381 



MOSES. 



MOSEa 



The first fundamental principle of the Mosaic law is the worship of 

 Jehovah as tho one true God ; and consequently an uncompromising 

 opposition to polytheism and idolatry, which were at that time tho 

 prevailing religious errors. Other nations, while acknowledging the 

 supreme God as the Creator, associated with him subordinate deities, 

 to whose agency they looked for temporal blessings. All such worship 

 was prohibited by the first words of the Law, ' I am Jehovah, thy 

 God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house 

 of bondage. Thou shall have no other gods with me." (Exod. xx. 

 2, 3; Dent. iv. 35, 39.) The second commandment is an equally 

 decisive prohibition of idolatry of every kind. (Exod. xx. 4, 6.) To 

 render this fundamental law the more binding, Jehovah, who was 

 already the founder of the nation of Israel by delivering them from 

 Egypt, was represented as their king, with the consent of the people 

 themselves, and thus idolatry became high-treason. (Exod. xix. 4-8 ; 

 Deut. vi. 22-24, xxxiii. 5 ; 1 Sam. \iii. 7 ; x. 18, 19 ; xii. 12; 1 Chrou. 

 xxix. 23 ; Isaiah, xxxiii. 22.) 



The land of Palestine too was represented as the property of God, 

 held under him by the people, who consequently had not the power 

 to alienate it for ever. (Levit xxv. 23.) This fundamental principle 

 was carried out in the form of government wliich is commonly called 

 a ' theocracy,' that is, a government under the direct superintendence 

 of God. The laws were given by God, and could only be repealed by 

 his command (Deut. iv. 2; xii. 32); the judges were selected usually 

 from the caste of the priests, and are represented as holy persona, 

 sitting in the place of God, to whose decision they submitted difficult 

 cases by means of the Urim and Thummim. (Deut. i. 17; xix. 17.) 

 Qod often made known his will concerning state affairs through the 

 prophets, of whom a constant succession was promised (Deut. xviii. 

 lii-i'l) ; and he promised to reward the people with prosperity if they 

 kept the law, and threatened to punish them with calamity if they 

 broke it. In these particulars the Israelites were distinguished from 

 other nations as being under the more direct government of God ; but 

 nevertheless they had a well-defined civil constitution, as we shall 

 presently see. 



The second fundamental principle of the Mosaic law is the dis- 

 couragement of intercourse between the Israelites and other nations. 

 This principle waa not carried so far as to prohibit the settlement of 

 1'ori'L-ners in Palestine, or of Israelites in foreign countries ; but both 

 practices were discouraged, and the latter much more than the former. 

 Each man had his hereditary possession in laud, which, as he could 

 not sell it, he of course forfeited upon settling in a foreign country ; 

 and many of the practices enjoined upon the people were such as 

 could hardly be observed in a strange land. To prevent their 

 indulging in conquest, and thus running the ritk of becoming sub- 

 ject to foreign powers, Moses confined them within certain boun- 

 daries, and also prohibited their choosing a foreigner as king. (Deut. 

 xvii.) 



This state of isolation was well suited to a nation who were suffi- 

 ciently numerous to people the country assigned to them without the 

 aid of foreigners, and who had neighbours, such as the Sidonians, who 

 were able to conduct their commerce for them ; but above all this 

 arrangement was necessary for the preservation of the worship of 

 Jehovah among them, prone as their history proves them to have been 

 to follow the idolatry of the surrounding nations. 



The nature of the occupations followed by the citizens of any state 

 affects the whole complexion of its institutions. Among the Israelites, 

 trades do not appear to have been followed to any extent as the means 

 of gaining a livelihood. Mechanical labour was probably left to the 

 slaves, who, in the houses of the wealthy, appear to have carried ou 

 extensive manufactures (1 Chrou. iv. 21), and to tho women (Prov. 

 xxxi.) ; though in the building of the tabernacle we find some of the 

 more noble mechanical arts practised by freemen. Hence it followed 

 that there were no cities dependent on trade or manufactures, and no 

 separate classes of citizens, or burghers, and peasants. The cities of 

 Palestine were only fortified villages, and most of them appear to 

 have been small. 



Neither was commerce the occupation of tho Hebrew people. The 

 necessary internal commerce was provided for by the three great 

 feasts, to celebrate which all the men were assembled at Jerusalem 

 thrice; a year, and which, in this respect, answered the purpose of 

 modern fairs. But foreign and maritime commerce was not at all 

 encouraged by the Mosaic institutions, many of which tended directly 

 to obstruct it, especially the making each man a landholder and cul- 

 tivator, and the law against lending money on interest. Besides the 

 example which Moses had before him in the case of Egypt, of a 

 powerful and civilised nation flourishing almost without foreign com- 

 merce, he was probably influenced by the following reasons in dis- 

 couraging it. It would tei.d to introduce idolatry, to tempt many 

 citizens to leave tho country, to foster luxury, and to involve the 

 Israelites in quarrels with other nations ; while on the other hand 

 they had all the advantages of commerce within their reach through 

 the Sidouianft and the Asiatic trading caravans. In later times Solo- 

 mon pursued commerce to a great extent, though hig seamen were 

 not Israelites, but Phomicians. 



The practice of freebooting to obtain a livelihood, so common 

 among the Arabs, and by no means unknown among their Hebrew 

 brethren (Judges ix., xi), was discouraged by Moees, both by the 



allotment of land to every citizen, and by tha little encouragement 

 which he gave to hunting. 



The real foundation of the Mosaic polity was in agriculture. The 

 whole territory of the state was so divided that every Israelite (that 

 is, every head of a family except those of the tribe of Levi) received 

 a portion of land, which became the inalienable property of himself 

 and his heirs. They had previously been a nomadic people, and a 

 trace of that condition was long after preserved in the extent to which 

 they pursued the breeding of cattle. This freehold basis, as we may 

 call it, prevented the formation of classes of burghers and nobility. 

 There was no distinction of ' caste,' except in the case of the Levites 

 (the descendants of Levi), who were devoted to the offices of religion 

 and learning ; but even they could not be said to form a class of nobi- 

 lity, for they had no landed property, but were supported by the 

 tithes of all the land. 



In consequence of the equality of the citizens, tho ' constitution of 

 the republic ' had a democratic character. When Moses made known 

 any laws, he called together the whole ' congregation of Israel." 

 When we consider that the number of adult males was then about 

 600,000, it becomes probable that those whom Moses addressed on 

 such occasions were certain persons deputed to represent the rest. 

 Such persons are mentioned in Exod. xix. 7, 8, and Numb. i. 6 ; and 

 in other passages there are enumerations of the classes of persons of 

 whom these representatives consisted, namely, ' elders, heads or cap- 

 tains of tribes, judges, and officers or scribes.' (Deut. xxix. 10; Josh, 

 xxiii. 2 ; xxiv. 1.) 



Tho lowest rank of officers in the republic were the ' heads of 

 tribes and heads of families.' These orders were a remnant of the 

 patriarchal state, and are still kept up among the Beduin Arabs. Each 

 of the twelve tribes had its chief. (Numb, it) The tribes were 

 subdivided into greater and lesser families, called ' families and houses 

 of fathers,' which had their respective heads. (Numb. i. 2 ; Josh. 

 vii. 14.) These heads of families are in all probability the persons 

 called 'elders' in Deut. xix. 12; xxi. 1-19; and Josh, xxiii., xxiv. It 

 is uncertain whether the elders were chosen with reference to their 

 age, as the word would seem to denote it' it were not constantly used 

 in other languages as a title of office or of honour, without reference 

 to age, as in the Uoman ' senator,' the Greek irpta&vTtpos, and the 

 Arabic ' sheik.' It is equally uncertain in what way the heads or 

 princes of tribes were chosen. The princes of tribes are found as 

 late as the reign of David. 



Thus the twelve tribes formed twelve distinct commonwealths, 

 governed by the princes of tribes, and under them by the heads of 

 families; and they sometimes acted as 'Separate states, carrying on war 

 independently of each other, even as late as the time of the kings. 

 (Josh. xvii. 11-15; Judges iv. 10; xviii.-xx. ; 1 Chron. iv. 41-43; 

 v. 18-23.) The descendants of Levi were not reckoned ainoug the 

 twelve tribes, but were scattered over the territory of their brethren ; 

 and the number of the tribes was made up by the division of t.lio 

 descendants of Joseph into two tribes, which were named after his 

 sons Ephraim and Slanasseh. (Numb, i.) A certain number of per- 

 sons appears to have been necessary to constitute tribes and families. 

 (1 Chron. xxiii. 11.) 



These twelve tribes were united in one republic, which generally, 

 though not always, had a chief magistrate, whether a lawgiver as 

 Moses, or a general as Joshua, or a judge as those whose history is 

 recorded in the book of Judges, or a king as Saul and his successors. 

 With regard to the judges however, it is highly probable that some of 

 them ruled not over all Israel, but only over single tribes. The twelve 

 tribes met in general diets (Josh, xxiii., xxiv.), and united in war 

 against a comnon enemy. We have striking instances of the independ- 

 ence of the separate tribes in the fact that David reigned "several years 

 over the tribe of Judah alone; in tho revolt of teu of the tribes from 

 Rehoboam ; and in the standiug rivalry between the tribes of Judah 

 and Joseph, which led to that revolt. 



The next rank of officers, the ' Judges,' did not represent their tribes. 

 Before their appointment Moses was sole judge, and it was to relieve 

 him from the burden of that office that a class of judges was insti- 

 tuted. (Exod. xviii.) There was a judge over every ten persons, 

 another over every hundred, and another over every thousand. From 

 each of these orders there waa an appeal to the one above, and from 

 the last to Moses himself. Moses further ordained that when the 

 people were settled in Palestine, judges should be appointed in every 

 city. The choice of them appears to have been left to the people, as 

 Moses lays down no rules for their clectiou. In subsequent ages it 

 generally happened that they were Levites. 



In Numb. xi. 16, we have an account of the appointineut of seventy 

 men out of the elders of the people to assist Moses. These aro 

 commonly supposed to have been judges; and the foundation of the 

 Sanhedrim, so well known in the later Jewish history, is traced to 

 their appointment. Michaelis takes a very different, and, we tliiuic, 

 more correct view of their office. He considers that they were a 

 senate chosen to take part with Moses in the government, and that 

 the institution was but temporary. We do not find them mentioned 

 iu the subsequent history of the people, and the real Sanhedrim was 

 not founded till after the Babylonish captivity. 



The 'Scribes' were an order of officers quite distinct from the judges. 

 This office was instituted during the Egyptian captivity. (Exod. v.) 



