44 



EET. A. H. FINX^ ON THE 



The combination of Egyptian and desert Arabic words suits 

 the time when the people were in the desert after a recent escape 

 from Egjrpt, and no other period. 



(d) Desert Surroundings. 



The system of subordinate judges suggested by Jethro ; the 

 materials for the Tabernacle (especially the Shittim wood, and 

 the skins of Tacha-shim) : the pro^-ision of such things as Manna 

 and Quails ; the Kmitation of animal food to the peace-offerings 

 and to animals taken in hunting ; the permission to eat certain 

 kinds of locusts ; the obscure provision (Xum. xviii, 27-30) 

 that the heave offering is to be as though it were the corn of 

 the threshing-floor and as the fulness of the wine-press " ; all 

 these fit in with the conditions prevailing in the Wilderness, 

 Some (at least) of them are so far from ob^aous that they can 

 hardly be supposed to have been preserved by tradition, or 

 inserted by later writers. 



The worship of the Golden Calf points to a form of idolatry 

 prevalent in Egypt ; the sacrificing to satyrs in the open 

 field (Lev, xvii, 5, 7) is exactly the form of superstition likely 

 to be found in the desert ; the worship of Baal-peor (Xum. xxv, 

 3) is specifically Moabite ; and the warnings and prohibitions 

 of Deuteronomy are against forms of Canaanite idolatry. Is 

 it possible that later traditions in independent sources should 

 have preserved these, and only these, and that in the precise 

 order required by the history ? 



Some of the evidence available, then, points to a remote 

 antiquity for the whole Pentateuch, and much of it to that 

 precise period when Israel was in the Wilderness, 



§ 3. IXDICATIOXS OF MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP. 



If the Pentateuch is the work of a single author and of great 

 antiquity, going back to the Wilderness times, who was the 

 author ? 



It is difficult to guess who but Moses could be suggested ; 

 but, without pressing this, or the consistent attribution to him 

 in Scripture and tradition, there seem to be sufficient indications 

 pointing to Moses as the true author. 



We may begin by considering two characteristics which at 

 first roight suggest the possibihty of another author. 



