This question can be treated both simply and comparatively. Simply indeed, [the land] is called “a good land” (Exod., ch. 3, v. 8); and “exceeding good” (Num. 14, v. 7), in the Hebrew — where, by the doubling of that [word], it signifies a goodness altogether great and excellent. And that [goodness] is placed chiefly in three [things]:
(col. 1093)
the healthfulness of the air, the fertility of the places, [and] the multitude of the people. Healthfulness is the head [chief] of all the conveniences which are in any region. And if it were lacking, this [land] would not [be] to be desired, nor [would it be] a seat and fatherland to be given by God to a chosen people, but [it] would rather have to be fled and execrated, as [it were] “the mouth of Orcus [hell]” and “Morbonia [Sickness-land].” Fertility, moreover, was shown by Joshua and Caleb, when they had performed the office of explorers, and brought thence a huge cluster [of grapes] and other fruits, concerning which [in] the first book. But [it] is often indicated by Scripture, when [the land] is called “a land flowing” or “streaming with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8 and 17; ch. 13:5; Lev. 20:24; Num. 14:8; ch. 16:14; Deut. 6:3; ch. 11:9; ch. 26:9 and 15; ch. 27:3; ch. 31:20; Josh. 5:6; Jer. 11:5; ch. 32:22; Baruch 1:20; Ezekiel 20:6 and 15). For by these words — after the manner of a proverb, as was said (bk. 1, ch. 8, q. 4) — “an affluence of things is signified to the worn-down [needy]”; partly because “milk and honey” are, of all, the first and simplest fruits from brute animals for the nourishment of men; partly because they clearly indicate the goodness of the sky and soil. For the “abundance and savor of milk” — whence [comes it] but from good and rich grass? Josephus says (bk. 2 of the Captivity, ch. 4): διὰ πλῆθος πόας ἀγαθῆς, τὰ κτήνη πλέον ἢ παρ᾽ ἄλλοις γαλακτοφόρα [dia plēthos poas agathēs, ta ktēnē pleon ē par’ allois galaktophora, “on account of the abundance of good grass, the cattle [are] more milk-bearing than among others”]. The “abundance and excellence of honey” — whence [comes it] but from very many flowers, and places most rich and clean? Let Pliny be seen (bk. 11, ch. 12, 13, 14). Since, then, so much both of milk and of honey is somewhere narrated [to be] — [so much] that it flows of its own accord hither and thither, like rivers — what else but a most blessed [land], and most furnished with all things for living honestly, peacefully, and pleasantly, is signified? And, imitating this, the Poets of the Gentiles said — Horace indeed (Epode 16): “Honey oozes from the hollow oak; from the high mountains the light water leaps down with sounding foot. There the she-goats come unbidden to the milk-pails, and the friendly flock brings back its stretched udders.” Virgil (Eclogue): “Now shall the hard oaks sweat dewy honey; the she-goats themselves shall bring home [their] udders distended with milk.” Tibullus (Elegy 3, bk. 1): “The oaks themselves gave honey, and of their own accord brought — to meet the careless [herdsmen] — the wealth of the milky udder.” Ovid (Metamorphoses 1): “and the yellow honeys dripped from the green oak.”
But although, by these words (as I said), the greatest affluence is noted, yet to me those certain new Interpreters do not please, who render “[the] land [as] flowing [affluent] with milk and honey.” For [there is] a greater and more expressive signification of a fruitful and good land, if — just as we say “a man flows and streams with sweat” — we say [that] “it [the land] flows and streams with milk and honey,” than if [we say it] “is affluent [abounds].” One abounds in wealth and learning who does not [thereby] flow and stream: that flowing indicates an abundance easily obtained, ready-at-hand, common, [and] secure. But always [there is] mention of milk before honey, because the use [of milk] pertains more widely to the sustaining of human life and its felicity. By milk infants, by milk boys, by milk adolescents, men and old men, and the sick and the strong, can be sustained — but not so by honey, although this sweetest and most healthful juice too avails for very many [things]. Hence, in Homer, [they are] ἀμύμονες [amymones], that is, “blameless [innocent]” — those γαλακτοφάγοι [galaktophagoi, “milk-eaters”]. And graphically, in his Canticle, Moses (v. 13 [Deut. 32:13–14]): “He set him (the Israelite people) upon a high land, that he might eat the fruits of the fields, and suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the hardest stone: butter of the herd, and milk of the sheep, with the fat of lambs, and of the rams of the sons of Basan, and goats; with the marrow of wheat; and [that] he might drink the purest blood of the grape.” St. Jerome, on the fifth chapter of Isaiah: “In truth,” he says, “nothing [is] richer than the land of promise, if [one considers] not the mountainous and desert parts [alone], but, considering all its breadth, from the river of Egypt as far as the great river Euphrates toward the east, and the Cilician Zephyrium, which overhangs the sea.” The same land he says (in the Radicals, and the commentary on Psalm 131, v. 15) [that] Radak called “ham moriiam” — which would be “moriiah,” that is, “watered and fruitful with waters.” Josephus, in the cited place, first concerning Galilee: “Πᾶσα,” he says, “καὶ εὔβοτος, καὶ δένδρεσι παντοίοις κατάφυτος, ὡς ὑπὸ τῆς εὐπαθείας προσκαλέσασθαι καὶ τὸν ἥκιστα γῆς φιλόπονον” [pasa kai eubotos, kai dendresi pantoiois kataphytos, hōs hypo tēs eupatheias proskalesasthai kai ton hēkista gēs philoponon, “[it is] all well-pastured, and planted with all kinds of trees — so that by [its] agreeableness it summons even the least industrious tiller of the soil”]. And comparing it with Perea, he says: ἡ ἑτέρα ὅλη καὶ συνεχής, ὅτι καρπόφορος [hē hetera holē kai synechēs, hoti karpophoros, “the other [Perea, though] wholly [rougher] and unbroken in extent, is [less] fruit-bearing”]. And again: τῇ γε μὲν μαλθακὸν ταύτης, καὶ τὸ πάμφορον, καὶ τὰ πεδία δένδρεσι κατάφυτα ποικίλοις· τὸ πλεῖστον δὲ εἰς ἐλαίαν τε καὶ ἄμπελον καὶ φοινικῶνας ἤσκηται, διαρδομένη χειμάῤῥοις τε τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ὀρῶν, καὶ πηγαῖς ἀεννάοις ἅλις, εἴ ποτε ἐκεῖνοι σειρίῳ φθίνοιεν [tē ge men malthakon tautēs… “(Perea) has a softer [soil] than this [Galilee], and is all-bearing; and its plains [are] planted with varied trees; but for the most part it is cultivated for the olive, the vine, and palm-groves, being watered by torrents from the mountains, and by ever-flowing springs in abundance, if ever those [torrents] should fail in the Dog-star heat”]. Concerning Samaria then, and Judaea: Ἄμφω ὀρειναὶ καὶ πεδιάδες, εἰς τε γεωργίαν μαλθακαὶ καὶ πολύφοροι· κατάδενδροί τε καὶ ὀπώρας ὀρεινῆς καὶ ἡμέρου μεσταί, γλυκὺ δὲ νᾶμα πᾶν διαφόρως ἐν αὐταῖς [amphō oreinai kai pediades… “Both [are] mountainous and champaign; and, for tillage, soft [fertile] and much-bearing; well-wooded, and full of mountain and cultivated fruit; and [there is] sweet water, of all sorts, in them”]. Whence that abundance of milk, or γαλακτοφορεία [galaktophoreia, “milk-yield”], concerning which above.
But [he] who, twenty years ago, visited and surveyed that same region for piety’s sake, the most illustrious Radziwiłł, [says] (letter 2): “Galilee, at the beginning, [is] rocky and abounding in cliffs, like hollow [Coele-] Syria; but two miles being traversed, so great is the amenity of the situation in this region, that it can with difficulty be described and explained in words. The signal fertility of the soil appears from this — that, although (on account of the incursions of the Arabs) the fields are not cultivated, yet it has produced the greatest force [growth] of the best herbs, especially of rosemary; and the shrubberies everywhere are green with dense [growth].” One could here treat in detail of those [things] which grew there happily — namely of balsam, vines, olives, palms, and the like, which are touched upon in Gen. 43, v. 11, and in the Canticle of Canticles. But too many [things], beyond [our] purpose, would here be heaped up; and of balsam it has already been treated above (ch. 2, q. 4).
To the multitude of the people, therefore, I turn — which was indeed so great that Josephus, in one and the same day, reckons up (bk. 6, ch. 45) the lambs slain at the Passover [as] 25 myriads and 5,600 — that is, in all, two hundred fifty-five thousand and six hundred (not, as in the Latin version of Rufinus, 256,500; bk. 7, ch. 17). Since [there] came together, for the eating of one lamb and the paschal banquet, men — and those whole, pure, and undefiled — 20 at most, but 10 at the least: if by this number, than which [it] could not be smaller, we multiply the aforesaid sum of paschal lambs, there will exist of such men [i.e. heads] twenty-five hundred
(col. 1095)
thousand: moreover, fifty-six thousand [i.e. 2,556,000]; or, if we follow that sum which is now read in Josephus, there will be [of] men 270 myriads — that is (as Rufinus rightly reckons up) two million seven hundred thousand. But what if we add to these the men prohibited from that eating and table by some defect — of gonorrhoea, or leprosy, or something similar? What of the women? What of the little boys? And the same multitude can be understood from the very many and most crowded cities and villages of that same land. For in the following division great catalogues are woven concerning that matter (ch. 14, 15, and following); and Josephus himself, in the cited place, says [that] in Galilee [there are] πόλεις πυκναί, καὶ τὸ τῶν κωμῶν πλῆθος πανταχῆ πολυάνθρωπον διὰ τὴν εὐθηνίαν [poleis pyknai, kai to tōn kōmōn plēthos pantachē polyanthrōpon dia tēn euthēnian, “cities close-set, and the multitude of villages everywhere thickly-peopled, on account of the plenty”]. But this [is spoken] generally, O Josephus: say, prithee, more distinctly — “how many cities and villages [are there] in Galilee?” He answers, in his Life: διακόσιαι καὶ τέσσαρες κατὰ τὴν Γαλιλαίαν εἰσὶ πόλεις καὶ κῶμαι [diakosiai kai tessares kata tēn Galilaian eisi poleis kai kōmai, “two hundred and four are the cities and villages throughout Galilee”]. But again, in such a city or village, how great a throng of men? The same [author] answers, in the cited bk. 3, ch. 4, of the Captivity: ἡ ἐλαχίστη πόλις ἢ κώμη ὑπὲρ πεντακισχιλίους πρὸς τοῖς μυρίοις ἔχει οἰκήτορας [hē elachistē polis ē kōmē hyper pentakischilious pros tois myriois echei oikētoras, “the smallest city or village has above fifteen thousand inhabitants”]. Truly great [is] this multitude, of which (if we omit the larger [places], which comprehend many more thousands) the sum would be three million and sixty thousand. And concerning Samaria and Judaea (same bk. 3, ch. 4): μέγιστον γε μὴν τεκμήριον ἀρετῆς καὶ εὐθηνίας, τὸ πληθύειν ἀνδρῶν ἑκατέραν [megiston ge mēn tekmērion aretēs kai euthēnias, to plēthyein andrōn hekateran, “the greatest proof, indeed, of [their] excellence and plenty [is] that each [region] abounds in men”]. And at this time, from the frequent ruins of cities and towns, it appears [that] it was most populous, as the aforesaid illustrious Radziwiłł says. Now indeed this same question would [remain] to be treated comparatively — but [it is] better to sever [it] off a little [into its own question].