CHAPTER IV

THE physical features of any country in the past have largely determined the course of the history of its people. The natural barriers surrounding a land prevented communication between it and neighboring nations and at the same time protected it largely from molestation by other peoples. In modern times, however, the situation has changed because distance and natural barriers have been largely removed by modern inventions.

Egypt's isolation from neighboring peoples by the peculiarities of the land enabled her to build up a civilization the like of which was not possible in any other environment. She was but a ribbon of green on both sides of the Nile extending from the Mediterranean southward to Ethiopia. She was hemmed in on the east, the south and the west by deserts which were all but impassable. But in this way she was protected from invasion.

Only on the northeast was she vulnerable. The comparatively short strip of territory from the Bitter Lakes northward to the Mediterranean constituted the open door through which the Asiatics, especially in times of famine, would come to the borders of the fertile delta and look over the boundary with anxious eyes. Experience taught the Pharaohs to build a line of fortifications to protect the country from these invaders. Nevertheless, as time went on, and as the Asiatics pressed upon Egypt because of economic conditions, there trickled into the delta a constant flow of these natives.

Finally, however, they came in hordes, pressed across the border, established themselves at different places, and gradually pushed the native Egyptian rulers up the Nile valley. They eventually seized control of the country and imposed a different type of civilization upon the people. These newcomers are known in history as the Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings. They established capitals at Tanis, Avaris, and Bubastis.

A live issue among the Egyptologists is the question of the length of the Hyksos domination in the Valley of the Nile. There are two groups of historians: one advocating the longer chronology, which sets the arrival of these foreigners in the country as early as 2700 and extends their occupation to 1580 B.C.E.; the other dates their advent around 1700 and their expulsion at 1580 B.C.E. There are also some who take a middle course and place their coming around 2200 B.C.E. Among the advocates of the longer chronology is the able and renowned Sir Flinders Petrie.

Since there is such a variation among these experts, one cannot afford to be too assertive with reference to Egypt's chronology. These divergencies of opinion show that the evidence is insufficient to justify dogmatism. In favor of the longer chronology, however, are the statements of Josephus with reference to the length of the Hyksos domination. We must, in view of the paucity of evidence, seek for further light.

Prior to the advent of the Hyksos and during the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth dynasties, there was what is known as the middle kingdom. During the days of the illustrious twelfth dynasty, Egypt enjoyed her golden age. This was an era of national improvement and development--a period of which the Egyptians might well be proud. But during the reigns of the thirteenth and fourteenth dynasties there was a rapid decline, which made possible the conquest of the Hyksos in the reigns of the fifteenth and sixteenth dynasties.

If we accept the calculation of Sir Flinders Petrie and assume the correctness of the longer chronology, we can easily understand the ready reception which Joseph, an Asiatic, received in Egypt. We can also comprehend more clearly-the welcome accorded Abraham when he and Sarah (Gen. 13) entered the country. Furthermore, we can appreciate the courtesies and favors that were extended to Jacob upon his arrival. The Hebrews were a Semitic people. The reigning house of Egypt at that time being Asiatics would naturally favor their fellow-tribesmen. The Scriptural narrative, therefore, becomes very luminous in the light of the historical facts.

As the conquest of Egypt by the Hyksos was a gradual process and development, so was their expulsion. The seventeenth dynasty instituted a revolt against the foreigners, and the eighteenth drove them out and reestablished the ancient Theban line. This was accomplished by the destruction of the fortress at Avaris, at which time the Hyksos fled toward Canaan and met their final defeat at Sharuhen about 1580 B.C.E.

As just stated, the revival of the new kingdom under the leadership of the Theban sovereigns began in the seventeenth dynasty and extended through the twenty-first. With the expulsion of the Hyksos the government reverted to the ancient capital at Thebes in the south. The stately splendor of the city of the eleventh dynasty was restored, and Thebes once more blossomed into its ancient prosperity and glory. This was accomplished especially under the famous eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties. During the period from 1580 to 1198 B.C.E., Egypt reached the zenith of her power and glory. There was an outburst of nationalism and progress such as the country had never experienced. This occurred during the reigns of Thothmes III, Amenhotep III, and Rameses II.

During this era the spirit of nationalism ran so very high that every trace of the hated Hyksos domination was destroyed. This fact accounts for the little evidence which we have of their presence in the country.

Especially, under Thothmes III of the eighteenth dynasty, Egypt, which had previously been contented with her own domains, began to reach out and to extend her boundaries and trade into Palestine and Syria. This spirit of foreign aggression was challenged by the Hittites at the battle of Kadesh on the Orontes. In the treaty which was signed at the conclusion of this bloody conflict, the northern boundary of Egyptian influence was to be coincident with the northern frontier of Canaan, which was, in turn, to be the southern limit of the Hittite kingdom. It is quite likely that Egypt's sovereignty over Canaan was confined largely to the Canaanite strongholds in the plains of Philistia and Esdraelon. This conclusion seems to be borne out by later events. Rameses II, although a powerful monarch, experienced great difficulty in maintaining his sovereignty in Canaan. During the reigns of the twentieth and twenty-first dynasties the influence and power of Egypt waned considerably, and finally she lost her prestige in the land. It was during the period of these dynasties that the Hebrew monarchy arose under David and Solomon. There was a rapid decline and disintegration of Egypt during the era from the twenty-second dynasty to the thirty-first. Egypt was experiencing the twilight of her ancient glory.

This rapid survey of the course and trend of Egyptian history forms the background of our Biblical story. It is only as we are able to know and to appreciate the events of the times that we can understand the political changes that took place in Israel, since the welfare of Canaan was so very closely allied with the fortunes of Egypt.

In Exodus 1:8 we are told that there arose, "a new king-over Egypt, who knew not Joseph." Who was this king? Does this passage refer to a single monarch or to a dynasty? In the light of the history at which we have just glanced, the probability is that it refers to the reestablishing of a native dynasty over Egypt after the expulsion of the hated Hyksos. This position will become more apparent as we investigate the data more fully. Since Egypt hated with a vengeance everything that pertained to the Hyksos Rulers, and since the Hebrews were Asiatics and had enjoyed great favors under these Shepherd Kings, it was natural that, when the latter were expelled, the Hebrews likewise should be hated by the native Egyptians. This position is further confirmed by the Biblical record concerning the attitude toward the Israelites taken by the king who knew not Joseph and the measures which he took to check their increase, or, if not, to reduce their numbers. Egypt had experienced many reverses at the hands of the Hyksos. When, therefore, the native dynasty was restored, the officials would naturally fear that, should there be another invasion of Asiatics, the Hebrews, being of kindred tribes, would rise up in rebellion and assist in the overthrow of the native princes. In order to forestall such possibility, the repressive and cruel measures adopted, as recorded in Exodus 1, were enforced. Hence at the reestablishment of the Theban line a campaign of anti-Semitism was launched and the Hebrews, who had enjoyed such favor prior to this time, became the objects of hatred and scorn. They were deprived of their citizenship and were thrown into bondage and slavery.

At this point the question arises as to the length of this bondage. According to the general conception it lasted for 400 years. This is gathered from a misunderstanding of Genesis 15:13,14: "And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; 14 and also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge; and afterward shall they come out with great substance." This passage has been misinterpreted because of a lack of attention to the wording of verse 13. Martin Anstey correctly puts it in the following form:

Know of a surety that
A. thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs,
 B. and shall serve them;
 B. and they shall afflict them;
A. four hundred years.

This verse as analyzed is in accordance with the normal structure of Hebrew poetry and is an introversion; that is, the fourth line supplements and completes the thought of the first, whereas the second and third are complementary. Lines one and four, therefore, make the prediction that Abraham's seed would be in a strange land which was not their own for four hundred years. Lines two and three, however, speak of their serving a foreign power which would afflict them. According to verses 14 and 15 the Hebrew people would come out of this slavery in the fourth generation. Verse 13 simply informs us that Abraham's seed would be strangers in a land that was not theirs for four hundred years and that they would be under foreign domination where they would be afflicted. But the following verse informs us that in the fourth generation they would come forth out of that bondage.

The first thing that one must note is that this prediction, when spoken to Abraham, referred to his seed, who was, as we learn from Genesis 21:12, Isaac. Ishmael was the elder son of Abraham by Hagar, the Egyptian. It was not God's will that he should, be reckoned as the seed of Abraham. Hence the Lord performed a biological miracle which made possible the birth of Isaac. When he was born, Ishmael was the seed and was legally so considered, until the time when Isaac was weaned. On this occasion Ishmael, with his mother, was cast out, and Isaac became the recognized legal heir.

From the date of the weaning of Isaac, therefore, the four hundred years of sojourning of Abraham's seed are to be reckoned. As we have already seen, Isaac was born in the year 2108 A.H. According to Dr. Anstey the Hebrew women weaned their children between the ages of three and five. If we assume the maximum date for the weaning of Isaac, which fact would be most likely since he was the child of promise and his mother would want to do everything for him that she could, we would put his being weaned in the year 2113 A.H. If this supposition be correct, then the seed of Abraham--Isaac and his descendants--would be sojourners in a land which was not theirs politically. If we accept 2113 as the beginning of this four hundred year period, the terminal date would be the year 2513 A.H.

Isaac lived sixty years and begat Jacob. Hence the latter's birth year was 2168 A.H. Jacob was 130 years of age when he appeared before Pharoah. The years of the wanderings of Isaac and Jacob, the seed of Abraham, in Canaan, therefore, were 190 years. Jacob, with his family, went to Egypt in the year 2298 A.H. Since the four hundred years conclude with 2513, and since Isaac and Jacob were sojourners in the land of Canaan until 2298 A.H., their seed were in Egypt during the time from 2298 to 2513 A.H., which is 215 years. This conclusion is in perfect accord with Dr. Anstey's statement relative to the testimony of Josephus and the Samaritan and Greek "versions: "Josephus and the translators of the Samaritan and Greek versions give the duration of the sojourn as 215 years, which is evidently a compromise between the shorter and the longer periods suggested by the earlier writings."

This period is in harmony with the statement that in the fourth generation Israel would come forth from Egyptian bondage. In Exodus 6:16-20 we see the ancestral line of Moses, who led Israel from bondage. The great law-giver was the fourth in the line of Levi whose lineage consisted of Levi, Kohath, Amram, and Moses. Levi went with his father down into Egypt, and his great grandson Moses led Israel out of bondage. We have already seen that Jacob married Leah and Rachel in the year 2252 A.H. The following year Reuben was born. Next was Simeon, and in the following year Levi was born. These facts may be gleaned from a close study of Genesis 29:30,31. Levi's birth year was 2255 A.H. Should we assume that he was 60 years old, as was Isaac when Jacob was born, the birth year of Kohath would be 2315 A.H. Upon the same assumption the birth year of his son Amram would be 2375 A.H. Accepting the same reasoning, we would say that the birth year of Moses would be 2435 A.H. He was 80 years of age when he led Israel out of bondage. This would be 2515 A.H. Thus upon the reasonable assumption that each in this line was approximately 60 years of age when his first son was born, we come to a time within two years of the actual date of the Exodus. This fact corroborates the position that Israel was in Egyptian bondage only 215 years.

On the other hand, if the fourth generation was counted from Jacob to Moses, evidently the lineage came through Levi and Jochebed, the Mother of Moses. (See Num. 26:57-59.) In either instance, the Genesis statement is correct that Israel would come out of Egyptian bondage in the fourth generation.

As seen, the Hebrews were in Egyptian bondage 215 years. In the first part of their sojourn they enjoyed imperial favor. Later they were reduced to a state of slavery when there arose "a new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph," and who, as we have assumed, was one of the kings of the ancient Theban line coming into power.

Since it is generally admitted that the bondage took place under either the eighteenth or nineteenth dynasties, let us assume that it was under the former and see how the facts presented in the Scriptures tally with those of profane history. In making this supposition I am simply following the line of reasoning that is often pursued in such subjects as geometry. A certain proposition is accepted as being true. On that basis the reasoning is founded. If, when the problem is completed, the result is found to accord with known and established facts, we assert that the supposition was correct. Let us now assume that the Exodus occurred under the eighteenth dynasty. We will study all the facts that are presented in the sacred record bearing upon this question. Reasoning logically we will endeavor to ascertain whether or not the Scriptural data accord with the known facts of history. If we find that they do, then we may be certain that our assumed premise is correct.

As has already been learned, during the middle kingdom (dynasties 11,12,13, and 14) the Asiatics filtered across the border into Egypt, coming in ever-increasing numbers. Archaeology proves this position. For instance, a wave of Asiatic nomads passed over Syria and Palestine, leaving traces of their conquests and civilization. Finally, they entered Egypt, subduing first the delta and later pushing their way onward into upper Egypt. Soon they became masters of the country. As has been noted, there is a dispute as to the length of the Hyksos domination of Egypt. If we accept the longer chronology, they were in power when Abraham entered the country (Gen. 13) and were still in control when Joseph was sold into slavery, and when Jacob went there later. Being of the same stock, the Hyksos would welcome their Semitic fellow-tribesmen. Racial ties account for the ready reception accorded them.

We are not told how long after the death of Joseph it was until there arose "a, new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:11). This statement can mean nothing but that this new king was hostile toward the Hebrew people and refused to recognize the great benefits that had come to his people through the services rendered by Joseph. This interpretation is in accordance with the facts of the context. It was by the effort of the seventeenth and eighteenth dynasties that these foreigners were expelled from the country. The latter dynasty was the one which completed the restoration of the old Theban line. The antipathy toward the hated Hyksos was so very great that, when they were expelled from the land, an effort was made to obliterate, throughout the country, every trace or vestige of this despised rule. The world today would know little of it if it were not for the meager references found in profane writings. Since their memory was blotted from the national consciousness, and since the Israelites were their kinsmen, it is only reasonable to suppose that in the destruction of the evidences of the Hyksos, all traces of Israel's being in Egypt were likewise erased.

According to the common chronology the Hyksos were expelled in 1580 B.C.E., or thereabout. The statement concerning the new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph, in the light of the facts just presented, evidently refers to the first king of the native house which assumed control of affairs. According to Sir Flinders Petrie in his article entitled Ancient Egypt, which is found in A Revision of History, the eighteenth dynasty consisted of the following kings:

Aohmes I...............1573-1560 B.C.
Amenhotep I..........1560-1539 B.C.
Thothmes I............1539-1514 B.C.
Thothmes II...........1514-1501 B.C.
Thothmes III..........1501-1447 B.C.
Amenhotep II.........1447-1423 B.C.
Thothmes...............1423-1413 B.C.
Amenhotep III........1413-1377 B.C.
Akhenaten ............1377-1361 B.C.