IX. JOSEPH AND HIS BRETHREN

The marks of coincidence without design, which I have brought forward to prove the truth of the Books of Moses, as successively presenting themselves in the history of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, I shall now follow up by others in the history of Joseph.

By the ill-concealed partiality of his father, and his own incaution in declaring his dreams of future greatness, Joseph had incurred the hatred of his brethren. They were feeding the flock near Shechem, Jacob desires to satisfy himself of their welfare, and sends Joseph to inquire of them and to bring him word again. Meanwhile they had driven further a-field to Dothan, and Joseph, informed of this by a man whom he found wandering in the country, followed them thither. They beheld him when he was yet afar off; his dress was remarkable [Gen. 37:3.] , and the eye of the shepherd in the plain country of the East, like that of the mariner now, was no doubt practised and keen. They take their counsel together against him. They conclude, however, not to stain their hands in the blood of their brother, but to cast him into an empty pit, which, in those countries, where the inhabitants were constantly engaged in a fruitless search for water, was a very likely place to be on the spot. There he was to be left to die, or, as Reuben intended, to remain till he could rid him out of their hands. Nothing can be more artless than this story. Nothing can bear more indisputable signs of truth than its details. But the circumstance, on which I now rest, is another that is mentioned. The brothers having achieved their evil purpose, sat down to eat bread—possibly some household present which Jacob had sent them, and Joseph had just conveyed, such as on a somewhat similar occasion, in after-times, Jesse sent and David conveyed to his elder brethren in the camp—though on this, as on a thousand touches of truth of the like kind, the reader of Moses is left to make his own speculations. And now “they lifted up their eyes and looked, and behold a company of Ishmaelites came from Gilead with their camels, bearing spicery and balm and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt.” [Gen. 37:25.] Now this, though by no means an obvious incident to have suggested itself, does seem to me a very natural one to have occurred; and, what is more, is an incident which tallies remarkably well with what we read elsewhere, in a passage, however, having no reference whatever to the one in question. For have we not reason to know, that at this very early period in the history of the world, this first of caravans upon record was charged with a cargo for Egypt singularly adapted to the wants of the Egyptians at that time? Expunge the 2nd and 3rd verses of the 50th chapter of Genesis, and the symptoms of veracity in the narrative which I here detect, or think I detect, would never have been discoverable. But in those verses I am told that “Joseph commanded the Physicians to embalm his father—and the Physicians embalmed Israel—and forty days were fulfilled to him; for so are fulfilled the days of those which are embalmed, and the Egyptians mourned threescore and ten days.” I conclude, therefore, from this, that in these very ancient times it was the practice of the Egyptians (for Joseph was here doing that which was the custom of the country where he lived) to embalm their dead; and we know from the case of our Lord that an hundred pounds weight of myrrh and aloes was not more than enough for a single body [John 19:39.] . Hence, then, the camelloads of spices which the Ishmaelites were bringing from Gilead, would naturally enough find an ample market in Egypt. Now, is it easy to come to any other conclusion when trifles of this kind drop out, fitted one to another like the corresponding parts of a cloven tally, than that both are true?—that the historian, however he obtained his intelligence, is speaking of particulars which fell within his own knowledge, and is speaking of them faithfully? Surely nothing can be more incidental than the mention of the lading of these camels of the Ishmaelites; it has nothing to do with the main fact, which is merely this, that the party, whoever they were, and whatever they were bent upon, were ready to buy Joseph, and that his brethren were ready to sell him. On the other hand no one can suspect, that when Moses relates Joseph to have caused his father’s body to be embalmed, he had an eye to corroborating his account of the adventure which he had already told concerning the Ishmaelitish merchants, who might thus seem occupied in a traffic that was appropriate. I think that this single coincidence would induce an unprejudiced person to believe, that the ordinary parts of this story are matters of fact fully known to the historian, and accurately reported by him. Yet it is an integral portion of this same story, uttered by the same historian, that Joseph had visions of his future destinies, which were strictly fulfilled—that the whole proceeding with regard to him had been under God’s controlling influence from beginning to end—that though his brethren “thought evil against him, God meant it unto good,” to bring to pass, as he did at a future day, “to save much people alive.” [Gen. 1:20.]