After the famine had lasted for a time, apparently two years, there was " no bread in all the land ; for the fam- ine [was] very sore, so that the land of Egypt and [all] the land of Canaan fainted by reason of the famine. And Joseph gathered up all the m«ncy that was found in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, for the corn which they bought ; and Joseph brought the money into Pharaoh's house" (xlvii, 13, 14). When all the money of Egypt and Canaan was exhausted, barter be- came necessary. Joseph then obtained all the cattle of Egypt, and in the next year, all the land, except that of the priests, and apparently, as a consequence, the Egyptians themselves. He demanded, however, only a fifth part of the produce as Pharaoh's right. It has been attempted to trace this enactment of Joseph in the fragments of Egyptian history preserved by profane writers, but the residt has not been satisfactory. Even were the latter sources trustworthy as to the early pe- riod of Egyptian history, it woidd be difficult to deter- mine the age referred to, as the actions of at least two kings are ascribed by the Greeks to Sesostris, the king particularized. Herodotus says that, according to the Egyptians, Sesostris "made a division of the soil of Egypt among the inhabitants, assigning square plots of ground of equal size to all, and obtaining his chief reve- nue from the rent which the holders were required to pay him every year" (ii, 109). Elsewhere he speaks of the priests as having no expenses, being supported b)^ the property of the temples (ii, 37), but he does not as- sign to Sesostris, as has been rashly supposed, the ex- emption from taxation that we may reasonably infer. Diodorus Siculus ascribes the division of Egypt into nomes to Sesostris, whom he calls Sesoosis. Taking into consideration the general character of the infor- mation given by Herodotus respecting the history of Egypt at periods remote from his own time, we are not justilied in supposing anything more than that some tradition of an ancient allotment of the soil by the crown among the population was current when he visited the country. The testimony of Diodorus is of far less weight.
There is a notice, in an ancient Egj'ptian inscription, of a famine which has been supposed to be that of Joseph. The inscription is in a tomb at Bent Hasan, and records of Ameni,a governor of a district of Upper Egypt, that when there were years of famine, his dis- trict was supplied with food. This was in the time of Sesertesen I, of the twelfth dynasty. It has been sup- posed by Bunsen {Egypt's Place, iii, 334) that this must be Joseph's famine ; but not only are the particulars of the record inapplicable to that instance, but the calami- ty it relates was never unusual in Egj-pt, as its ancient inscriptions and modern history equally testify.
Joseph's policy towards the subjects of Pharaoh is important in reference to forming an estimate of his character. It displays the resolution and breadth of view that mark his whole career. He perceived a great advantage to be gained, and he ktst no part of it. He put all Egypt under Pharaoh. First the money, then
the cattle, last of all the land, and the Egyptians them- selves, became the property of the sovereign, and that, too, by the voluntary act of the people without any pressure. This being effected, he exercised a great act of generosity, and retpiired only a fifth of the produce as a recognition of the rights of the crown. Of the wis- dom of this policy there can be no doubt. Its justice can hardly be questioned when it is borne in mind that the Egyptians were not forcibly deprived of their lib- erties, and that when these had been given up they were at once restored. We do not know all the circumstances ; but if, as we may reasonably suppose, the people were warned of the famine, and j'et made no preparation dur- ing the years of overfiowing abundance, the government had a clear claim upon its subjects for having taken pre- cautions they had neglected. In any case it may have been desirable to make a new allotment of land, and to reduce an unequal system of taxation to a simple claim to a fifth of the produce. W^e have no evidence wheth- er Josejih were in this matter divinely aided, but we cannot doubt that if not he acted in accord with a judg- ment of great clearness in distinguishing good and evil.
4. We have now to consider the conduct of Joseph at this time towards his brethren and his father. Early in the time of famine, which prevailed equally in Canaan and Egypt, Jacob reproved his helpless sons and sent them to Egypt, where he knew there was corn to be bought. Benjamin alone he kept with him. Joseph was now governor, an Egyptian in habits and speech, for like all men of large mind he had suffered no scruples of prejudice to make him a stranger to the people he ruled. In his exalted station he labored with the zeal that he showed in all his various charges, presiding himself at the sale of corn. Thej' had, of necessity, to appear before Joseph, whose license for the jnirchase of corn was indispensable. Joseph had probably expected to see them, and he seems to have formed a deliberate plan of action. His conduct has brought on him the al- ways ready charges of those v,-':o would rather impeach than study the Bible, and even friends of that sacred book have hardly in this case done Joseph full justice (Niemeyer, Charakt. ii, 36G; Heuser, Diss, non iiihuinani- ter sed prudeiiHssime Josephum cum fratrihus J'ecisse, Hal. 1773). Joseph's main object appears to have been to make his brothers feel and recognise their guilt in their conduct towards him. For this purpose suffering, then as well as now, was indispensable. Accordingly, Joseph feigned not to know his brothers, charged them with being spies, threatened them with imprisonment, and allowed them to return home to fetch their yoini- ger brother, as a proof of their veracity, only on condition that one of them should remain behind in chains, with a prospect of death before him should not their words be verified. Then it was, and not before, that " they said one to another. We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the anguish of his soul and would not hear-, therefore is this distress come upon us. And Reuben said, Spake I not unto you, saying. Do not sin against the chiM, and ye would not hear? therefore, behold, also his bl<icMl is required" (xlii, 21). Upon this, after weeping liittcrly, he by common agreement bound his brother Simeon, and left him in custody. How deejily concerned Joseph was for his family, how true and affectionate a heart he had, may be learned from the words which escape from the brothers in their en- treaty that Jacob would allow Benjamin to go into Egypt, as required by Joseph: "The man asked us straitly of our state and of our kindred, saying. Is your father yet alive? have ye another brother?" (xliii, 7).