407 
wish to write anything that would have a disturbing effect upon weaker 
minds than my own, for I am convinced that he wrote not with the view of 
pulling down, but of building up ; still there was a feeling created, which I 
think found expression in the room when his paper was read, that he had 
“ unsettled a great deal and settled very little,” and some of us felt much as 
a small detachment of an army feels which, cautiously advancing to meet a 
known foe in front, suddenly finds a supposed friend attacking them in flank. 
We are, therefore, grateful to have something added to the defence of the 
points thus assailed. Much that is valuable has also fallen from Mr. Row, 
and I am sure we are glad to have heard the whole matter well discussed. 
Mr. Row. — I have not touched the numbers of the Exodus at all. 
The Chairman.— I cannot avoid feeling myself that the numbers men- 
tioned in the Exodus are so essentially mixed up with the whole tenor of 
the dispensation of the Old Testament, that they stand upon a very different 
basis from other numbers. Isolated facts, not in any way mixed up with 
the general tenor of the Old Testament dispensation, such as the number of 
men slain by Samson, and the number who perished at Bethshemesh the 
latter of which has been most ably explained by Mr. Moule — whether right 
or wrong, are isolated facts, not mixed up with the tenor and details of the 
Old Testament dispensation in the same manner as are the numbers of the 
Exodus. He who would omit one cipher puts us in this difficulty, that his 
number does not fit the amoupt of silver in the tribute, and does not fit the 
aggregate enumeration of the separate tribes. Now, these are two important 
points, both of which, as cumulative evidence, bear on the stated number of 
the 600,000 men ;• and if we drop a cipher, we place ourselves in a difficulty 
in regard to those two points of collateral evidence. 
Mr. James.— I allow myself to be beaten on that point. I threw it out 
only as a suggestion. 
Captain F. Petrie.— There are one or two matters which have struck me 
during the_ discussion. In the first place, the numbers which have been 
referred to by Dr. Thornton may be classed under two heads : under the 
first I would put those which have been so much discussed this evening, and 
m regard to which Dr. Thornton in his correspondence has to some extent 
not only given up the position he originally took, but adds, that if it can be 
satisfactorily proved to him that he is wrong, he will give up everything he 
has advanced in his paper against their credibility. Under the second head 
I would put such as are evidently not intended for literal acceptation. For 
instance, m the First Book of Samuel, we are told that David, after he slew 
the giant, was brought before Saul, and afterwards 
PhiliV^T+w ?? SS ' ' When David was returned from the slaughter of the 
Philistine, that the women came out of all cities of Israel sino-ino-. 
i . ! he women answered one another as they played, and said,°Saul hath 
slain his thousands and David his ten thousands.” 
Now that was merely a form of expression, and not a distinct statement of 
tact. As to one point mentioned by Mr. Graham— the number of the 
