long, and averaging about two and a half miles broad, extending along the present railway, which branches off to Ismailia from the direct line between Alexandria and Cairo. Westward Goshen probably included likewise a considerable tract of the adjoining Delta. The ruins scattered along the continuation of the valley, still farther east, are thought to indicate a populous region there likewise, and hence the name of Goshen is usually extended considerably farther in that direction; but the neglect of irrigation has allowed the sands of the desert on either side to encroach upon this narrow tract, so that it is now almost uninhabitable. The portion named above, however, is still so rich that it was sold in 1863 for $2,000,000, and is now worth much more.

The government works, upon which the Israelites were cornpelled to serve, were public edifices in the two cities, Pithom, and Raamses or Rameses, doubtless situated in or near the land of Goshen. The first of these places is generally identified with the present Tel el Kebir, a village in the center of the valley of Tumeilat, with remains of antiquity in its vicinity. The other is probably represented by Tel Ramsis, a quadrangular mound on an arm of the Nile opposite the modern village of Belbeis, located on the Damietta branch of the railway, about seventeen miles south-west of the former place. The canal, which conveys the sweet water of the Nile from Cairo to Suez, passes through both these villages, parallel with the railway, by way of Ismailia, pursuing very nearly the same line as the ancient one constructed for the same purpose, but choked up and obliterated for many centuries. By this route small craft during the Roman period and the Middle Ages used to furnish a communication with the market at Memphis for the citizens of Klysma, which was situated in the immediate vicin-` ity of Suez, as traces of the name still attest. The Suez Canal, which was opened in 1869 for navigation between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, has made this neighborhood public to thousands of persons traveling across the Isthmus to India and China, as large steamers sail directly through it from European ports to these distant lands. Those who wish to see more of · Egypt can disembark at Alexandria, take the cars for Cairo, and thence back by way of Ismailia, intercepting their vessel again at Suez. Thus most of the spots rendered memorable

by the exodus of the Israelites have been rapidly seen, at least from a distance, by multitudes of passengers on their way to and from the more distant east. The abrupt contact of modern improvements with these ancient scenes is calculated, perhaps, to dissipate some of the romantic haze which the imagination of Bible readers usually throws around them, but deepens rather than lessens their interest by the familiarity of approach.

After these preliminaries, we are prepared to follow the Hebrews in their exit from the land of their bondage. On the eve of the passover, corresponding to our Easter, they had rendezvoused by divine appointment at Rameses. Memphis, the capital, was forty miles distant, and hence Moses' final interview with Pharaoh, when the Israelitish leader uttered the ominous words, "Thou hast spoken well, I will see thy face again no more," must have taken place at some nearer point. The sacred meal was eaten in haste, the destroying angel at midnight smote all the first-born, and by the morning light the Israelitish host were on their march. As it is expressly stated that "God led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines,... but by the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea," we are sure that they took the direct south-easterly route toward the head of the Gulf of Suez, doubtless corresponding substantially with the modern pilgrim road. This way would lead them out of the fertile valley of Goshen, across a rolling, gravelly plain between low hills of shifting sand the whole distance. There was no obstruction to their journey, and they would make rapid progress. They had but little household stuff, for Orientals, especially those of nomadic habits, such as the Israelites inherited from their tent-dwelling forefathers, are not apt to encumber themselves much with furniture. Rain water would be abundant in the pits and rocks along their path at that time of the year, and they carried with them provision enough to last several days. Their first day was a long one, and they, no doubt, were anxious to fall as soon as possible into the main Haj road. Their first camp is called Succoth, or "booths," (Exod. xii, 37; xiii, 20; Num. xxxiii, 56,) probably a rough khan, like those established in all ages along this thoroughfare. The present Derb-el-Bân, a northern branch of the great pilgrim route, leads direct from

Belbeis, south-west down the valley by way of Rubeihy and Aweibet, and falls into the main Haj road at the Castle of Ajrúd, sixty miles from Belbeis. Ajrûd has been thought by many to correspond to the next station of the Israelites, "Etham, in the edge of the wilderness." (Exod. xiii, 20; Num. xxxiii, 6.) It is a long-established Egyptian outpost on the frontier of the desert. The whole air of the sacred narrative gives us the impression that this was a great landmark for travelers, and that it formed the first or immediate point of des

tination for the Hebrews on their journey. If this be Etham, it will be necessary to allow thirty miles for each day's journey, which, under the pressing circumstances, is not extravagant, although an ordinary day's march in caravan is only about twenty miles.

At Etham the Israelites received this divine command: "Turn and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdôl and the sea, over against Baal-zephon: before it shall ye encamp by the sea." (Exod. xiv, 2.) This direction must be carefully examined, as it is the only precise description we have of the actual crossing-place of the Red Sea by the Israelites. It is substantially repeated in verse nine, where the Egyptians are said to have overtaken the Hebrews "encamping by the sea, beside Pi-hahiroth, before Baal-zephon." Of the names of these localities no trace at present exists; their identification, therefore, must depend upon a comparison of the circumstances of the narrative, with some slight corroboration from the etymology and historical application of the names. Three or four places have been selected by different writers as rivals for the honor of this remarkable crossing, and their claims have been somewhat hotly contested at times. We propose calmly and carefully to discuss their respective merits, and to be guided by the explicit terms of the biblical account, irrespective of any theological considerations as to whether the miracle involved. may thus be enhanced or lessened. We take them up in their geographical order.

1. At the "Bitter Lakes." These are a series of shallow ponds of brackish water, some of them of very considerable extent, stretching at intervals from the head of the Gulf of Suez to the Mediterranean. They are supposed to have formerly constituted a continuous water connection between those two great seas, which has since been broken by a change of level, leaving these isolated basins partly salt from the remnant of sea-water. A few geological evidences in support of this theory have been adduced, the most palpable of which is the fact that sea-shells, of the same character with those now thrown up by the Red Sea, may be seen along the shore of these lakes. See Dr. Harmon's late book of travels in that region.) This would seem to indicate a continuity of these bodies of water in earlier times. (See further in Laborde,

Commentarie Géographique sur l'Exode. Paris, 1841. Fol., p. 79, a.)*

A rise of the intermediate land has been inferred from the stoppage of the ancient canal along this line; but this can readily be accounted for by the drifting in of sand, and the neglect of the banks. On the other hand, that no material change of level has taken place in this region in modern times, seems to be proved by the fact that the fresh water canal now actually conveys water from the Nile to Suez, just as it formerly did, without any considerable cutting for that purpose. The brackishness of these lakes merely argues a connection at some period with the Mediterranean, and not necessarily with the Red Sea likewise, and the shells and other marine indications are probably traces of this connection only. In fact the immense lagoon of Lake Menzaleh still reaches almost to Lake Timsah, the principal or deepest of the Bitter Lakes, and there is nothing but flats and marshes in this direction; whereas southerly the Suez Canal required extensive excavations for its continuance to the Gulf of Suez, cutting in some cases, not through sand and silted débris merely, but through firm strata of clay and crystalline alabaster.

This theory rests upon so problematical a foundation that it

*The great bed of the Bitter Lakes extends in a northerly and southerly direction, and is separated from the Red Sea by a sand bank 4,000 to 5,000 meters long, which is seldom more than one meter higher than the latter. It is forty to fifty lower than the water level of the sea basin, and from plain indications was ence covered with the sea. (Du Bois Aimée, in the Desci. de l'Eg. Mod., i, p. 188 sq1st ed.) Before it had a connection with the Nile by means of the well-known canal, and thus received fresh water, its waters were bitter, (Strabo, xvii, p. 804.) There can hardly be a doubt that it was originally embraced in the Heroöpolitan Gulf. (Stickel, in the Stud. u. Kritiken, 1850, p. 328 sq.) But this is no proof that the ancient Heroöpolis was situated in the inner corner of the Arabian Sea. (Strabo, xvi, p. 767; xvii, p. 836: Pliny, vi. 33,) and that vessels sailed thence. (Strabo, xvi. p. 768;) but more probably this city was located far north of Klysma, namely, Kolsum, near the present Suez, (Ptolemy, iv, 5, 14 and 54; Itinerar Anton., p. 107, ed. Wess..) namely, somewhere about the modern Abu-Keished, or Mukfar. (Knobel, Commentar zu Exodus, p. 140 sq.) Its ruins are still visible there. (Champollion, Egypte, ii. 88.) Its importance gave name to the entire adjacent nome, and to the contiguous gulf. Both were likewise more properly designated from Arsinoë, which was situated near the present head of the bay. (See Smith's Dictionary of Classical Geography, s. v, Arsinoë.) This latter seems to have been the official designation of the place which was popularly termed Clysma, (namely, the beach, Tò xλvoua, Reland, Palaestina, pp. 472, 556.)