XI PECULIAR CONTROVERSIAL METHODS 401 



sacrificial purposes, pigs were held in such 

 abhorrence by the ancient Egyptians, that 

 swineherds were not permitted to enter a temple, 

 or to intermarry with other castes ; and anj one 

 who had touched a pig, even accidentally, was 

 unclean. But these very regulations prove that 

 pig-keeping was not illegal ; it merely involved 

 certain civil and religious disabilities. For the 

 Jews, dogs were typically " unclean animals ; but, 

 when that eminently pious Hebrew, Tobit, " went 

 forth" with the angel "the young man's dog" 

 went" with them " (Tobit v. 16) without apparent 

 remonstrance from the celestial guide. I really 

 do not see how an appeal to the Law could have 

 justified any one in drowning Tobit's dog, on the 

 ground that his master was keeping and feeding 

 an animal quite as " unclean " as any pig. 

 Certainly the excellent Raguel must have failed to 

 see the harm of dog-keeping, for we are told that, 

 on the travellers' return homewards, " the dog 

 went after them " (xi. 4). 



Until better light than I have been able to 

 obtain is thrown upon the subject, therefore, it is 

 obvious that Mr. Gladstone's argumentative house 

 has been built upon an extremely slippery 

 quicksand ; perhaps even has no foundation at all. 



Yet another " point " does not seem to have 

 occurred to Mr. Gladstone, who is so much shocked 

 that I attach no overwhelming weight to the 

 assertions contained in the synoptic Gospels, even 



