(8) There arose up a new king.--A king of a new dynasty might seem to be intended. Some suppose him to be Aahmes I., the founder of the eighteenth dynasty of Manetho; others suggest Rameses II., one of the greatest monarchs of the nineteenth. The present writer inclines to regard him as Seti I., the father of this Rameses, and the son of Rameses I. Seti, though not the actual founder of the nineteenth dynasty, was the originator of its greatness. (See Excursus I. "On Egyptian History, as connected with the Book of Exodus," at the end of this Book.)
Which knew not Joseph.--It seems to be implied that, for some considerable time after his death, the memory of the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt had protected his kinsfolk. But, in the shifts and changes incident to politics--especially to Oriental politics--this condition of things had passed away. The "new king" felt under no obligation to him, perhaps was even ignorant of his name. He viewed the political situation apart from all personal predilections, and saw a danger in it.
Verse 8. - There arose up a new king. It is asked, Does this mean merely another king, or a completely different king, one of a new dynasty or a new family, not bound by precedent, but free to adopt and likely to adopt quite new principles of government? The latter seems the more probable supposition; but it is probable only, not certain. Assuming it to be what is really meant, we have to ask, What changes of dynasty fall within the probable period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, and to which of them is it most likely that allusion is here made? Some writers (as Kalisch) have supposed the Hyksos dynasty to be meant, and the "new king" to be Set, or Salatis, the first of the Hyksos rulers. But the date of Salatis appears to us too early. If Joseph was, as we suppose, the minister of Apophis, the last Hyksos king, two changes of dynasty only can come into consideration - that which took place about B.C. 1700 (or, according to some, B.C. 1600), when the Hyksos were expelled; and that which followed about three centuries later, when the eighteenth dynasty was superseded by the nineteenth. To us it seems that the former of these occasions, though in many respects suitable, is
(a) too near the going down into Egypt to allow time for the multiplication which evidently took place before this king arose (see ver. 7), and
(b) unsuitable from the circumstance that the first king of this dynasty was not a builder of new cities (see ver. 11), but only a repairer of temples. We therefore conclude that the "new king" was either Rameses I., the founder of the nineteenth dynasty, or Seti I., his son, who within little more than a year succeeded him. It is evident that this view receives much confirmation from the name of one of the cities built for the king by the Hebrews, which was Raamses, or Rameses, a name now appearing for the first time in the Egyptian dynastic lists. Who knew not Joseph. Who not only had no personal know]edge of Joseph, but was wholly ignorant of his history. At the distance of from two to three centuries the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt, more especially as they were conferred under a foreign and hated dynasty, were forgotten.
1:8-14 The land of Egypt became to Israel a house of bondage. The place where we have been happy, may soon become the place of our affliction; and that may prove the greatest cross to us, of which we said, This same shall comfort us. Cease from man, and say not of any place on this side heaven, This is my rest. All that knew Joseph, loved him, and were kind to his brethren for his sake; but the best and most useful services a man does to others, are soon forgotten after his death. Our great care should be, to serve God, and to please him who is not unrighteous, whatever men are, to forget our work and labour of love. The offence of Israel is, that he prospers. There is no sight more hateful to a wicked man than the prosperity of the righteous. The Egyptians feared lest the children of Israel should join their enemies, and get them up out of the land. Wickedness is ever cowardly and unjust; it makes a man fear, where no fear is, and flee, when no one pursues him. And human wisdom often is foolishness, and very sinful. God's people had task-masters set over them, not only to burden them, but to afflict them with their burdens. They not only made them serve for Pharaoh's profit, but so that their lives became bitter. The Israelites wonderfully increased. Christianity spread most when it was persecuted: the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church. They that take counsel against the Lord and his Israel, do but imagine a vain thing, and create greater vexation to themselves.
Now there arose up a new king over Egypt,.... Stephen calls him another king, Acts 7:18 one of another family, according to Josephus (g); who was not of the seed royal, as Aben Ezra; and Sir John Marsham (h) thinks this was Salatis, who, according to Manetho (i), was the first of the Hycsi or pastor kings that ruled in lower Egypt; but these kings seem to have reigned before that time; see Gill on Genesis 46:34 and Bishop Usher (k) takes this king to be one of the ancient royal family, whose name was Ramesses Miamun; and gives us a succession of the Egyptian kings from the time of Joseph's going into Egypt to this king: the name of that Pharaoh that reigned when Joseph was had into Egypt, and whose dreams he interpreted, was Mephramuthosis; after him reigned Thmosis, Amenophis, and Orus; and in the reign of the last of these Joseph died, and after Orus reigned Acenehres a daughter of his, then Rathotis a brother of Acenchres, after him Acencheres a son of Rathotis, then another Acencheres, after him Armais, then Ramesses, who was succeeded by Ramesses Miamun, here called the new king, because, as the Jews (l) say, new decrees were made in his time; and this Pharaoh, under whom Moses was born, they call Talma (m), and with Artapanus (n) his name is Palmanothes:
which knew not Joseph; which is not to be understood of ignorance of his person, whom he could not know; nor of the history of him, and of the benefits done by him to the Egyptian nation, though, no doubt, this was among their records, and which, one would think, he could not but know; or rather, he had no regard to the memory of Joseph; and so to his family and kindred, the whole people of Israel: he acknowledged not the favours of Joseph to his nation, ungratefully neglected them, and showed no respect to his posterity, and those in connection with him, on his account; though, if a stranger, it is not to be wondered at.
(g) Antiqu. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 1.((h) Canon. Chron. Sec. 8. p. 107. (i) Apud Joseph. Contr. Apion. l. 1. sect. 14. (k) Annal. Vet. Test. p. 17. 18. (l) T. Bab. Erubin. fol. 53. 1.((m) Juchasin, fol. 135. 2.((n) Apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 27. p. 431.
Which knew not Joseph.--It seems to be implied that, for some considerable time after his death, the memory of the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt had protected his kinsfolk. But, in the shifts and changes incident to politics--especially to Oriental politics--this condition of things had passed away. The "new king" felt under no obligation to him, perhaps was even ignorant of his name. He viewed the political situation apart from all personal predilections, and saw a danger in it.
(a) too near the going down into Egypt to allow time for the multiplication which evidently took place before this king arose (see ver. 7), and
(b) unsuitable from the circumstance that the first king of this dynasty was not a builder of new cities (see ver. 11), but only a repairer of temples. We therefore conclude that the "new king" was either Rameses I., the founder of the nineteenth dynasty, or Seti I., his son, who within little more than a year succeeded him. It is evident that this view receives much confirmation from the name of one of the cities built for the king by the Hebrews, which was Raamses, or Rameses, a name now appearing for the first time in the Egyptian dynastic lists. Who knew not Joseph. Who not only had no personal know]edge of Joseph, but was wholly ignorant of his history. At the distance of from two to three centuries the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt, more especially as they were conferred under a foreign and hated dynasty, were forgotten.
which knew not Joseph; which is not to be understood of ignorance of his person, whom he could not know; nor of the history of him, and of the benefits done by him to the Egyptian nation, though, no doubt, this was among their records, and which, one would think, he could not but know; or rather, he had no regard to the memory of Joseph; and so to his family and kindred, the whole people of Israel: he acknowledged not the favours of Joseph to his nation, ungratefully neglected them, and showed no respect to his posterity, and those in connection with him, on his account; though, if a stranger, it is not to be wondered at.
(g) Antiqu. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 1.((h) Canon. Chron. Sec. 8. p. 107. (i) Apud Joseph. Contr. Apion. l. 1. sect. 14. (k) Annal. Vet. Test. p. 17. 18. (l) T. Bab. Erubin. fol. 53. 1.((m) Juchasin, fol. 135. 2.((n) Apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 27. p. 431.