115 
a perpetual duty was imposed upon them, which is represented at the 
present day by the Roman Catholic custom of saying masses. There was, in 
their case, even more than the saying of masses among the Catholics, 
because the Egyptians not only deposited the ritual papyrus and deemed 
it needful to offer up prayers for the departed, that they might fulfil all 
the destinies in Hades, but, besides that, they offered on behalf of the 
dead personal offerings, while legacies and endowments of a very magnificent 
kind were given for the purpose of maintaining the perpetual repose of the 
deceased in their mummy cases. Therefore, it is highly probable that 
Joseph, in his injunctions and provision for the family care of his mortal 
remains, would have taken very good care that his body, properly embalmed, 
should be forthcoming in after generations. We have two historical facts, 
the one that Joseph was embalmed and put into a coffin, the other that his 
injunctions were carried out when the children of Israel went forth out of 
Egypt ; and I think there is no historical improbability in believing in the 
fulfilment of Joseph’s injunctions, and admitting the credibility of the latter 
part of the narrative. I hope I have answered the question. (Hear, hear.) 
The deposit of the mummy was a most sacred family trust — an object of 
great veneration and care. 
Mr. G. M. Turpin. — I should like to make one or two observations in 
consequence of what has fallen from the Rev. Prebendary Row. It has been 
my fortune to spend a great deal of time in defending the Old Testa- 
ment, and my views and opinions on the point raised by Mr. Row are 
opposed to those which he has enunciated. The great object of the contro- 
versy carried on by sceptics has been to destroy the credibility of the Old 
Testament narrative, and by that means to show that there is no historical basis 
for its supernatural element. (Hear, hear.) It seems to me, therefore — as 
a common sense person, not having very much acquaintance with 
Egyptian hieroglyphics, although I have read very extensively what has 
appeared in English on the matter, as my friend Mr. Tomkins is aware — that 
his is the most useful way of defending the Scriptures. It shows that the 
Book contains nothing but what is true history, and this is proved by the dis- 
coveries we have so far made among the Egyptian hieroglyphics. When we 
are told that the opponents of the Bible would destroy all faith in it, it is 
an advantage to be able to go to Assyria and find that Biblical history is 
confirmed by the Assyrian monuments. (Hear, hear.) These things, I 
think, give us a firm basis of hard and solid fact on which to rest a belief in 
the supernatural element of the Bible, Another point of importance is to be 
found in the concessions made by modern scientists, which show that, when 
you have traced them through all their various wanderings, they cannot get 
away from God Almighty after all. (Hear, hear.) I affirm, then, that the 
historical facts of the Bible are admitted and proved by the modern revela- 
tions of Egyptology and Assyriology, and I assert that there is a good deal 
to be made of all this in our defence of the Old Testament, not only as to its 
truth in regard to matters of ordinary history, but also as to Supernatural 
Revelation. (Hear, hear). 
