In dealing18 with the historical portion of the Old Testament, it is important to keep clearly in view the distinction between the historical and the religious and moral elements which are contained in the collection of works comprised in it. It is quite open to any one to 210 hold that a certain moral and religious idea runs through the whole of these writings, which is gradually developed from rude beginnings into pure and lofty views of an Almighty20 God who created all things, and who loves justice and mercy better than the blood of bulls and rams2. It is open to him to call this inspiration, and to see it also in the series of influences and events by which the Jews were moulded into a peculiar22 people, through whose instrumentality the three great Monotheistic religions of the world, Judaism, Christianity, and Mahometanism, superseded24 the older forms of polytheism.
With inspiration in this sense I have no quarrel, any more than I have with Bishop25 Temple's definition of "original impress," though possibly I might think "Evolution" a more modest term to apply, with our limited faculties26 and knowledge, to that "unceasing purpose" which the poet tells us
"Through the ages runs,
And the thoughts of men are widened with the process of the suns."
But admitting this, I do not see how any candid27 man, who is at all acquainted with the results of modern science and of historical criticism, can doubt that the materials with which this edifice28 was gradually built up, consist, to a great extent, of myths, legends, and traditions of rude and unscientific ages which have no pretension29 to be true statements, or real history.
After all this is only applying to the Old, the same principles of interpretation30 as are applied31 to the New Testament. If the theory of literal inspiration requires us to accept the manifest impossibilities of Noah's Deluge32, why does it not equally compel us to believe 211 that there really was a certain rich man who fared sumptuously33 every day, a beggar named Lazarus, and definite localities of a Heaven and Hell within speaking distance of one another, though separated by an impassable gulf35. The assertion is made positively36 and without any reservation. There was a rich man; Lazarus died, and was carried to Abraham's bosom37; and Dives cried to Abraham, who answered him in a detailed38 colloquy39. But common sense steps in and says, all this never actually occurred, but was invented to illustrate40 by a parable41 the moral truth that it is wrong for the selfish rich to neglect the suffering poor.
Why should not common sense equally step in, and say of the narrative43 of the Garden of Eden with its trees of Knowledge and of Life, that here is an obvious allegory, stating the problem which has perplexed44 so many generations of men, of the origin of evil, man's dual19 nature, and how to reconcile the fact of the existence of sin and suffering with the theory of a benevolent45 and omnipotent46 Creator? Or again, why hesitate to admit that the story of the Deluge is not literal history, but a version of a chapter of an old Chald?an solar epic47, revised in a monotheistic sense, and used for the purpose of impressing the lesson that the ways of sin are ways of destruction, and that righteousness is the true path of safety? This is in effect what continental48 critics have long recognized, and what the most liberal and learned Anglican Divines of the present day are beginning to recognize; and we find men like Canon Driver, Professor of Hebrew at Oxford50, and Canon Cheyne, insisting on "the fundamental importance of disengaging the religious from the critical and historical problems of the Old Testament." We hear a great deal 212 about the "higher criticism," and those who dislike its conclusions try to represent it as something very obscure and unintelligible51, spun53 from the inner consciousness of German pedants54. But really there is nothing obscure about it. It is simply the criticism of common sense applied from a higher point of view, which embraces, not the immediate55 subject only, but all branches of human knowledge which are related to it. This new criticism bears the same relation to the old, as Mommsen's History of Rome does to the school-boy manuals which used to assume Romulus and Remus, Numa and Tarquin, as real men who lived and reigned56 just as certainly as Julius C?sar and Augustus, and who found nothing to stagger them in Livy's speaking oxen.
This criticism has now been carried so far by the labours of a number of earnest and learned men in all the principal countries of Europe for the last century, that it has become to a great extent one of the modern sciences, and although there are still differences as to details, the leading outlines are no more in dispute than those of Geology or Biology. The conclusions of enlightened English divines like Canons Driver and Cheyne are practically very nearly the same as those of foreign professors, like Kuenen, Welhausen, Dillman, and Renan, and any one who wishes to have any intelligent understanding of the Hebrew Bible must take them into consideration.
Although the Old Testament does not carry history back nearly as far as the records of Egypt and Chald?a, still, when freed from the incubus59 of literal inspiration, it affords a very interesting picture of the ways of thinking of ancient races, of their manners and customs, their first attempts to solve problems of science 213 and philosophy, and of their popular legends and traditions.
It is with these historical results only that I propose to deal, and this not in the way of minute criticism, but of the broad, common-sense aspects of the question, and in view of the salient facts which rise up like guiding pillars in the vast mass of literature on the subject, of which it may be said, in the words of St. John's Gospel, that if all that has been written were collected, "I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books."
I may begin by referring to the extreme uncertainty60 that attaches to all ancient history unless it is confirmed by monuments, or by comparison with annals of other nations which have been so confirmed. The instance of Cyrus is a most instructive one. Here is one of the greatest conquerors61 the world has seen, and the founder62 of a mighty21 Empire; who flourished at a comparatively recent period, and whose life and exploits are related by well-known historians, such as Herodotus, who wrote within a few generations after his death; confirmed also to a great extent by almost contemporary records of Hebrew writers who were in close relations with him. The picture given of him is that of the son of a Median princess by an obscure Persian; in common with so many of the gods and heroes of antiquity63, he is said to have been exposed in infancy64 and saved miraculously65 or marvellously; he incites66 the poor and hardy67 people of Persia to revolt; defeats the Medes, consolidates68 Media and Persia, conquers Lydia and all Asia Minor69; and finally, as the "servant of the most High God," and instrument of his vengeance70 on Babylon, takes and destroys the cruel city of Nebuchadnezzar, and allows 214 the Jews to return from exile out of sympathy with their religion.
Unexpectedly a tablet of Cyrus himself turns up, and plays havoc71 alike with prophets and historians Instead of being the son of an obscure Persian father, he proves to be the legitimate72 descendant of a long line of Elamite kings; instead of being a servant of the most High God, or even a Zoroastrian, he appears as a devoted73 worshipper of the Chald?an gods, Assur, Merodach, and Nebo; so far from being an instrument of divine vengeance for the destruction of Babylon, he enters it without a battle, and is welcomed by its priests and people as an orthodox deliverer from the heretical tendencies of the last native king Nabonidus. It is apparent from this and other records, that Darius and not Cyrus was the real founder of the Persian Empire. Cyrus indeed founded a great Empire, but it fell to pieces after the death of his son Cambyses and the usurpation74 of the Magi, and it was Darius who, after years of hard fighting, suppressed revolts, really besieged75 and took Babylon, and reconstituted the Empire, which now for the first time became Persian and Zoroastrian.
Such an example teaches us to regard with considerable doubt all history prior to the fifth or sixth century b.c. which is not confirmed by contemporary monuments. Of such nations, Egypt and Chald?a (including in the latter term Assyria) alone give us a series of annals, proved by monuments confirming native historians, which extend for some 4000 years back, from the commencement of what may be called the modern and scientific history of the Greek period.
The historical portion of the Old Testament is singularly deficient76 in this essential point of confirmation77 215 by monumental evidence. Of Hebrew inscriptions78 there are none except that of the time of Hezekiah in the tunnel which brought water from the Pool of Siloam into the city; and the Moabite stone, which confirms the narrative in 2 Kings of the siege of Rabbah by Jehoshaphat and Jehoram, and their repulse80 after the sacrifice of his eldest81 son in sight of the armies by the King of Moab. Both of these inscriptions are of comparatively modern date, and close to or within the period when contact with the Assyrian Empire removes all uncertainty as to the history of Jud?a and Israel under their later kings. The capture of Jerusalem by David and the building of the Temple there by Solomon are doubtless historical facts, but they cannot be said to receive any additional confirmation from monuments. There have been so many destructions and rebuildings of temples on this site, that it is difficult to say to what era the lower strata82 belong. It is apparent, moreover, from the Egyptian tablets of Tel-el-Amarna, the city founded by the heretic king, Amenophis IV., about 1500 b.c., that Jerusalem was a well-known city and sacred shrine83 prior to the Hebrew conquest, and even to the date of the Exodus. Professor Sayce tells us that on one of these tablets is written, "The city of the mountain of Jerusalem (or Urasalim), the City of the temple of the God Uras, whose name there is Marra, the City of the King, which adjoins the locality of the men of Keilah." Uras was a Babylonian deity84, and Marra is probably the Aramaic Mare85, "lord," from which it may be conjectured86 that Mount Moriah received its name from the Temple of Uras which stood there.
Some of the other tablets show that in the century before the Exodus, Jerusalem was occupied by a semi-independent 216 king, who claimed to have derived his authority from "the oracle88 of the mighty King," which is explained to mean a deity, though he acknowledged the superiority of Egypt, which still retained the conquests of the eighteenth dynasty in Palestine. This, however, relates not to the Hebrews, but to the state of things prior to their invasion, when Palestine was occupied by comparatively civilized89 races of Amorites and Canaanites, and studded with numerous fenced cities.
A glimpse at the later state of things, when those earlier nations and cities were overwhelmed by an invasion of a rude nomad91 race, as described in the Books of Joshua and Judges, has been afforded quite recently by the exploration by Mr. Flinders Petrie of a mound93 on the plain of Southern Jud?a, which he is disposed to identify with the ancient Lachish. A section of this mound has been exposed by the action of a brook94, and it shows, as in Dr. Schliemann's excavations95 on the supposed site of Troy at Hissarlik, several successive occupations. The lowest and earliest city was fortified96 by a wall of sun-burnt bricks, 28 feet 8 inches thick, and which still stands to a height of 21 feet. It shows signs of great antiquity, having been twice repaired, and a large accumulation of broken pottery97 was found both outside and within it.
This city, which Petrie identifies with one of those Amorite cities which were "walled up to heaven," had been taken and destroyed, and the wall had fallen into ruins. Then, to use Professor Sayce's words, "came a period when the site was occupied by rude herdsmen, unskilled in the arts either of making bricks or of fortifying98 towns. Their huts were built of mud and 217 rolled stones from the Wady below, and resembled the wretched shanties99 of the half-savage100 Bedouins, which we may still see on the outskirts101 of the Holy Land. They must have been inhabited by the invading Israelitish tribes, who had overthrown102 the civilization which had long existed in the cities of Canaan, and were still in a state of nomadic103 barbarism."
Above this come newer walls, which had been built and repaired three or four times over by the Jewish kings, one of the later rebuildings being a massive brick wall 25 feet thick, with a glacis of large blocks of polished stone traced to a height of 40 feet, which Petrie refers to the reign57 of Manasseh. Then comes a destruction, probably by the Assyrians under Sennacherib, and then other buildings of minor importance, the latest being those of a colony of Greeks, who were swept away before the age of Alexander the Great.
This discovery is of first-rate importance as regards the early history of the Hebrews, and especially as to their relations with Egypt, their sojourn there, and the Exodus. If Abraham really came from Ur of Chald?a, the seat of a very old civilization; and if his descendants really lived for 400 years or longer in Egypt, mixed up a good deal with the native population, and for a great part of the time treated with favour, and occupying, if the legend of Joseph be true, the highest posts in the land; and if they really left Egypt, as described in the Exodus, laden104 with the spoils of the Egyptians, and led by Moses, a priest of Heliopolis skilled in all the lore105 of that ancient temple, it is inconceivable that in a single generation they should have sunk to such a level as that of the half-savage Bedouins, as indicated by Petrie's 218 researches. And yet who else could have been the barbarians106 whose inroad destroyed the walled city of the Amorites; and how well does this condition of rude savagery107 correspond with the bloodthirsty massacres, and the crude superstitions108, which meet us at every turn in the traditions of the period between the departure from Egypt and the establishment of a monarchy, which have been used by the compilers of the Books of Exodus, Joshua, and Judges?
If we are ever to know anything beyond legend and conjecture87 as to this obscure period, it is to the pick and the spade that we must look for certain information, and the exploration of mounds109 of ruined cities must either confirm or modify Petrie's inference as to the extreme rudeness of the nomad tribes who broke in upon the civilized inhabitants of older races.
Another exploration by Mr. Flinders Petrie, that of the ruins of Pi-thom and Ramses, gives a certain amount of monumental confirmation to the statement in Exodus i. 2, that during the captivity110 of the Israelites in Egypt they were employed as slaves by Ramses II. in building two treasure cities, Ramses and Pi-thom. Some wall-paintings show slaves or forced labourers, of a Jewish cast of countenance111, working at the brick walls under the sticks of taskmasters.
The first certain synchronism, however, between the Egyptian monuments and Jewish history is afforded by the capture of Jerusalem by Shishak in the reign of Rehoboam in the year 974 b.c. Among the wall-paintings in the temple at Thebes commemorating112 the triumphs of this campaign of Shishak, is a portrait of a captive with Jewish features, inscribed113 Yuten-Malek. This has been read "King of the Jews," and taken to 219 be a portrait of Rehoboam, but it is more probable that it means "Kingdom of the Jews," and that the portrait is one representative of the country conquered. In any case this gives us the first absolutely certain date in Old Testament history. From this time downwards114 there is no reason to doubt that annals substantially correct, of successive kings of Judah and Israel, were kept, and after the reign of Ahaz, when the great Assyrian Empire appeared on the scene, we have a full confirmation, from the Assyrian monuments, of the principal events recorded in the Book of Kings. In fact, we may say that from the foundation of the Jewish Monarchy by Saul and David, we are fairly in the stream of history, but that for everything prior to about 1000 b.c. we have to grope our way almost entirely115 by the light of the internal evidence afforded by the Old Testament itself.
The first point evidently is to have some clear idea of what this Old Testament really consists of. Until the recent era of scientific criticism, it was assumed to constitute, in effect, one volume, the earlier chapters of which were written by Moses, and the later ones by a continuance of the same Divine inspiration, which made the Bible from Genesis to Chronicles one consistent and infallible whole, in which it was impossible that there should be any error or contradiction. Such a theory could not stand a moment's investigation116 in the free light of reason. It is only necessary to read the two first chapters of Genesis to see that the book is of a composite structure, made up of different and inconsistent elements. We have only to include in the first chapter the two first verses printed in the second chapter, and to write the original Hebrew word "Elohim" for "God," 220 and "Yahve" or Jehovah for "Lord God," to see this at a glance.
The two accounts of the creation of the heaven and earth, of animal and vegetable life, and of man, are quite different. In the first Man is created last, male and female, in the image of God, with dominion117 over all the previous forms of matter and of life, which have been created for his benefit. In the second Man is formed from the dust of the earth immediately after the creation of the heavens and earth and of the vegetable world, and subsequently all the beasts of the field and fowls118 of the air are formed out of the ground, and brought to Adam to name, while, last of all, woman is made from a rib92 taken from Adam to be an helpmeet for him.
The two narratives119, Elohistic and Jehovistic, distinguished120 both by the different names of God, and by a number of other peculiarities121, run almost side by side through a great part of the earlier portion of the Old Testament, presenting often flagrant contradictions.
Thus Lamech, the father of Noah, is represented in one as a descendant of Cain, in the other of Seth. Canaan is in one the grandson of Adam, in the other the grandson of Noah. The Elohist says that Noah took two of each sort of living things, a male and a female, into the ark; the Jehovist that he took seven pairs of clean, and single pairs of unclean animals.
The difference between these narratives, the Elohistic and Jehovistic, is, however, only the first and most obvious instance of the composite character of the Pentateuch. These narratives are distinguished from one another by a number of minute peculiarities of language and expressions, and they are both embedded122 221 in a much larger mass of matter which relates mainly to the sacrificial and ceremonial system of the Israelites, and to the position, privileges, and functions of the priests and priestly caste of Levites. This is commonly known as the "Priests' Code," and a great deal of it is obviously of late date, having relation to practices and ceremonies which had gradually grown up after the foundation of the Temple at Jerusalem. A vast amount of erudition has been expended123 in the minute analysis of these different documents by learned scholars who have devoted their lives to the subject. I shall not attempt to enter upon it, but content myself with taking the main results from Canon Driver, both because he is thoroughly124 competent from his knowledge of the latest foreign criticism and from his position as Professor of Hebrew, and because he cannot be suspected of any adverse125 leaning to the old orthodox views. In fact he is a strenuous126 advocate of the inspiration of the Bible, taken in the larger sense of a religious and moral purpose underlying127 the often mistaken and conflicting statements of fallible writers.
The conclusions at which he arrives, in common with a great majority of competent critics in all countries, are—
1. That the old orthodox belief that the Pentateuch is one work written by Moses is quite untenable.
2. That the Pentateuch and Book of Joshua have been formed by the combination of different layers of narrative, each marked by characteristic features of its own.
3. That the Elohistic and Jehovistic narratives, which are the oldest portion of the collection, have nothing archaic128 in their style, but belong to the golden 222 period of Hebrew literature, the date assigned to them by most critics being not earlier than the eighth or ninth century b.c., though of course they may be founded partly on older legends and traditions; and, on the other hand, they contain many passages which could only have been introduced by some post-exilic editor.
4. That Deuteronomy, which is placed almost unanimously by critics in the reign of either Josiah or Manasseh, is absolutely inconsistent in many respects with the Priests' Code, and apparently129 of earlier date, before the priestly system had crystallized into such a definite code of minute regulations, as we find it in the later days of Jewish history after the Exile.
5. There is a difference of opinion, however, in respect to the date of the Priests' Code, Kuenen, Wellhausen, and Graf holding it to be post-Deuteronomic, and probably committed to writing during the period from the beginning of the exile to the time of Nehemiah, while Dillman assigns the main body to about 800 b.c., though admitting that additions may have been made as late as the time of Ezra.
Being concerned mainly with the historical question, I shall not attempt to pursue this higher criticism further, but content myself with referring to the principal points which, judged by the broad conclusions of common-sense, stand out as guiding pillars in the mass of details. Taking these in ascending130 order of time, they seem to me to be—
1. The Book of Chronicles.
2. The foundation of modern Judaism as described in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah.
3. The discovery of the Book of the Law or Deuteronomy in the reign of Josiah.
223 The Book of Chronicles is important because we know its date, viz. about 300 b.c., and to a great extent the materials from which it was compiled, viz. the Books of Samuel and Kings. We have thus an object-lesson as to the way in which a Hebrew writer, as late as 300 b.c., or nearly 300 years after the exile, composed history and treated the earlier records. It is totally different from the method of a classical or modern historian, and may be aptly described as a "scissors and paste" method. That is to say, he makes excerpts131 from the sources at his disposal; sometimes inserts them consecutively132 and without alteration133; at other times makes additions and changes of his own; and, in Canon Driver's words, "does not scruple134 to omit what is not required for his purpose, and in fact treats his authorities with considerable freedom." He also does not scruple to put in the mouth of David and other historical characters of the olden time, speeches which, from their spirit, grammar, and vocabulary, are evidently of his own age and composition.
If this was the method of a writer as late as 300 b.c., whose work was afterwards received as canonical135, two things are evident. First, that the canon of the earlier Books of the Old Testament could not have been then fixed136 and invested with the same sacred authority as we find to be the case two or three centuries later, when the Thora, or Book of Moses and the Prophets, was regarded very much as the Moslems regard the Koran, as an inspired volume which it was impious to alter by a single jot138 or tittle. This late date for fixing the canon of the Books of the Old Testament is confirmed by Canon Cheyne's learned and exhaustive work on the Psalter, in which he shows that a great majority of the 224 Psalms139, attributed to David, were written in the time of the Maccabees, and that there are only one or two doubtful cases in which it can be plausibly140 contended that any of the Psalms are pre-exilic.
Secondly141, that if a writer, as late as 300 b.c., could employ this method, and get his work accepted as a part of the Sacred Canon, a writer who lived earlier, say any time between the Chronicler and the foundation of the Jewish Monarchy, might probably adopt the same methods. If the Chronicler put a speech of his own composition into the mouth of David, the Deuteronomist might well do so in the case of Moses. According to the ideas of the age and country, this would not be considered to be what we moderns would call literary forgery142, but rather a legitimate and praiseworthy means of giving authority to good precepts143 and sentiments.
A perfect illustration of this which I have called the "scissors and paste" method, is afforded by the first two chapters of Genesis, and the way in which the Elohistic and Jehovistic narratives are so strangely interblended throughout the Pentateuch. No attempt is made to blend the two narratives into one harmonious144 and consistent whole, but excerpts, sometimes from one and sometimes from the other, are placed together without any attempt to explain away the evident contradictions. Clearly the same hand could not have written both narratives, and the compilation145 must have been made by some subsequent editor, or editors, for there is conclusive146 proof that the final edition, as it has come down to us, could not have been made until after the Exile. Thus in Leviticus xxvi. we find, "I will scatter147 you among the heathen, and your land shall be desolate148, and your cities waste," and "they 225 that are left of you shall pine away in their iniquity149 in your enemies' land." And in Deuteronomy xxix., "And the Lord rooted them out of their land in anger, and in wrath150, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is to this day." Even in Genesis, which professes151 to be the earliest Book, we find (xii. 6), "and the Canaanite was then in the land." This could not have been written until the memory of the Canaanite had become a tradition of a remote past, and this could not have been until after the return of the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity, for we find from the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah that the Canaanites were then still in the land, and the Jewish leaders, and even priests and Levites, were intermarrying freely with Canaanite wives.
The Apocryphal152 Book of Esdras contains a legend that the sacred books of the Law having been lost or destroyed when Jerusalem was taken by Nebuchadnezzar, they were re-written miraculously by Ezra dictating153 to five ready writers at once in a wonderfully short time. This is a counterpart of the legend of the Septuagint being a translation of the Hebrew text into Greek, made by seventy different translators, whose separate versions agreed down to the minutest particular. This legend, in the case of the Septuagint, is based on an historical fact that there really was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Sacred Books made by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and it may well be that the legend of Esdras contains some reminiscence of an actual fact, that a new and complete edition of the old writings was made and stamped with a sacred character among the other reforms introduced by Ezra.
These reforms, and the condition of the Jewish 226 people after the return from the Captivity, as disclosed by the Books of Nehemiah and Ezra, afford what I call the second guiding pillar, in our attempt to trace backwards155 the course of Jewish history. These books were indeed not written in their present form until a later period, and, as most critics think, by the same hand as Chronicles; but there is no reason to doubt the substantial accuracy of the historical facts recorded, which relate, not to a remote antiquity, but to a comparatively recent period after the use of writing had become general. They constitute in fact the dividing line between ancient and modern Judaism, and show us the origin of the latter.
Modern Judaism, that is, the religious and social life of the Jewish people, since they fairly entered into the current of modern history, has been marked by many strong and characteristic peculiarities. They have been zealously156 and almost fanatically attached to the idea of one Supreme158 God, Jehovah, with whom they had a special covenant159 inherited from Abraham, and whose will, in regard to all religious rites90 and ceremonies and social usages, was conveyed to them in a sacred book containing the inspired writings of Moses and the Prophets. This led them to consider themselves a peculiar people, and to regard all other nations with aversion, as being idolaters and unclean, feelings which were returned by the rest of the world, so that they stood alone, hating and being hated. No force or persuasion160 were required in order to prevent them from lapsing161 into idolatry or intermarrying with heathen women. On the contrary, they were inspired to the most heroic efforts, and ready to endure the severest sufferings and martyrdom for the pure faith. The 227 belief in the sacred character of their ancient writings gradually crystallized into a faith as absolute as that of the Moslems in the Koran; a canon was formed, and although, as we have seen in the case of the Chronicles and Psalms, some time must have elapsed before this sacred character was fully154 recognized, it ended in a theory of the literal inspiration of every word of the Old Testament down even to the commas and vowel164 points, and the establishment of learned schools of Scribes and Pharisees, whose literary labours were concentrated on expounding165 the text in synagogues, and writing volumes of Talmudic commentaries.
Now during the period preceding the Exile all this was very different. So far from being zealous157 for one Supreme God, Jehovah was long recognized only as a tribal166 or national god, one among the many gods of surrounding nations. When the idea of a Supreme Deity, who loved justice and mercy better than the blood of bullocks and rams, was at length elaborated by the later prophets, it received but scant167 acceptance. The great majority of the kings and people, both of Judah and Israel, were always ready to lapse162 into idolatry, worship strange gods, golden calves168, and brazen169 serpents, and flock to the alluring170 rites of Baal and Astarte, in groves171 and high places. They were also always ready to intermarry freely with heathen wives, and to form political alliances with heathen nations. There is no trace of the religious and social repulsion towards other races which forms such a marked trait in modern Judaism. Nor, as we shall see presently, is there any evidence, prior to the reign of Josiah, of anything like a sacred book or code of divine laws, universally known and accepted. The Books of Nehemiah and Ezra 228 afford invaluable172 evidence of the time and manner in which this modern Judaism was stamped upon the character of the people after the return from exile. We are told that when Ezra came to Jerusalem from Babylon, armed with a decree of Artaxerxes, he was scandalized at finding that nearly all the Jews, including the principal nobles and many priests and Levites, had intermarried with the daughters of the people of the land, "of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites." Backed by Nehemiah, the cup-bearer and favourite of Artaxerxes, who had been appointed governor of Jerusalem, he persuaded or compelled the Jews to put away these wives and their children, and to separate themselves as a peculiar and exclusive people from other nations.
It was a cruel act, characteristic of the fanatical spirit of priestly domination, which never hesitates to trample174 on the natural affections and the laws of charity and mercy, but it was the means of crystallizing the Jewish race into a mould so rigid175, that it defied wars, persecutions, and all dissolving influences, and preserved the idea of Monotheism to grow up into the world-wide religions of Christianity and Mahometanism, So true is it that evolution works out its results by unexpected means often opposed to what seem like the best instincts of human nature.
What is important, however, for the present object is, to observe that clearly at this date the population of the Holy Land must have consisted mainly of the descendants of the old races, who had been conquered but not exterminated176 by the Israelites. Such a sentence as, "for the Canaanites were then in the land," could 229 not have been written till long after the time when the Jews were intermarrying freely with Canaanite wives. Nor does it seem possible that codes, such as those of Leviticus, Numbers, and the Priests' Code, could have been generally known and accepted as sacred books written by Moses under Divine inspiration, when the rulers, nobles, and even priests and Levites acted in such apparent ignorance of them. In fact we are told in Nehemiah that Ezra read and explained the Book of the Law, whatever that may have included, to the people, who apparently had no previous knowledge of it.
By far the most important landmark177, however, in the history of the Old Testament, is afforded by the account in 2 Kings xxii. and xxiii. of the discovery of the Book of the Law in the Temple in the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah. It says that Shaphan the scribe, having been sent by the king to Hilkiah the high priest, to obtain an account of the silver collected from the people for the repairs of the Temple, Hilkiah told him that he had "found the Book of the Law in the house of the Lord." Shaphan brought it to the king and read it to him; whereupon Josiah, in great consternation178 at finding that so many of its injunctions had been violated, and that such dreadful penalties were threatened, rent his clothes, and being confirmed in his fears by Huldah the prophetess, proceeded to take stringent179 measures to stamp out idolatry, which, from the account given in 2 Kings xxiii., seems to have been almost universal. We read of vessels180 consecrated181 to Baal and to the host of heaven in the Temple itself, and of horses and chariots of the Sun at its entrance; of idolatrous priests who had been ordained182 by the kings of Judah to burn incense183 "unto Baal, to the Sun, and 230 to the Moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven"; and of high places close to Jerusalem, with groves, images, and altars, which had been built by Solomon to Ashtaroth, the goddess of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the Ammonites, and had apparently remained undisturbed and places of popular worship ever since the time of Solomon.
On any ordinary principles of criticism it is impossible to doubt that, if this narrative is correct, there could have been no previous Book of the Law in existence, and generally recognized as a sacred volume written by Divine inspiration. When even such a great and wise king as Solomon could establish such a system of idolatry, and pious137 kings like Hezekiah, and Josiah during the first eighteen years of his reign, could allow it to continue, there could have been no knowledge that it was in direct contravention of the most essential precepts of a sacred law dictated184 by Jehovah to Moses. It is generally admitted by critics that the Book of the Law discovered by Hilkiah was Deuteronomy, or rather perhaps an earlier or shorter original of the Deuteronomy which has come down to us, and which had already been re-edited with additions after the Exile. The title "Deuteronomy," which might seem to imply that it was a supplement to an earlier law, is taken, like the other headings of the books of the Old Testament in our Bible, from the Septuagint version, and in the original Hebrew the heading is "the Book of the Law." The internal evidence points also to Deuteronomy, as placing the threats of punishment and promises of reward mainly on moral grounds, and in the spirit of the later prophets, such as Isaiah, who lived shortly 231 before the discovery of the book by Hilkiah. And it is apparent that when Deuteronomy was written, the Priests' Code, which forms such an important part of the other books of the Pentateuch, could not have been known, as so many of the ceremonial rites and usages are clearly inconsistent with it.
It is not to be inferred that there were no writings in existence before the reign of Josiah. Doubtless annals had been kept of the principal events of each reign from the foundation of the monarchy, and many of the old legends and traditions of the race had been collected and reduced to writing during the period from Solomon to the later kings.
The Priests' Code also, though of later date in its complete form, was doubtless not an invention of any single priest, but a compilation of usages, some of which had long existed, while others had grown up in connection with the Second Temple after the return from exile. So also the civil and social legislation was not a code promulgated185, like the Code Napoleon, by any one monarch16 or high priest, but a compilation from usages and precedents186 which had come to be received as having an established authority. But what is plainly inconsistent with the account of the discovery of the Book of the Law in the reign of Josiah, is the supposition that there had been, in long previous existence, a collection of sacred books, recognized as a Bible or work of Divine inspiration, as the Old Testament came to be among the Jews of the first or second century b.c.
It is to be observed that among early nations, such historical annals and legislative187 enactments188 never form the first stratum189 of a sacred literature, which consists invariably of hymns190, prayers, ceremonial rites, and 232 astronomical191 or astrological myths. Thus the Rig Veda of the Hindoos, the early portions of the Vendedad of the Iranians, the Book of the Dead of the Egyptians, and the penitential psalms and invocations of the Chald?ans formed the oldest sacred books, about which codes and commentaries, and in some cases historical allusions192 and biographies, gradually accumulated, though never attaining193 to quite an equal authority.
There is abundant internal evidence in the books of the Old Testament which profess49 to be older than the reign of Josiah, to show that they are in great part, at any rate, of later compilation, and could not have been recognized as the sacred Thora or Bible of the nation. To take a single instance, that of Solomon. Is it conceivable that this greatest and wisest of kings, who had held personal commune with Jehovah, and who knew everything down to the hyssop on the wall, could have been ignorant of such a sacred book if it had been in existence? And if he had known it, or even the Decalogue, is it conceivable that he should have totally ignored its first and fundamental precepts, "Thou shalt have no other gods but me," and "thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image"? Could uxoriousness194, divided among 700 wives, have turned the heart of such a monarch so completely as to make him worship Ashtaroth and Milcom, and build high places for Chemosh and Moloch? And could he have done this without the opposition195, and apparently with the approval, of the priests and the people? And again, could these high places and altars and vessels dedicated196 to Baal and the host of heaven have been allowed to remain in the Temple, down to the eighteenth year of Josiah, Under a succession of kings several of whom 233 were reputed to be pious servants of Jehovah? And the idolatrous tendencies of the ten tribes of Israel, who formed the majority of the Hebrew race, and had a common history and traditions, are even more apparent.
In the speeches put into the mouth of Solomon in 1 Kings, in which reference is made to "statutes197 and commandments spoken by Jehovah by the hand of Moses," there is abundant evidence that their composition must be assigned to a much later date. They are full of references to the captivity in a foreign land and return from exile (1 Kings viii. 46—53, and ix. 6—9). Similar references to the Exile are found throughout the Book of Kings, and even in Books of the Pentateuch which profess to be written by Moses. If such a code of sacred writings had been in existence in the time of Josiah, instead of rending199 his clothes in dismay when Shaphan brought him the Book of the Law found by Hilkiah, he would have said, "Why this is only a different version of what we know already."
On the whole the evidence points to this conclusion. The idea of a one Supreme God who was a Spirit, while all other gods were mere200 idols201 made by men's hands; who created and ruled all things in heaven and earth; and who loved justice and mercy rather than the blood of rams and bullocks, was slowly evolved from the crude conceptions of a jealous, vindictive202, and cruel anthropomorphic local god, by the prophets and best minds of Israel after it had settled down under the Monarchy into a civilized and cultured state. It appears for the first time distinctly in Isaiah and Amos, and was never popular with the majority of the kings and upper classes, or with the mass of the nation until the Exile, 234 but it gradually gained ground during the calamities204 of the later days, when Assyrian armies were threatening destruction. A strong opposition arose in the later reigns205 between the aristocracy, who looked on the situation from a political point of view and trusted to armies and alliances, and what may be called the pietist or evangelical party of the prophets, who took a purely206 religious view of matters, and considered the misfortunes of the country as a consequence of its sins, to be averted207 only by repentance208 and Divine interposition.
It was a natural, and under the circumstances of the age and country quite a justifiable209 proceeding210 on the part of the prophetic school to endeavour to stamp their views with Divine authority, and recommend them for acceptance as coming from Moses, the traditional deliverer of Israel from Egypt. For this purpose no doubt numerous materials existed in the form of legends, traditions, customs, and old records, and very probably some of those had been collected and reduced to writing, like the Sagas211 of the old Norsemen, though without any idea of collecting them into a sacred volume.
The first attempt in this direction was made in the reign of Josiah, and it had only a partial success, as we find the nation "doing evil in the sight of the Lord," that is, relapsing into the old idolatrous practices, in the reigns of his three next successors, Jehoiachin, Jehoiachim, and Zedechiah. But the crowning calamity212 of the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and the seventy years' exile, seems to have crushed out the old aristocratic and national party, and converted all the leading minds among the Jews of the Captivity, including the priests, to the prophetical view that the essence 235 of the question was the religious one, and that the only hope for the future lay in repentance for sins and drawing closer to the worship of Jehovah and the Covenant between him and his chosen people. Prophets disappear from this period because priests, scribes, and rulers had adopted their views, and there was no longer room for itinerant213 and unofficial missionaries214. Under such circumstances the religion, after the return from the Exile, crystallized rapidly into definite forms. Creeds215, rituals, and sacred books were multiplied down to the third century b.c. or later, when the canon was closed with the Books of Chronicles and Daniel and the later Psalms, and the era began of commentaries on the text of a Koran or Bible, every word of which was held to be infallibly inspired.
The different crystals in solution have now united into one large crystal of fixed form, and henceforward we are in the full age of Talmudism and Pharisaism.
It is not to be supposed, however, that the books which thus came to be considered sacred were the inventions of priests and scribes of this later age. Doubtless they were based to a great extent on old traditions, legends, and written annals and records, compiled perhaps in the reigns of Solomon and his successors, but based themselves on still older materials. The very crudeness of many of the representations, and the barbarism of manners, point to an early origin. It is impossible to conceive any contemporary of Isaiah, or of the cultured court of Solomon, describing the Almighty ruler of the universe as showing his hinder part to Moses, or sewing skins to clothe Adam and Eve; and the conception of a jealous and vindictive Jehovah who commanded the indiscriminate massacre14 of prisoners of 236 war, women and children, must be far removed from that of a God who loved justice and mercy. These crude, impossible, and immoral12 representations must have existed in the form of Sagas during the early and semi-barbarous stage of the people of Israel, and become so rooted in the popular mind that they could not be neglected when authors of later ages came to fix the old traditions in writing, and religious reformers to use them in endeavouring to enforce higher views and a purer morality. It is from this jungle of old legends and traditions, written and re-written, edited and re-edited, many times over, to suit the ideas of various stages of advancing civilization, that we have to pick out as we best can what is really historical, prior to the foundation of the Monarchy, from which time downwards we doubtless have more or less authentic216 annals, and meet with confirmations217 from Egyptian and Assyrian history.
The first figure which arrests our attention in the Old Testament as possibly historical, is that of Abraham. Prior to him everything is plainly myth and legend. We have two accounts of the creation of the universe and of man in Genesis, contradictory218 with one another, and each hopelessly inconsistent with the best established conclusions of astronomy, geology, ethnology, and other sciences. Then follow ten antediluvian219 patriarchs, who live on the average 847 years each, and correspond manifestly with the ten reigns of gods or demi-gods in the Chald?an mythology220; while side by side with this genealogy221 is a fragment of one which is entirely different, mentioning seven only of the ten patriarchs, and tracing the descent of Enoch and Noah from Adam through Cain instead of through Seth.
237 Then comes the Deluge with all the flagrant impossibilities which have been pointed173 out in a preceding chapter; the building of the Tower of Babel, with the dispersion of mankind and confusion of languages, equally opposed to the most certain conclusions of history, ethnology, and philology222. The descent from Noah to Abraham is then traced through ten other patriarchs, whose ages average 394 years each, and similar genealogies223 are given for the descendants of the other two sons of Noah, Ham and Japheth. It is evident that these genealogies are not history but ethnology, and that of a very rude and primitive224 description, by a writer with imperfect knowledge and a limited range of vision. A great majority of the primitive races of the world, such as the Negroes and the Mongolians, are omitted altogether, and Semitic Canaan is coupled with Turanian Hittite as a descendant not of Shem but of Ham. It is unnecessary to go into details, for when we find such an instance as that Canaan begat Sidon his first-born, it is evident that this does not mean that two such men really lived, but is an Oriental way of stating that the Ph?nicians were of the same race as the Canaanites, and that Sidon was their earliest sea-port on the shore of the Mediterranean225.
The whole of this Biblical literature prior to Abraham is clearly myth and legend, and not history; and whoever will compare it dispassionately with the much older Chald?an myths and legends known to us from Berosus and the tablets, can hardly doubt that it is taken mainly from this source, revised at a later date, in a monotheistic sense. Whole passages are simply altered by writing "God" for "gods," and pruning226 off or toning down grotesque227 and revolting incidents. To 238 give a single instance, where the Chald?an solar epic of Izdubar, in the chapter on the passage of the sun through the rainy sign of Aquarius, which describes the Deluge, says that "the gods smelt228 the sweet savour of the sacrifice offered by Hasisadra on emerging from the ark, and flocked like flies about the altar," Genesis says simply that "the Lord smelled a sweet savour"; and where the mixture of a divine and animal nature in man is symbolized229 in the Chald?an legend by Bel cutting off his own head and kneading the clay with the blood into the first man, the Jehovist narrative in Genesis ii. says, that "the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils230 the breath of life." But when we arrive at Abraham we feel as if we might be treading on really historical ground. There is the universal tradition of the Hebrew race that he was their ancestor, and his figure is very like what in the unchanging East may be met with to the present day. We seem to see the dignified231 sheik sitting at the door of his tent dispensing232 hospitality, raiding with his retainers on the rear of a retreating army and capturing booty, and much exercised by domestic difficulties between the women of his household. Surely this is an historical figure. But when we look closer, doubts and difficulties appear. In the first place the name "Abram" suggests that of an eponymous ancestor, like Shem for the Semites, or Canaan for the Canaanites. Abram, Sayce tells us, is the Babylonian Abu-ramer or "exalted233 father," a name much more likely to be given to a mythical ancestor than to an actual man. This is rendered more probable by the fact that, as we have already seen, the genealogy of Abraham traced upwards234 consists mainly of eponyms: 239 while those which radiate from him downwards are of the same character. Thus two of his sons by Keturah are Jokshan and Midian; and Sheba, Dedan, and Assurim are among his descendants. Again, Abraham is said to have lived for 175 years, and to have had a son by Sarah when she was ninety-nine and he one hundred; and a large family by Keturah, whom he married after Sarah's death. Figures such as these are a sure test that legend has taken the place of authentic history.
Another circumstance which tells strongly against the historical character of Abraham is his connection with Lot, and the legend of Lot's wife. The history of this legend is a curious one. For many centuries, in fact down to quite modern times, the volcanic235 phenomena236 of the Dead Sea were appealed to as convincing confirmations of the account in Genesis of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha, and hundreds of pious pilgrims saw, touched, and tasted the identical pillar of salt into which Lot's wife was changed. It is now certain that the volcanic eruptions237 were of an earlier geological age, and that the story of Lot's wife is owing to the disintegration238 of a stratum of salt marl, which weathers away under the action of wind and rain into columnar masses, like those described by Lyell in a similar formation in Catalonia. Innumerable travellers and pilgrims from early Christian23 times down to the seventeenth century returned from Palestine testifying that they had seen Lot's wife, and this was appealed to by theologians as a convincing proof of the truth of the Scripture239 narrative. Some saw her big, some little, some upright, and some prostrate240, according to the state of disintegration of the pillars pointed out by the 240 guides, which change their form rapidly under the influence of the weather, but no doubt was entertained as to the attestation241 of the miracle. It turns out, however, to be one of those geological myths of precisely242 the same nature as that which attributed the Devil's Dyke243 near Brighton to an arrested attempt of the Evil One to cut a trench244 through the South Downs, so as to let in the sea and drown the Weald. The episode of Lot and his daughters is also clearly a myth to account for the aversion of the Hebrews to races so closely akin34 to them as the Moabites and Ammonites, and it could hardly have originated until after the date of the Book of Ruth, which shows no trace of such a racial aversion.
Many of the events recorded of Abraham's life, though not so wildly extravagant245 as those attributed to Noah, are still clearly unhistorical. That a woman getting on towards one hundred years old should be so beautiful that her husband passes her off for his sister, fearing that, if known to be his wife, the king would kill him in order to take her into his harem, does not seem to be very probable. But when precisely the same thing is said to have occurred twice over to the same man, once at the court of Pharaoh and again at that of Abimelech; and a third time to his son Isaac, at the same place, Gerar, and to the same king Abimelech, the improbability becomes impossibility, and the legend is obviously mythical. Nor is it very consistent with the character of the pious patriarch, the father of the chosen people, to have told such lies, and apparently connived246 at his wife's prostitution, so that he could save his own skin, and grow rich on the "sheep and oxen, asses203, manservants, maidservants, and camels" given him by the king on the supposition that he was Sarah's brother.
241 Nor can we take as authentic history, Abraham talking with the Lord, and holding a sort of Dutch auction247 with him, in which he beats down from fifty to ten the number of righteous men who, if found in Sodom, are to save it from destruction.
On the whole, I do not see that there is anything in the account of Abraham and his times which we can safely assume to be historical, except the general fact that the Hebrews were descended248 from a Semitic family or clan249, who migrated from the district of Ur in Lower Chald?a probably about the time, and possibly in consequence, of the Elamite conquest, about 2200 b.c., which set in motion so many wars, revolutions, and migrations250 in Western Asia.
The chronology from Abraham to Moses is hopelessly confused. If Abraham is really an historical character, his synchronism with Chedorlaomer or Kudur-lagomer, the Elamite King of Chald?a, must be admitted, which fixes his date at about 2200 b.c. Again, if the narrative of the Exodus is historical, it is generally agreed that it took place in the reign of Menepthah, or about 1320 b.c. The interval251 between Abraham and Moses therefore must have been about 900 years. But if we take the genealogies as authentic history, Jacob, in whose time the Hebrews went into Egypt, was Abraham's grandson, and Moses, under whom they left it, was the son of Jochebed, who was the granddaughter of Levi, the son of Jacob, who was a man advanced in life when he came to Egypt. The genealogies therefore do not allow of more than five generations, or, at a high average for each, about 200 years for this interval between Abraham and Moses.
The tradition respecting this seems to have been 242 already very confused when Genesis was compiled, for we find in chap. xv. vers. 15, 16, the Lord saying to Abraham, that his descendants shall come back to Palestine and possess the whole country from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates, "in the fourth generation" after Abraham had "gone to his fathers in peace, and been buried in a good old age"; while only one verse before it is said, "thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict252 them for four hundred years."
Even if 400 years were allowed for the sojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt, it would not extend the interval between Moses and Abraham to more than 500 years, or 400 years less than is required by the synchronism with Chedorlaomer. It is needless to say that neither in the fourth or in any other generation did the descendants of Abraham "possess the whole country from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates."
There is no period of Jewish history so obscure as that of the sojourn in Egypt. The long date is based entirely on the distinct statement in Genesis xii., that the sojourning of the children of Israel was 430 years, and other statements that it was 400 years, both of which are hopelessly inconsistent with the genealogies. Genealogies are perhaps more likely to be preserved accurately253 by oral tradition than dates and figures, which Oriental races generally deal with in a very arbitrary way. But there are serious difficulties in the way of accepting either date as historical. There is no mention of any specific event during the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt between their advent7 in the time of Joseph and the Exodus, except their oppression by 243 a new king who knew not Joseph, and the building of the treasure cities, Pi-thom and Ramses, by their forced labour. The latter fact may be taken as probably true from the monuments discovered by Mr. Flinders Petrie; and if so, it occurred in the reign of Ramses II. But there is no other confirmation, from Egyptian records or monuments, of any of the events related in the Pentateuch, until we come to the passage quoted from Manetho by Josephus, which describes how the unclean people and lepers were oppressed; how they revolted under the leadership of a priest of Hieropolis, who changed his name from Osarphis to Moyses; how they fortified Avaris and called in help from the expelled Hyksos settled at Jerusalem; how the Egyptian king and his army retreated before them into Ethiopia without striking a blow; and the revolters ruled Egypt for thirteen years, killing254 the sacred animals and desecrating255 the temples; and how, at the end of this period, the king and his son returned with a great army, defeated the rebels and shepherds with great slaughter256, and pursued them to the bounds of Syria.
This account is evidently very different from that of Exodus, and does not itself read very like real history, nor is there anything in the Egyptian monuments to confirm it, but rather the reverse. Menepthah certainly reigned many years after he was said to have been drowned in the Red Sea, and his power and that of his immediate successors, though greatly diminished, still extended with a sort of suzerainty over Palestine and Southern Syria. It is said that the Egyptians purposely omitted all mention of disasters and defeats, but this is distinctly untrue, for Manetho records events such as the conquest of Egypt by the Hyksos without a battle, 244 and the retreat of Menepthah into Ethiopia for thirteen years before the impure257 rebels, which were much more disgraceful than would have been the destruction of a pursuing force of chariots by the returning tide of the Red Sea.
The question therefore of the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt and the Exodus has to be considered solely258 by the light of the internal evidence afforded by the books of the Old Testament. The long period of 430 years is open to grave objections. It is inconceivable that a people who had lived for four centuries in an old and highly-civilized empire, for part of the time at any rate on equal or superior terms under the king who "knew Joseph"; and who appear to have been so much intermixed with the native Egyptians as to have been borrowing from them as neighbours before their flight, should have carried away with them so little of Egyptian manners and relics259. Beyond a few rites and ceremonies, and a certain tendency to revert260 to the animal worship of the golden calf261, there is nothing to show that the Hebrews had ever been in contact with Egyptian civilization. This is most remarkable262 in the absence of all belief in a resurrection of the body, future life, and day of judgment263, which were the cardinal264 axioms of the practical daily life of the Egyptian people. Temporal rewards and punishments to the individual and his posterity265 in the present life, are the sole inducements held out to practise virtue266 and abstain267 from vice268, from the Decalogue down to the comparatively late period of Ecclesiastes, where Solomon the wise king is represented as saying, "there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge in the grave whither thou goest." Even down to the 245 Christian era the Sadducees, who were the conservative aristocracy who stood on the old ways and on the law of Moses, and from whose ranks most of the high priests were taken, were opposed to the newfangled Pharisaic doctrine269 of a resurrection. How completely foreign the idea was to the Jewish mind is apparent from the writings of the Prophets and the Book of Job, where the obvious solution of the problem why goodness was not always rewarded and wickedness punished, afforded by the theory of a judgment after death and future life, was never even hinted at by Job or his friends, however hardly they might be pressed in argument.
If the sojourn in Egypt really lasted for 430 years, it must have embraced many of the greatest events in Egyptian history. The descendants of Jacob must have witnessed a long period of the rule of the Hyksos, and lived through the desolating270 thirty years' war by which these foreign conquerors were gradually driven back by the native armies of Upper Egypt. They must have been close to the scene of the final campaigns, the siege of Avaris, and the expulsion of the Hyksos. They must have been subjects of Ahmes, Thotmes, and the conquering kings of the eighteenth dynasty, who followed up the fugitive271 Hyksos, and carried the conquering arms of Egypt not only over Palestine and Syria, but up to the Euphrates and Tigris, and over nearly the whole of Western Asia. They must have witnessed the decline of this empire, the growth of the Hittites, and the half-century of wars waged between them and the Egyptians in Palestine and Syria.
The victory of Ramses II. at Kadesh and the epic poem of Pentaur must have been known to the 246 generation before the Exodus as signal events. And if there is any truth in the account quoted by Josephus, they must have been aware that they did not fly from Egypt as a body of fugitive slaves, but as retreating warriors272 who for thirteen years had held Egypt up to Ethiopia in subjection. And yet of all these memorable273 events there is not the slightest trace in the Hebrew annals which have come down to us.
An even greater difficulty is to understand how, if the children of Israel had lived for anything like 400 years in such a civilized empire as Egypt, they could have emerged from it in such a plane of low civilization, or rather of ferocious274 savagery and crude superstitions as are shown by the books of the Old Testament, where they burst like a host of Red Indians on the settlements and cities of the Amorites, and other more advanced nations of Palestine. The discoveries at Lachish already referred to show that their civilization could not have exceeded that of the rudest Bedouins, and their myths and legends are so similar to those of the North American Indians as to show that they must have originated in a very similar stage of mental development.
If we adopt the short date of the genealogies we are equally confronted by difficulties. If the Exodus occurred in the reign of Menepthah, 180 years back from that date would take us, not to the Hyksos dynasty where alone it would have been possible for Joseph to be a vizier, and for a Semitic tribe of shepherds to be welcomed in Egypt, but into the midst of the great and glorious eighteenth dynasty who had expelled the Hyksos, and carried the dominion of Egypt to the Euphrates. Nor would there have been time for 247 the seventy souls, who we are told were all of the family of Jacob who migrated into Egypt, to have increased in three generations into a nation numerous enough to alarm the Egyptians, and conquer the Canaanites.
The legend of Joseph is very touching275 and beautiful, but it may just as well be a novel as history, and this suspicion is strengthened by the fact that the episode of Potiphar's wife is almost verbatim the same as one of the chapters of the Egyptian novel of the Two Brothers. Nor does it seem likely that such a seven years' famine and such a momentous276 change as the conversion277 of all the land of Egypt from freehold into a tenure278 held from the king subject to payment of a rent of one-fifth of the gross produce, should have left no trace in the records. Again, the age of 110 years assigned to Joseph, and 147 to his father, are a sufficient proof that we are not upon strictly279 historical ground; and on the whole this narrative does not go far, in the absence of any confirmation from monuments, to assist us in fixing dates, or enabling us to form any consistent idea of the real conditions of the sojourn of the people of Israel in Egypt. It places them on far too high a level of civilization at first, to have fallen to such a low one as we find depicted280 in the Books of Exodus, Joshua, and Judges. Further excavations in the mounds of ruined cities in Jud?a and Palestine, like those of Schliemann on the sites of Troy and Mycen?, can alone give us anything like certain facts as to the real condition of the Hebrew tribes who destroyed the older walled cities of the comparatively civilized Amorites and Canaanites. If the conclusion of Mr. Flinders Petrie from the section of the mound 248 of Lachish, as to the extremely rude condition of the tribes who built the second town of mud-huts on the ruins of the Amorite city, should be confirmed, it would go far to negative the idea that the accounts of their having been trained in an advanced code of Mosaic281 legislation, can have any historical foundation.
We come next to Moses. It is difficult to refuse an historical character to a personage who has been accepted by uniform tradition as the chief who led the Israelites out of Egypt, and as the great legislator who laid the foundations of the religious and civil institutions of the peculiar people. And if the passage from Manetho is correctly quoted by Josephus, and was really taken from contemporary Egyptian annals, and is not a later version of the account in the Pentateuch modified to suit Egyptian prejudices, Moses is clearly identified with Osarsiph the priest of Hieropolis, who abandoned the worship of the old gods, and headed the revolt of the unclean people, which probably meant the heretics. It may be conjectured that this may have had some connection with the great religious revolution of the heretic king of Tel-el-Amarna, which for a time displaced the national gods, worshipped in the form of sacred animals and symbolic282 statues, by an approach to Monotheism under the image of the winged solar disc. Such a reform must have had many adherents283 to have survived as the State religion for two or three reigns, and must have left a large number of so-called heretics when the nation returned to its ancient faith; and it is quite intelligible52 that some of the more enlightened priests should have assimilated to it the doctrine of one Supreme God, which was always at the bottom of the 249 religious metaphysics of the earliest ages in Egypt, and was probably preserved as an esoteric doctrine in the priestly colleges. This, however, must remain purely a conjecture, and we must look for anything specific in regard to Moses exclusively to the Old Testament.
And here we are at once assailed284 by formidable difficulties. As long as we confine ourselves to general views it may be accepted as historical that the Israelites really came out of Egypt under a great leader and legislator; but when we come to details, and to the events connected with Moses, and to a great extent supposed to have been written by him or taken from his journals, they are for the most part more wildly and hopelessly impossible than anything related of the earlier patriarchs, Abraham and Joseph. The story of his preservation285 in infancy is a variation of the myth common to so many nations, of an infant hero or god, whose life is sought by a wicked king, and who is miraculously saved. We find it in the myths of Khrishna, Buddha286, Cyrus, Romulus, and others, and in the inscription79 by Sargon I. of Accade on his own tablet; he states himself to have been saved in an ark floated on the river Euphrates, just as Moses was on the Nile. When grown up he is represented first as the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter, and then as a shepherd in the wilderness287 of Midian talking with the Lord in a fiery288 bush, who for the first time communicates his real name of Jehovah, which he says was not known to Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, although constantly used by them, and although men began to call him by that name in the time of Enos, Adam's grandson. At Jehovah's command 250 Moses throws his rod on the ground, when it becomes a serpent from which he flies, and when he takes it up by the tail it becomes a rod again; and as a farther sign his hand is changed from sound to leprous as white as snow, and back again to sound, in a minute or two of time.
On returning to Egypt Moses is represented as going ten times into the presence of Pharaoh demanding of him to let the Hebrews depart, and inflicting289 on Egypt a succession of plagues, each one more than sufficient to have convinced the king of the futility290 of opposing such supernatural powers, and to have made him only too anxious to get rid of the Hebrews from the land at any price. What could have been the condition of Egypt, if for seven days "the streams, the rivers, the ponds and pools, and even the water in the vessels of wood and of stone, through all the land of Egypt," had been really turned into blood? And what sort of magicians must they have been who could do the same with their enchantments291?
The whole account of these plagues has distinctly the air of being an historical romance rather than real history. Those repeated interviews accompanied by taunts292 and reproaches of Moses, the representative of an oppressed race of slaves, in the august presence of a Pharaoh who, like the Inca of Peru or the Mikado of Japan, was half monarch and half deity, are totally inconsistent with all we know of Egyptian usage. The son and successor of the splendid Ramses II., who has been called the Louis XIV. of Egyptian history, would certainly, after the first interview and miracle, either have recognized the supernatural power which it was useless to resist, or ordered Moses to instant execution. 251 It is remarkable also how the series of plagues reproduce the natural features of the Egyptian seasons. Recent travellers tell us how at the end of the dry season when the Nile is at its lowest, and the adjacent plains are arid293 and lifeless, suddenly one morning at sunrise they see the river apparently turned into blood. It is the phenomenon of the red Nile, which is caused by the first flush of the Abyssinian flood, coming from banks of red marl. After a few days the real rise commences, the Nile resumes its usual colour, percolates294 through its banks, fills the tanks and ponds, and finally overflows295 and saturates296 the dusty plains. The first signal of the renewal297 of life is the croaking298 of innumerable frogs, and soon the plains are alive with flies, gnats299, and all manner of creeping and hopping300 insects, as if the dust had been turned into lice. Then after the inundation301 subsides302 come the other plagues which in the summer and autumn seasons frequently afflict the young crops and the inhabitants—local hail-storms, locusts303, murrain among the cattle, boils and other sicknesses while the stagnant304 waters are drying up. It reads like what some Rider Haggard of the Court of Solomon might have written in working up the tales of travellers and old popular traditions into an historical romance of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt.
When we come to the Exodus the impossibilities of the narrative are even more obvious. The robust305 common-sense of Bishop Colenso, sharpened by a mathematical education, has reduced many of these to the convincing test of arithmetic. The host of Israelites who left Egypt is said to have comprised 603,550 fighting men above the age of twenty; exclusive of the Levites and of a mixed multitude who followed. This 252 implies a total population of at least 2,500,000, who are said to have wandered about for forty years in the desert of Sinai, one of the most arid wildernesses306 in the world, destitute307 alike of water, arable42 soil, and pasture, and where a Bedouin tribe of even 600 souls would find it difficult to exist. They are said to have been miraculously fed during these forty years on manna, a sweetish, gummy exudation308 from the scanty309 foliage310 of certain prickly desert plants, which is described as being "as small as the hoar frost," and as being so imbued311 with Sabbatarian principles, as to keep fresh only for the day it is gathered during the week, but for two days if gathered on a Friday, so as to prevent the necessity of doing any work on the Sabbath.
Bishop Colenso points out with irresistible312 force the obvious impossibilities in regard to food, water, fuel, sanitation313, transport, and other matters, which was involved in the supposition that a population, half as large as that of London, wandered about under tents from camp to camp for forty years in a desert. No attempt has ever been made to refute him, except by vague suppositions that the deserts of Sinai and Arabia may then have been in a very different condition, and capable of supporting a large population. But this is impossible in the present geological age and under existing geographical314 conditions. These deserts form part of the great rainless zone of the earth between the north tropical and south temperate315 zones, where cultivation316 is only possible when the means of irrigation are afforded by lakes, rivers, or melting snow. But there are none of these in the deserts of Sinai and Northern Arabia, and therefore no water and no vegetation sufficient to support any population. No army has ever 253 invaded Egypt from Asia, or Asia from Egypt, except by the short route adjoining the Mediterranean between Pelusium and Jaffa, and with the command of the sea and assistance of trains to carry supplies and water. And the account in Exodus itself confirms this, for both food and water are stated to have been supplied miraculously, and there is no mention made of anything but the present arid and uninhabited desert in the various encampments and marches. In fact, the Bible constantly dwells on the inhospitable character of the "howling wilderness," where there was neither grass nor water. Accordingly reconcilers have been reduced to the supposition that ciphers317 may have been added by copyists, and that the real number may have been 6000, or even, as some writers think, 600. But this is inconsistent with the detailed numeration by twelve separate tribes, which works out to the same figure of 603,550 fighting men for the total number. Nor is it consistent with the undoubted fact that the Hebrews did evacuate318 Egypt in sufficient numbers and sufficiently319 armed to burst through the frontiers, and capture the walled cities of considerable nations like the Amorites and Canaanites, who had been long settled in the country. The narrative of Manetho, quoted by Josephus, seems much more like real history; that the Hebrews formed part of an army, which, after having held Lower Egypt for thirteen years, was finally defeated, and retreated by the usual military route across the short part of the desert from Pelusium to Palestine, the Hebrews, for some reason, branching off, and taking to a Bedouin life on the outskirts of the desert and cultivated land, just as many Bedouin tribes live a semi-nomad life in the same regions at the present day.
254 Apart from statistics, however, the Books of the Pentateuch ascribed to Moses are full of the most flagrant contradictions and absurdities. It is evident that, instead of being the production of some one contemporary writer, they have been compiled and edited, probably many times over, by what I have called the "scissors and paste method," of clipping out extracts from old documents and traditions, and piecing them together in juxtaposition320 or succession, without regard to their being contradictory or repetitions.
Thus in Exodus xxxiii. 20, God says to Moses: "Thou canst not see my face and live; for there shall no man see me and live"; and accordingly he shows Moses only his "back parts"; while in ver. 11 in the very same chapter we read, "And the Lord spoke198 unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto a friend." Again in Exodus xxiv. the Lord says to Moses, "that he alone shall come near the Lord" (ver. 2), while in vers. 9—11 of the same chapter, we are told that "Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up; and they saw the God of Israel, and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire321 stone," and although they saw God, were none the worse for it, but survived and "did eat and drink." Is it possible to believe that these excessively crude representations of the Deity, and these flagrant inconsistencies, were all written at the same time, by the same hand, and that the hand of a man who, if not a holy inspired prophet, was at any rate an educated and learned ex-priest of Hieropolis, skilled in all the knowledge of the Egyptians?
The contradictions in the ideas and precepts of morality and religion are even more startling. These 255 oscillate between the two extremes of the conception of the later prophets of a one Supreme God, who loves justice and mercy better than sacrifice, and that of a ferocious and vindictive tribal god, whose appetite for human blood is as insatiable as that of the war-god of the Mexicans. Thus we have, on the one hand, the commandment, "Thou shalt do no murder," and on the other, the injunction to commit indiscriminate massacres. A single instance may suffice. The "Book of the Law of Moses" is quoted in 2 Kings xiv. as saying, "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin." In Numbers xxxi., Moses, the "meekest322 of mankind," is represented as extremely wroth with the captains who, having warred against Midian at the Lord's command, had only slaughtered323 the males, and taken the women of Midian and their little ones captives; and he commands them to "kill every male among the little ones, and every woman that hath known man by lying with him; but all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
These Midianites, be it remembered, being the people whose high priest Jethro had hospitably324 received Moses when he fled for his life from Egypt, and gave him his daughter as a wife, by whom he had children who were half Midianites, so that if the zealous Phinehas was right in slaying325 the Hebrew who had married a Midianite woman, Moses himself deserved the same fate.
The same injunction of indiscriminate massacre in order to escape the jealous wrath of an offended Jehovah is repeated, over and over again, in Joshua and Judges, and even as late as after the foundation 256 of the Monarchy, we find Samuel telling Saul in the name of the Lord of Hosts, to "go and smite326 Amalek, and utterly327 destroy them, slaying both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass," and denouncing Saul, and hewing328 Agag in pieces before the Lord, because this savage injunction had not been literally329 obeyed. Even under David, the man after the Lord's own heart, we find him torturing to death the prisoners taken at the fall of Rabbah, and giving up seven of the sons of Saul to the Gibeonites to be sacrificed before the Lord as human victims. It is one of the strangest contradictions of human nature that such atrocious violations330 of the moral sense should have been received for so many centuries as a divine revelation, rather than as instances of what may be more appropriately called "devil worship."
Nor is it a less singular proof of the power of cherished prepossessions that such a medley331 of the sublime332 religious ideas and lofty poetry of the prophetic ages, with such a mass of puerile333 and absurd legends, such obvious contradictions, and such a number of passages obviously dating from a later period, should be received by many men of intelligence, even to the present day, as the work of a single contemporary writer, the inspired prophet Moses.
When we pass from the Pentateuch to the succeeding Books of Joshua and of Judges the same remarks apply. The falling of the walls of Jericho at the sound of the trumpet334, and the defeat of an army of 135,000 men of Midian and Amalek with a slaughter of 120,000, by 300 men under Gideon, armed with pitchers335 and trumpets336, are on a par4 with the wandering of 2,500,000 Israelites in the desert for forty years, fed with manna 257 of the size of hoar-frost. The moral atmosphere also continues to be that of Red Indians down to the time of David, for we read of nothing but murders and massacres, sometimes of other races, sometimes of one tribe by another; while the actions selected for special commendation are like those of Jael, who drove a nail into the head of the sleeping fugitive whom she had invited into her tent; or of Jephthah, who sacrificed his daughter as an offering to the Lord in obedience337 to a vow163. This barbarous state of manners is confirmed by Flinders Petrie's discoveries at the supposed site of Lachish, which show the ruins of a walled city of the Amorites, built upon by the mud hovels of a race as rude as the rudest Bedouins who now wander on the edge of the Arabian desert.
The only safe conclusion seems to be that authentic annals of Jewish history only begin with the Monarchy, and that everything prior to David and Solomon, or possibly Saul and Samuel, consists of myth, legend, and oral tradition, so inextricably blended, and so mixed up with successive later additions, as to give no certain information as to events or dates.
All that it is safe to assume is, that in a general way the Hebrews were originally a Semitic tribe who migrated from Chald?a into Palestine and thence into Egypt, where they remained for an uncertain time and were oppressed by the national dynasty which expelled the Hyksos; that they left Egypt probably in the reign of Menepthah, and as a consequence of the rebellion recorded by Manetho; that they then lived for an unknown time as wandering Bedouins on the frontier of Palestine in a state of very rude barbarism; and finally burst in like a horde338 of Aztecs on the older and more 258 civilized Toltecs of Mexico. For a long period after this, perhaps for 200 or 300 years, they lived in a state of chronic3 warfare339 with one another, and with their neighbours, massacring and being massacred with the alternate vicissitudes340 of war, but with the same rudeness and ferocity of superstitions and manners. Gradually, however, they advanced in civilization, and something of a national feeling arose, which led to a partial consolidation341 under priests, and a more complete one under kings.
The first king, Saul, was opposed by priestly influence and defeated and slain342 in battle, but a captain of condottieri, David, arose, a man of great energy and military genius, who gradually formed a standing58 army and conquered province after province, until at his death he left to his successor, Solomon, an empire extending from the frontier of Egypt to Damascus, and from the Red Sea almost to the Mediterranean.
This kingdom commanded two of the great commercial routes between the East and West, the caravan343 route between Tyre and Babylon, via Damascus and Tadmor, and the route from Tyre to the terminus at Ezion-Gebir, of the sea-routes to Arabia, Africa, and India. Solomon entered into close commercial relations with Tyre, and during his long and splendid reign, Jerusalem blossomed rapidly into a wealthy and a cultured city, and the surrounding cities and districts shared in the general prosperity. The greatness of the kingdom did not last long, for the revolt of the ten tribes and the growth of other powers soon reduced Jud?a and Samaria to political insignificance344; but Jerusalem, down to the time of its final destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, i.e. for a period of some 400 years 259 after Solomon, never seems to have lost its character of a considerable and civilized city. It is evident from the later prophets that it was the seat of a good deal of wealth and luxury, for their invectives are, to a great extent, what we should call at the present day, Socialist345 denunciations of the oppression of the poor by the rich, land-grabbing by the powerful, and extravagance of dress by the ladies of fashion. There were hereditary346 nobles, organized colleges of priests and scribes, and no doubt there was a certain amount of intellectual life and literary activity. But of a sacred book there is no trace until the discovery of one in the Temple in the reign of Josiah; and the peculiar tenets of modern Judaism had no real hold on the mass of the people until after the return from Exile and the reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah.
The history, therefore, contained in the Old Testament is comparatively modern. There is nothing which can be relied on as authentic in regard to events and dates prior to the establishment of the Monarchy, and even the wildest myths and the most impossible legends do not carry us back within 2000 years of the time when we have genuine historical annals attested347 by monuments both in Egypt and Chald?a.
点击收听单词发音
1 testament | |
n.遗嘱;证明 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 rams | |
n.公羊( ram的名词复数 );(R-)白羊(星)座;夯;攻城槌v.夯实(土等)( ram的第三人称单数 );猛撞;猛压;反复灌输 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 chronic | |
adj.(疾病)长期未愈的,慢性的;极坏的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 par | |
n.标准,票面价值,平均数量;adj.票面的,平常的,标准的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 mythical | |
adj.神话的;虚构的;想像的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 derived | |
vi.起源;由来;衍生;导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 );(从…中)得到获得;源于;(从…中)提取 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 advent | |
n.(重要事件等的)到来,来临 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 sojourn | |
v./n.旅居,寄居;逗留 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 quotation | |
n.引文,引语,语录;报价,牌价,行情 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 fabulous | |
adj.极好的;极为巨大的;寓言中的,传说中的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 exodus | |
v.大批离去,成群外出 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 immoral | |
adj.不道德的,淫荡的,荒淫的,有伤风化的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 massacres | |
大屠杀( massacre的名词复数 ); 惨败 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 massacre | |
n.残杀,大屠杀;v.残杀,集体屠杀 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 absurdities | |
n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 );荒谬;谬论;荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 monarch | |
n.帝王,君主,最高统治者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 monarchy | |
n.君主,最高统治者;君主政体,君主国 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 dealing | |
n.经商方法,待人态度 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 dual | |
adj.双的;二重的,二元的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 almighty | |
adj.全能的,万能的;很大的,很强的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 mighty | |
adj.强有力的;巨大的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 peculiar | |
adj.古怪的,异常的;特殊的,特有的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 Christian | |
adj.基督教徒的;n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 superseded | |
[医]被代替的,废弃的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 bishop | |
n.主教,(国际象棋)象 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
26 faculties | |
n.能力( faculty的名词复数 );全体教职员;技巧;院 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
27 candid | |
adj.公正的,正直的;坦率的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
28 edifice | |
n.宏伟的建筑物(如宫殿,教室) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
29 pretension | |
n.要求;自命,自称;自负 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
30 interpretation | |
n.解释,说明,描述;艺术处理 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
31 applied | |
adj.应用的;v.应用,适用 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
32 deluge | |
n./vt.洪水,暴雨,使泛滥 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
33 sumptuously | |
奢侈地,豪华地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
34 akin | |
adj.同族的,类似的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
35 gulf | |
n.海湾;深渊,鸿沟;分歧,隔阂 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
36 positively | |
adv.明确地,断然,坚决地;实在,确实 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
37 bosom | |
n.胸,胸部;胸怀;内心;adj.亲密的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
38 detailed | |
adj.详细的,详尽的,极注意细节的,完全的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
39 colloquy | |
n.谈话,自由讨论 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
40 illustrate | |
v.举例说明,阐明;图解,加插图 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
41 parable | |
n.寓言,比喻 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
42 arable | |
adj.可耕的,适合种植的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
43 narrative | |
n.叙述,故事;adj.叙事的,故事体的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
44 perplexed | |
adj.不知所措的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
45 benevolent | |
adj.仁慈的,乐善好施的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
46 omnipotent | |
adj.全能的,万能的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
47 epic | |
n.史诗,叙事诗;adj.史诗般的,壮丽的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
48 continental | |
adj.大陆的,大陆性的,欧洲大陆的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
49 profess | |
v.声称,冒称,以...为业,正式接受入教,表明信仰 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
50 Oxford | |
n.牛津(英国城市) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
51 unintelligible | |
adj.无法了解的,难解的,莫明其妙的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
52 intelligible | |
adj.可理解的,明白易懂的,清楚的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
53 spun | |
v.纺,杜撰,急转身 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
54 pedants | |
n.卖弄学问的人,学究,书呆子( pedant的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
55 immediate | |
adj.立即的;直接的,最接近的;紧靠的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
56 reigned | |
vi.当政,统治(reign的过去式形式) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
57 reign | |
n.统治时期,统治,支配,盛行;v.占优势 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
58 standing | |
n.持续,地位;adj.永久的,不动的,直立的,不流动的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
59 incubus | |
n.负担;恶梦 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
60 uncertainty | |
n.易变,靠不住,不确知,不确定的事物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
61 conquerors | |
征服者,占领者( conqueror的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
62 Founder | |
n.创始者,缔造者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
63 antiquity | |
n.古老;高龄;古物,古迹 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
64 infancy | |
n.婴儿期;幼年期;初期 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
65 miraculously | |
ad.奇迹般地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
66 incites | |
刺激,激励,煽动( incite的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
67 hardy | |
adj.勇敢的,果断的,吃苦的;耐寒的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
68 consolidates | |
巩固 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
69 minor | |
adj.较小(少)的,较次要的;n.辅修学科;vi.辅修 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
70 vengeance | |
n.报复,报仇,复仇 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
71 havoc | |
n.大破坏,浩劫,大混乱,大杂乱 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
72 legitimate | |
adj.合法的,合理的,合乎逻辑的;v.使合法 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
73 devoted | |
adj.忠诚的,忠实的,热心的,献身于...的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
74 usurpation | |
n.篡位;霸占 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
75 besieged | |
包围,围困,围攻( besiege的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
76 deficient | |
adj.不足的,不充份的,有缺陷的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
77 confirmation | |
n.证实,确认,批准 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
78 inscriptions | |
(作者)题词( inscription的名词复数 ); 献词; 碑文; 证劵持有人的登记 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
79 inscription | |
n.(尤指石块上的)刻印文字,铭文,碑文 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
80 repulse | |
n.击退,拒绝;vt.逐退,击退,拒绝 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
81 eldest | |
adj.最年长的,最年老的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
82 strata | |
n.地层(复数);社会阶层 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
83 shrine | |
n.圣地,神龛,庙;v.将...置于神龛内,把...奉为神圣 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
84 deity | |
n.神,神性;被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
85 mare | |
n.母马,母驴 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
86 conjectured | |
推测,猜测,猜想( conjecture的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
87 conjecture | |
n./v.推测,猜测 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
88 oracle | |
n.神谕,神谕处,预言 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
89 civilized | |
a.有教养的,文雅的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
90 rites | |
仪式,典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
91 nomad | |
n.游牧部落的人,流浪者,游牧民 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
92 rib | |
n.肋骨,肋状物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
93 mound | |
n.土墩,堤,小山;v.筑堤,用土堆防卫 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
94 brook | |
n.小河,溪;v.忍受,容让 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
95 excavations | |
n.挖掘( excavation的名词复数 );开凿;开凿的洞穴(或山路等);(发掘出来的)古迹 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
96 fortified | |
adj. 加强的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
97 pottery | |
n.陶器,陶器场 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
98 fortifying | |
筑防御工事于( fortify的现在分词 ); 筑堡于; 增强; 强化(食品) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
99 shanties | |
n.简陋的小木屋( shanty的名词复数 );铁皮棚屋;船工号子;船歌 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
100 savage | |
adj.野蛮的;凶恶的,残暴的;n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
101 outskirts | |
n.郊外,郊区 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
102 overthrown | |
adj. 打翻的,推倒的,倾覆的 动词overthrow的过去分词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
103 nomadic | |
adj.流浪的;游牧的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
104 laden | |
adj.装满了的;充满了的;负了重担的;苦恼的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
105 lore | |
n.传说;学问,经验,知识 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
106 barbarians | |
n.野蛮人( barbarian的名词复数 );外国人;粗野的人;无教养的人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
107 savagery | |
n.野性 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
108 superstitions | |
迷信,迷信行为( superstition的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
109 mounds | |
土堆,土丘( mound的名词复数 ); 一大堆 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
110 captivity | |
n.囚禁;被俘;束缚 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
111 countenance | |
n.脸色,面容;面部表情;vt.支持,赞同 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
112 commemorating | |
v.纪念,庆祝( commemorate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
113 inscribed | |
v.写,刻( inscribe的过去式和过去分词 );内接 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
114 downwards | |
adj./adv.向下的(地),下行的(地) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
115 entirely | |
ad.全部地,完整地;完全地,彻底地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
116 investigation | |
n.调查,调查研究 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
117 dominion | |
n.统治,管辖,支配权;领土,版图 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
118 fowls | |
鸟( fowl的名词复数 ); 禽肉; 既不是这; 非驴非马 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
119 narratives | |
记叙文( narrative的名词复数 ); 故事; 叙述; 叙述部分 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
120 distinguished | |
adj.卓越的,杰出的,著名的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
121 peculiarities | |
n. 特质, 特性, 怪癖, 古怪 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
122 embedded | |
a.扎牢的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
123 expended | |
v.花费( expend的过去式和过去分词 );使用(钱等)做某事;用光;耗尽 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
124 thoroughly | |
adv.完全地,彻底地,十足地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
125 adverse | |
adj.不利的;有害的;敌对的,不友好的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
126 strenuous | |
adj.奋发的,使劲的;紧张的;热烈的,狂热的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
127 underlying | |
adj.在下面的,含蓄的,潜在的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
128 archaic | |
adj.(语言、词汇等)古代的,已不通用的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
129 apparently | |
adv.显然地;表面上,似乎 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
130 ascending | |
adj.上升的,向上的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
131 excerpts | |
n.摘录,摘要( excerpt的名词复数 );节选(音乐,电影)片段 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
132 consecutively | |
adv.连续地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
133 alteration | |
n.变更,改变;蚀变 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
134 scruple | |
n./v.顾忌,迟疑 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
135 canonical | |
n.权威的;典型的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
136 fixed | |
adj.固定的,不变的,准备好的;(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
137 pious | |
adj.虔诚的;道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
138 jot | |
n.少量;vi.草草记下;vt.匆匆写下 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
139 psalms | |
n.赞美诗( psalm的名词复数 );圣诗;圣歌;(中的) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
140 plausibly | |
似真地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
141 secondly | |
adv.第二,其次 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
142 forgery | |
n.伪造的文件等,赝品,伪造(行为) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
143 precepts | |
n.规诫,戒律,箴言( precept的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
144 harmonious | |
adj.和睦的,调和的,和谐的,协调的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
145 compilation | |
n.编译,编辑 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
146 conclusive | |
adj.最后的,结论的;确凿的,消除怀疑的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
147 scatter | |
vt.撒,驱散,散开;散布/播;vi.分散,消散 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
148 desolate | |
adj.荒凉的,荒芜的;孤独的,凄凉的;v.使荒芜,使孤寂 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
149 iniquity | |
n.邪恶;不公正 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
150 wrath | |
n.愤怒,愤慨,暴怒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
151 professes | |
声称( profess的第三人称单数 ); 宣称; 公开表明; 信奉 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
152 apocryphal | |
adj.假冒的,虚假的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
153 dictating | |
v.大声讲或读( dictate的现在分词 );口授;支配;摆布 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
154 fully | |
adv.完全地,全部地,彻底地;充分地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
155 backwards | |
adv.往回地,向原处,倒,相反,前后倒置地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
156 zealously | |
adv.热心地;热情地;积极地;狂热地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
157 zealous | |
adj.狂热的,热心的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
158 supreme | |
adj.极度的,最重要的;至高的,最高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
159 covenant | |
n.盟约,契约;v.订盟约 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
160 persuasion | |
n.劝说;说服;持有某种信仰的宗派 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
161 lapsing | |
v.退步( lapse的现在分词 );陷入;倒退;丧失 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
162 lapse | |
n.过失,流逝,失效,抛弃信仰,间隔;vi.堕落,停止,失效,流逝;vt.使失效 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
163 vow | |
n.誓(言),誓约;v.起誓,立誓 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
164 vowel | |
n.元音;元音字母 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
165 expounding | |
论述,详细讲解( expound的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
166 tribal | |
adj.部族的,种族的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
167 scant | |
adj.不充分的,不足的;v.减缩,限制,忽略 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
168 calves | |
n.(calf的复数)笨拙的男子,腓;腿肚子( calf的名词复数 );牛犊;腓;小腿肚v.生小牛( calve的第三人称单数 );(冰川)崩解;生(小牛等),产(犊);使(冰川)崩解 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
169 brazen | |
adj.厚脸皮的,无耻的,坚硬的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
170 alluring | |
adj.吸引人的,迷人的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
171 groves | |
树丛,小树林( grove的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
172 invaluable | |
adj.无价的,非常宝贵的,极为贵重的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
173 pointed | |
adj.尖的,直截了当的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
174 trample | |
vt.踩,践踏;无视,伤害,侵犯 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
175 rigid | |
adj.严格的,死板的;刚硬的,僵硬的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
176 exterminated | |
v.消灭,根绝( exterminate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
177 landmark | |
n.陆标,划时代的事,地界标 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
178 consternation | |
n.大为吃惊,惊骇 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
179 stringent | |
adj.严厉的;令人信服的;银根紧的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
180 vessels | |
n.血管( vessel的名词复数 );船;容器;(具有特殊品质或接受特殊品质的)人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
181 consecrated | |
adj.神圣的,被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣,给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 );奉献 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
182 ordained | |
v.任命(某人)为牧师( ordain的过去式和过去分词 );授予(某人)圣职;(上帝、法律等)命令;判定 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
183 incense | |
v.激怒;n.香,焚香时的烟,香气 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
184 dictated | |
v.大声讲或读( dictate的过去式和过去分词 );口授;支配;摆布 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
185 promulgated | |
v.宣扬(某事物)( promulgate的过去式和过去分词 );传播;公布;颁布(法令、新法律等) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
186 precedents | |
引用单元; 范例( precedent的名词复数 ); 先前出现的事例; 前例; 先例 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
187 legislative | |
n.立法机构,立法权;adj.立法的,有立法权的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
188 enactments | |
n.演出( enactment的名词复数 );展现;规定;通过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
189 stratum | |
n.地层,社会阶层 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
190 hymns | |
n.赞美诗,圣歌,颂歌( hymn的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
191 astronomical | |
adj.天文学的,(数字)极大的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
192 allusions | |
暗指,间接提到( allusion的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
193 attaining | |
(通常经过努力)实现( attain的现在分词 ); 达到; 获得; 达到(某年龄、水平、状况) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
194 uxoriousness | |
n.疼爱妻子 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
195 opposition | |
n.反对,敌对 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
196 dedicated | |
adj.一心一意的;献身的;热诚的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
197 statutes | |
成文法( statute的名词复数 ); 法令; 法规; 章程 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
198 spoke | |
n.(车轮的)辐条;轮辐;破坏某人的计划;阻挠某人的行动 v.讲,谈(speak的过去式);说;演说;从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
199 rending | |
v.撕碎( rend的现在分词 );分裂;(因愤怒、痛苦等而)揪扯(衣服或头发等);(声音等)刺破 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
200 mere | |
adj.纯粹的;仅仅,只不过 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
201 idols | |
偶像( idol的名词复数 ); 受崇拜的人或物; 受到热爱和崇拜的人或物; 神像 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
202 vindictive | |
adj.有报仇心的,怀恨的,惩罚的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
203 asses | |
n. 驴,愚蠢的人,臀部 adv. (常用作后置)用于贬损或骂人 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
204 calamities | |
n.灾祸,灾难( calamity的名词复数 );不幸之事 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
205 reigns | |
n.君主的统治( reign的名词复数 );君主统治时期;任期;当政期 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
206 purely | |
adv.纯粹地,完全地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
207 averted | |
防止,避免( avert的过去式和过去分词 ); 转移 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
208 repentance | |
n.懊悔 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
209 justifiable | |
adj.有理由的,无可非议的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
210 proceeding | |
n.行动,进行,(pl.)会议录,学报 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
211 sagas | |
n.萨迦(尤指古代挪威或冰岛讲述冒险经历和英雄业绩的长篇故事)( saga的名词复数 );(讲述许多年间发生的事情的)长篇故事;一连串的事件(或经历);一连串经历的讲述(或记述) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
212 calamity | |
n.灾害,祸患,不幸事件 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
213 itinerant | |
adj.巡回的;流动的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
214 missionaries | |
n.传教士( missionary的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
215 creeds | |
(尤指宗教)信条,教条( creed的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
216 authentic | |
a.真的,真正的;可靠的,可信的,有根据的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
217 confirmations | |
证实( confirmation的名词复数 ); 证据; 确认; (基督教中的)坚信礼 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
218 contradictory | |
adj.反驳的,反对的,抗辩的;n.正反对,矛盾对立 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
219 antediluvian | |
adj.史前的,陈旧的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
220 mythology | |
n.神话,神话学,神话集 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
221 genealogy | |
n.家系,宗谱 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
222 philology | |
n.语言学;语文学 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
223 genealogies | |
n.系谱,家系,宗谱( genealogy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
224 primitive | |
adj.原始的;简单的;n.原(始)人,原始事物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
225 Mediterranean | |
adj.地中海的;地中海沿岸的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
226 pruning | |
n.修枝,剪枝,修剪v.修剪(树木等)( prune的现在分词 );精简某事物,除去某事物多余的部分 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
227 grotesque | |
adj.怪诞的,丑陋的;n.怪诞的图案,怪人(物) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
228 smelt | |
v.熔解,熔炼;n.银白鱼,胡瓜鱼 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
229 symbolized | |
v.象征,作为…的象征( symbolize的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
230 nostrils | |
鼻孔( nostril的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
231 dignified | |
a.可敬的,高贵的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
232 dispensing | |
v.分配( dispense的现在分词 );施与;配(药) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
233 exalted | |
adj.(地位等)高的,崇高的;尊贵的,高尚的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
234 upwards | |
adv.向上,在更高处...以上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
235 volcanic | |
adj.火山的;象火山的;由火山引起的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
236 phenomena | |
n.现象 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
237 eruptions | |
n.喷发,爆发( eruption的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
238 disintegration | |
n.分散,解体 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
239 scripture | |
n.经文,圣书,手稿;Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》,《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
240 prostrate | |
v.拜倒,平卧,衰竭;adj.拜倒的,平卧的,衰竭的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
241 attestation | |
n.证词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
242 precisely | |
adv.恰好,正好,精确地,细致地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
243 dyke | |
n.堤,水坝,排水沟 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
244 trench | |
n./v.(挖)沟,(挖)战壕 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
245 extravagant | |
adj.奢侈的;过分的;(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
246 connived | |
v.密谋 ( connive的过去式和过去分词 );搞阴谋;默许;纵容 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
247 auction | |
n.拍卖;拍卖会;vt.拍卖 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
248 descended | |
a.为...后裔的,出身于...的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
249 clan | |
n.氏族,部落,宗族,家族,宗派 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
250 migrations | |
n.迁移,移居( migration的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
251 interval | |
n.间隔,间距;幕间休息,中场休息 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
252 afflict | |
vt.使身体或精神受痛苦,折磨 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
253 accurately | |
adv.准确地,精确地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
254 killing | |
n.巨额利润;突然赚大钱,发大财 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
255 desecrating | |
毁坏或亵渎( desecrate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
256 slaughter | |
n.屠杀,屠宰;vt.屠杀,宰杀 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
257 impure | |
adj.不纯净的,不洁的;不道德的,下流的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
258 solely | |
adv.仅仅,唯一地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
259 relics | |
[pl.]n.遗物,遗迹,遗产;遗体,尸骸 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
260 revert | |
v.恢复,复归,回到 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
261 calf | |
n.小牛,犊,幼仔,小牛皮 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
262 remarkable | |
adj.显著的,异常的,非凡的,值得注意的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
263 judgment | |
n.审判;判断力,识别力,看法,意见 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
264 cardinal | |
n.(天主教的)红衣主教;adj.首要的,基本的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
265 posterity | |
n.后裔,子孙,后代 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
266 virtue | |
n.德行,美德;贞操;优点;功效,效力 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
267 abstain | |
v.自制,戒绝,弃权,避免 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
268 vice | |
n.坏事;恶习;[pl.]台钳,老虎钳;adj.副的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
269 doctrine | |
n.教义;主义;学说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
270 desolating | |
毁坏( desolate的现在分词 ); 极大地破坏; 使沮丧; 使痛苦 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
271 fugitive | |
adj.逃亡的,易逝的;n.逃犯,逃亡者 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
272 warriors | |
武士,勇士,战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
273 memorable | |
adj.值得回忆的,难忘的,特别的,显著的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
274 ferocious | |
adj.凶猛的,残暴的,极度的,十分强烈的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
275 touching | |
adj.动人的,使人感伤的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
276 momentous | |
adj.重要的,重大的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
277 conversion | |
n.转化,转换,转变 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
278 tenure | |
n.终身职位;任期;(土地)保有权,保有期 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
279 strictly | |
adv.严厉地,严格地;严密地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
280 depicted | |
描绘,描画( depict的过去式和过去分词 ); 描述 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
281 mosaic | |
n./adj.镶嵌细工的,镶嵌工艺品的,嵌花式的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
282 symbolic | |
adj.象征性的,符号的,象征主义的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
283 adherents | |
n.支持者,拥护者( adherent的名词复数 );党羽;徒子徒孙 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
284 assailed | |
v.攻击( assail的过去式和过去分词 );困扰;质问;毅然应对 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
285 preservation | |
n.保护,维护,保存,保留,保持 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
286 Buddha | |
n.佛;佛像;佛陀 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
287 wilderness | |
n.杳无人烟的一片陆地、水等,荒漠 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
288 fiery | |
adj.燃烧着的,火红的;暴躁的;激烈的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
289 inflicting | |
把…强加给,使承受,遭受( inflict的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
290 futility | |
n.无用 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
291 enchantments | |
n.魅力( enchantment的名词复数 );迷人之处;施魔法;着魔 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
292 taunts | |
嘲弄的言语,嘲笑,奚落( taunt的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
293 arid | |
adj.干旱的;(土地)贫瘠的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
294 percolates | |
v.滤( percolate的第三人称单数 );渗透;(思想等)渗透;渗入 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
295 overflows | |
v.溢出,淹没( overflow的第三人称单数 );充满;挤满了人;扩展出界,过度延伸 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
296 saturates | |
浸湿,浸透( saturate的第三人称单数 ); 使…大量吸收或充满某物 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
297 renewal | |
adj.(契约)延期,续订,更新,复活,重来 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
298 croaking | |
v.呱呱地叫( croak的现在分词 );用粗的声音说 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
299 gnats | |
n.叮人小虫( gnat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
300 hopping | |
n. 跳跃 动词hop的现在分词形式 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
301 inundation | |
n.the act or fact of overflowing | |
参考例句: |
|
|
302 subsides | |
v.(土地)下陷(因在地下采矿)( subside的第三人称单数 );减弱;下降至较低或正常水平;一下子坐在椅子等上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
303 locusts | |
n.蝗虫( locust的名词复数 );贪吃的人;破坏者;槐树 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
304 stagnant | |
adj.不流动的,停滞的,不景气的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
305 robust | |
adj.强壮的,强健的,粗野的,需要体力的,浓的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
306 wildernesses | |
荒野( wilderness的名词复数 ); 沙漠; (政治家)在野; 不再当政(或掌权) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
307 destitute | |
adj.缺乏的;穷困的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
308 exudation | |
n.渗出,渗出物,分泌;溢泌 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
309 scanty | |
adj.缺乏的,仅有的,节省的,狭小的,不够的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
310 foliage | |
n.叶子,树叶,簇叶 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
311 imbued | |
v.使(某人/某事)充满或激起(感情等)( imbue的过去式和过去分词 );使充满;灌输;激发(强烈感情或品质等) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
312 irresistible | |
adj.非常诱人的,无法拒绝的,无法抗拒的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
313 sanitation | |
n.公共卫生,环境卫生,卫生设备 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
314 geographical | |
adj.地理的;地区(性)的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
315 temperate | |
adj.温和的,温带的,自我克制的,不过分的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
316 cultivation | |
n.耕作,培养,栽培(法),养成 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
317 ciphers | |
n.密码( cipher的名词复数 );零;不重要的人;无价值的东西 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
318 evacuate | |
v.遣送;搬空;抽出;排泄;大(小)便 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
319 sufficiently | |
adv.足够地,充分地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
320 juxtaposition | |
n.毗邻,并置,并列 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
321 sapphire | |
n.青玉,蓝宝石;adj.天蓝色的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
322 meekest | |
adj.温顺的,驯服的( meek的最高级 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
323 slaughtered | |
v.屠杀,杀戮,屠宰( slaughter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
324 hospitably | |
亲切地,招待周到地,善于款待地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
325 slaying | |
杀戮。 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
326 smite | |
v.重击;彻底击败;n.打;尝试;一点儿 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
327 utterly | |
adv.完全地,绝对地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
328 hewing | |
v.(用斧、刀等)砍、劈( hew的现在分词 );砍成;劈出;开辟 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
329 literally | |
adv.照字面意义,逐字地;确实 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
330 violations | |
违反( violation的名词复数 ); 冒犯; 违反(行为、事例); 强奸 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
331 medley | |
n.混合 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
332 sublime | |
adj.崇高的,伟大的;极度的,不顾后果的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
333 puerile | |
adj.幼稚的,儿童的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
334 trumpet | |
n.喇叭,喇叭声;v.吹喇叭,吹嘘 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
335 pitchers | |
大水罐( pitcher的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
336 trumpets | |
喇叭( trumpet的名词复数 ); 小号; 喇叭形物; (尤指)绽开的水仙花 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
337 obedience | |
n.服从,顺从 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
338 horde | |
n.群众,一大群 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
339 warfare | |
n.战争(状态);斗争;冲突 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
340 vicissitudes | |
n.变迁,世事变化;变迁兴衰( vicissitude的名词复数 );盛衰兴废 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
341 consolidation | |
n.合并,巩固 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
342 slain | |
杀死,宰杀,杀戮( slay的过去分词 ); (slay的过去分词) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
343 caravan | |
n.大蓬车;活动房屋 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
344 insignificance | |
n.不重要;无价值;无意义 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
345 socialist | |
n.社会主义者;adj.社会主义的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
346 hereditary | |
adj.遗传的,遗传性的,可继承的,世袭的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
347 attested | |
adj.经检验证明无病的,经检验证明无菌的v.证明( attest的过去式和过去分词 );证实;声称…属实;使宣誓 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
欢迎访问英文小说网 |