not seem to have heen friendly to the lick ws. and
for the other reasons enumerated above, we presume that these foreigners were not at this time (if indeed I they ever were) in possession of the whole of Egypt. We therefore incline to identify the Pharaoh in ques- tion with one of the eighth) Memphitic) dynasty. whose names are unrecorded, hut who were contemporaneous with the twelfth (Diospolitic) as well as with the fifteenth (Shepherd) dynasty. There is one indica- tion in Scripture which seems to attribute a very con- siderable antiquity to this period. In Joseph's time the territory allocated to the Israelites was called Goshen (Gen. xlv, 10). In the time of Moses this ancient name appears to have heen almost forgi tten, and to have yielded to that of the land of Ramcses (Gen. xlvii. n .
I he religion of Egypt during the reign of this Pha- raoh appear- to have heen far less corrupt than it sub- sequently presents itself in the time of Moses. The Scriptures give us several indications of this; and these "f no indistinct kind. Thus Joseph speaks to
his master's wife as if she recognised the same (iod
that he did i Gen. xxxix, 9). His language to the chief
butler and baker in the prison conveys a similar idea I \1. 8), as doe- his address to Pharaoh when called he- fore him i xli. 16 32). Pharaoh in his speech to his servants and to Joseph speaks of God precisely as Joseph had done, and as if he recognised hut cne Cod i xli. 88,39). Joseph, without any fear of inju- rious consequent es to himself, and as if it were no ex- traordinary thing, allow- the identity of his religion with that of the sons of Jacob ixlii, 18). Joseph's steward, probably a native Egyptian, evidently recog- nises their (iod i xliii, 23). No doubt corruption had now he, •!! introduced into the pure religion derived
from Noah. In the magicians and wise men t xli, 8)
of Egypt we see probably a caste who had .dicey
PHARAOH 6
given a superstitious coloring to religion, introduced new rites of worship, and paved the way for a total de- clension from theism to gross polytheism. But this latter condition does not appear to have been reached in the time of Joseph. Symbolic worship, if now, as is most likely, in common use, had still to a very great extent left undestroyed the notion of one supreme God ruling over all the nations ; nor have we reason to suppose that Potipherah, the father-in-law of Joseph, and priest of On, was an upholder of the idolatry of a later time. The sun, now introduced into Egyptian worship, was by him in all likelihood explained as the sign and symbol of deity, but not as partaking of deity itself. No doubt we see from this the danger of any alteration by man of the worship ordained by God, but at the same time the religion of Egypt may have been comparatively true and pure, though it had now intro- duced that symbolism which quickly degenerated into the grossest idolatry the world has ever seen. Sym- bolic worship was now probably regarded as a high proof of religious wisdom (Rom. i, 22) ; a short time proved it to be utter folly.
The government of Pharaoh seems to have been of an absolute kind (Gen. xli, 40-43; see Wilkinson, i, 45). The supposition that at this time Egypt was governed by several independent dynasties seems in- consistent with the language and conduct of Pharaoh in making by his own mere will Joseph to be ruler " over all the land of Egypt," only inferior to himself throughout its whole extent. But this language is evidently that of courtly assumption, and may very naturally be applied only to that region over which he ruled. The evidence is very strong from the monu- ments and other sources that even under the Shepherd rule there were kings in other parts of Egypt largely if not wholly independent of them. The appointment of coregents decorated with royal titles is thought to have been characteristic of this dynasty (Trevor, Egypt, p. 258). This Pharaoh's personal character seems to have been that of a wise and prudent monarch, anxious for the welfare of his people, and superior to popular prejudice against strangers. Wilkinson thinks he was pacific in his policy, and his conduct in receiving a blessing from the aged Jacob shows a humility of mind and a respect for worth which contrasts very favor- ably with the conduct of other despotic kings. The situation of his capital was near the land of Goshen (Gen. xlv, 10), and the civilization and flourishing condition of Egypt during his reign were very great (AVilkinson, i, 43). Whether he were the same mon- arch whom we And ruling Egypt at the time of Jacob's death, seventeen years subsequently to his removal into Goshen, has been differently viewed (Gen. 1, 4). It has been thought by some that Joseph's using the intercession of Pharaoh's household to procure a favor from the king indicates a less intimate acquaintance than we should expect between him and that king who ruled at the time of the famine. But local customs, probably connected with the habits of Egyptian mourn- ing, may account for this, without supposing a different king (Hengstenberg, Egypt, p. 71).