poses about 1,400 persons to have been present, and that a twentieth part of them was slain.

Having thus pointed out the difficulties which are involved in the passage, and the little satisfaction to be derived from the suggested methods of removing them, we submit the following from the ingenious author whose suggestions for removing the difficulties involved in some of the Hebrew numbers we have noticed in other places-“ The Arabians have a very singular idiom in their dates, and other large numbers, placing, generally, the units before the tens, the tens before the hundreds, and the hundreds before the thousands; though it is not uncommon, even in the same passage, to follow both methods. The chronologist says that "in the Raben l'awel (May) of the year twelve and three hundred of the Hejira, there appeared a comet, sending forth rays and sparks of fire, and there followed it three bright flames; and it was at the fourth hour of the night, which was as light as day: and this happened in the six thousand and four hundred and sixteenth year of the world."*

This, in figures, would be 12

300

Total 312 Years. A.M. 6416. If it be asked, whether this mode of placing units before tens, tens before hundreds, hundreds before thousands, is ever used in Scripture, we would ask in return, whether it will not explain satisfactorily the number of people smitten as mentioned in the text (1 Sam. vi. 19)? "The Lord smote among the people 50,070 men." But here the

* Richardson, Arab. Gram. p. 48.

smaller number-seventy, is put before the largerthousand; and the word men comes between them; the word fifties is dual, and the word thousand is singular, and therefore does not agree with it. Suppose we place this literally-"The Lord smote seventy men, fifties, a thousand men." On the same principle as the Arabic notation, this would be 70

two fifties 100

a thousand 1000

Total 1170 Persons.

Whether this smaller number is not more credible the reader will judge. Why otherwise put the 70 before the thousand, with the word men between them?

If the same principle of numeration were applied to the loss of the Assyrian army (Isaiah xxxvii. 36) it would greatly vary the numbers from those of our translation: "And an angel of the Lord went forth, and slew in the camp of the Assyrians, (literally) one hundred AND eighty AND five thou sand, that is 5,180, (or, at most 85,100). In 2 Kings, xix. 35, the numbers stand, one hundred eighty AND five thousand; which, if we allow the proper force of the and (vau), makes 5,180 (or 85,100). Now, this number is much nearer to probability-to the supposable force of Assyrians encamped before any one town, to the course of a Samiel wind, and to the remark, when THEY AROSE IN THE MORNING they were ALL dead; that is, these 5,180 were entirely dead, besides a greater number injured; for, if they were all dead, how could they rise in the morning?

If we might rely on the fact recorded by Herodotus, that the ancient mode of calculation was by

the (Chinese?) Abacus, or arithmetical addition table, possibly it might discover the source of these errors the following may give an idea of such a statement the enumeration we have already given would stand more regularly thus :—

We may read this-Seventy, AND one hundred, and one thousand.

Also, the number of Assyrians slain might

stand :

We may read this-Eighty, AND one hundred, and five thousand; or, One hundred AND eighty-five thousand: but the first seems the more regular.*

It has to be remarked, after all, however, that the text does not necessarily imply that the number mentioned, whatever it was, died. It is, "He smote of the people." Whether only some died, it is impossible to state, as we cannot ascertain from the verse the circumstances connected with this awful

*"Fragments to Calmet."

instance of divine justice. It may have been a plague, or a pestilence, as smiting does not, as we have said, necessarily imply death (see Gen. xix. 11; Numb. xiv. 12, etc.) It has been conjectured, with great probability, that all the surrounding population suffered from a terrible plague,* but did not all die.

CHAPTER IX.

"Beforetime in Israel, when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, and let us go to the seer; for he that is now called a Prophet was beforetime called a Seer.”—Ver. 9.

THIS being the case, says bishop Colenso, it is remarkable, that, throughout the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua and Judges, the word Roeh (Seer) is never once used, but always Nabi (Prophet); and from this it follows, he says, that those portions of these books which contain this latter word, as Gen. xx. 7: Ex. vii. 1 ; xv. 20: Numb. xi. 29; xii. 6: Deut. xiii. 1, 3, 5; xviii. 15—18, 20, 22; xxxiv. 10: Jud. iv. 4; vi. 8, can hardly have been written before the days of Samuel. But there is surely an alternative-perhaps, several. Either as Poole suggests, the words here are by some later sacred writer, who, after Samuel's death, inserted this verse; or, as bishop Patrick thinks, Samuel, being fifty or sixty years old at the writing of this book, and speaking of the state of things in his early days, might well call it, "beforetime.” Or, secondly, the words might be those of Saul's servant, who, now stricken in years, might speak this, either by his knowledge of what was in his juvenile years, or upon the information of his father, or other person. And so it is a fit argument to persuade

*“Journal of Sacred Literature," vol. v. p. 139.
+"Pentateuch Examined," Pt. ii. p. 204.

Saul to go to the man of God, that he might show them their way, and where the asses were, because he was likely to inform them; for the prophets were formerly called Seers, because they knew and could reveal hidden things. And the meaning will then be, that anciently they were not popularly called prophets, but seers, only; whereas now, and afterwards, they were called seers, yet they were more commonly called prophets.

CHAPTER XIII.

"Saul reigned one year, and when he had reigned two years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men," etc.Ver. 1, 2.

THE literal reading is, 66 The son of a year was Saul in his reigning," as it is put in the margin. As it stands in the text, one clause contradicts the other. The words evidently mean, that at the time certain things happened, Saul had reigned one year, and when he had entered on the second year of his reign, the subsequent event happened. Luther has, "Saul was a year king," etc. Tremellius and Junius, "Saul living in his reign one year (but he reigned over Israel two years) did" so and so. The Vulgate, "The son of one year was Saul when he began to reign, but he reigned two years over Israel," etc., thus making him king when he was only a year old. Dr. Samuel Lee and others have maintained that the verse is not in the Septuagint. It is, however, given in the printed copy, published by Drs. Stier and Thiele (Bielefield, 1851), with a note stating that it is found in many codices. That the Hebrew text can be explained is certain, and as