, we see reason to conclude, that a history was framed several generations or centuries after the time when the events, which it records, are alleged to have taken place, then we are at a loss what confidence to repose in it, except so far as we are able to see, that it rested on earlier authorities, and that those authorities were trustworthy. And, under such circumstances, the more such events are of a marvellous and extraordinary kind, the less credible do they become. It is the business of tradition, especially in a rude age, to confound imaginations with realities; to take a basis of fact, and build upon it a superstructure of fable. And the materials for the early history of almost every nation of the world have to be sifted from a mass of legend and romance.

In urging the credibility of the history which records the miraculous deliverance of the Jewish nation from Egypt, the communication to them of the Law, and their political and religious consolidation, I took the ground of the credibility of its author;- endeavouring to show, that there was good and sufficient reason to believe, that the writer of that history was no other than a contemporary of the events which it relates, and the principal human actor in them. So far as the evidence offered to that point produces conviction in any

mind, so far will that mind be satisfied of the truth of the history. If we can prove the same thing concerning the book of Joshua, a similar conviction of its authority will follow. If we cannot prove, that this book was written by one who lived at the time to which it relates, then it remains for us to inquire, by whom it was written; or, at least, at what time, and with what materials. In proportion as we may be able to answer these inquiries, we shall obtain aid towards some conclusions respecting its authority as a record of veritable history.

an

But, before proceeding to these inquiries, I wish to make a preliminary remark, having reference equally to all that portion of the Old Testament collection which we have not yet examined. It is certain, that the current opinion among Christians, which places the rest of the Old Testament upon substantially the same footing with the books of Moses, in point of authority,— opinion supposed by Christians to have been that of the Jews themselves, and therefore well sustained and sound, because entertained by those, who had means of coming at the truth, - is not justified by what we know, or can reasonably infer, respecting the opinions of the ancient people. On the contrary, the ascribing to the other Old Testament books a similar authority to that of the books of Moses, appears to have been a distinction of the Pharisees, a sect of recent origin among that small portion of the Jewish people, which returned to the Holy Land after the Babylonish captivity, and which still remained there, when many of their compatriots emigrated, at a later time.

Had all that portion of the race, which lived in Palestine after the return, entertained this view, their number was not such, as to authorize their sense, on such a question, to be taken for that of the great people, 18

VOL. II.

which had now been politically ruined, and its fragments scattered over the remote East. But far less than this was the case. A portion of that number were transferred to Egypt, under Alexander and the Ptolemies. Among them, the Septuagint version was produced. Of this all critics agree, that the Pentateuch alone was translated at first, and no part of the rest till after a considerable interval, probably of more than a century. The natural account to be given of this, is, that the Law was considered as containing the Jewish religion, or, at least, as having a peculiar and paramount authority in distinction from the other books.

To go further back; if other books, now in the Old Testament collection, had been regarded, by the ancient nation, as fit to be placed on a level with the Law in point of authority, or even as, in any respect, authoritative witnesses to the faith, there is every reason, why we should expect to find the Samaritans in possession of all other books, belonging to the collection, which were written previously to the time when they ceased to receive books from the Jews; there is every reason, I say, why we should expect to find all such books in their possession, as much as the Law, which we do find there.* Now, the earliest time, which, from the nature of the case, can be designated as the period of suspension of intercourse between the northern and southern tribes, is that of Jeroboam, when they parted into two kingdoms. Previously to this, the books of Joshua and Judges, at least, had been written (if the date commonly assigned to them is correct), and many of the Psalms and Proverbs. But these books there is no appearance that they took care to preserve.

* See Vol. I. p. 47, note . Also, the Samaritan Version includes only the Pentateuch. The Samaritans had, in times since the Christian era, a Book of Joshua, so called. But this fact only strengthens the argu