Phyllis of Philistia | Page 6

father
was the trustee of his child's happiness.
"But I know I can only be happy with you, my father!" she cried; but it
was of no avail. He, being a father and not a mother, was unable to
perceive what was in the girl's heart. He considered it quite natural that
she should be a trifle hysterical in anticipating her new life--that strange

untraveled country! Ah, is there anything more pathetic, he thought,
than a girl's anticipations of wifehood? But he would do his duty, and
he fancied that he was doing his duty when he put aside her earnest,
almost passionate protestations, and told her how happy she would be
with the man who was lucky enough to have won the pure treasure of
her love.
What could she do? The terrible doubts of that month of doubting
broadened into certainties. She knew that she did not love George
Holland; but she had not the courage to face Philistia as the girl who
did not know her own mind. Philistia was very solid on such points as
the sacredness of an engagement between a man and a woman. It was a
contract practically as abiding as marriage, in the eyes of Philistia; and,
indeed, Phyllis herself had held this belief, and had never hesitated to
express it. So nothing was left to her but to marry George Holland.
After all, he was a brilliant and distinguished man, and had not a score
of other girls wanted to marry him? Oh, she would marry him and give
up her life to the splendid duties which devolve upon the wife of a
clergyman.
But just as she had made up her mind to face her fate, Mr. Holland's
fate induced him to publish the book at which he had been working for
some time. It came out just when the girl was becoming resigned to her
future by his side, and it attracted even more attention than the author
had hoped it would achieve.
The book was titled "Revised Versions," and it was strikingly modern
in design and in tone. It purported to deal with several personages and
numerous episodes of the Old Testament, not from the standpoint of the
comparative philologist; not from the standpoint of the comparative
mythologist, but from the standpoint of the modern man of common
sense and average power of discrimination; and the result was that the
breath of a good many people, especially clergymen, was taken from
them, and that the Rev. George Holland became the best-known
clergyman in England.
He dealt with the patriarchs in succession, and they fared very badly at
his hands. He showed that Abraham had not one good act recorded to

his credit, and contrasted his duplicity with the magnanimity of the
ruler of Egypt whom he visited. He dwelt upon the Hagar episode,
showing that the adulterer was also a murderer by intention, and so
forth; while no words could be too strong to apply to Sara, his wife.
Isaac did not call for elaborate notice. He could not be accused of any
actual crime, but if he was a man of strong personality, he was
singularly unfortunate in having failed to impart to his wife any of that
integrity which he may have practiced through life. Her methods of
dealing with him after they had lived together for a good many years
were criminal, considering the largeness of the issue at stake as the
result of his blessing. As for Jacob, not a single praiseworthy act of his
long life was available to his biographer. His career was that of the
most sordid of hucksters. Of eleven of his sons nothing good is told,
but Joseph was undoubtedly an able and exemplary man; the only thing
to his discredit being his utter callousness regarding the fate of his
father, after he had attained to a high position in Egypt.
The chapter on the patriarchs was followed by one that dealt with the
incidents of the Exodus. The writer said that he feared that even the
most indulgent critic must allow that the whole scheme of Moses was a
shocking one; but he was probably the greatest man that ever lived on
the face of the earth, if he was the leader and organizer of a band of
depredators who for bloodthirst and rapacity had no parallel in history.
How could it be expected that a kingdom founded upon the massacre of
men and cemented by the blood of women and children should survive?
It had survived only as example to the world of the impossibility of a
permanent success being founded upon the atrocious methods pursued
by the worst of the robber states of the East. While civilization had
been spreading on all sides of them, the people of