CHAPTER XVI.

FURTHER NOTICES OF EGYPT IN EXODUS.

THE portraits of the first and second Pharaohs mentioned in the Book of Exodus are only faintly and slightly sketched. That of the third monarch—“ the Pharaoh of the Exodus," as he is commonly termed -is, on the contrary, presented to us with much clearness and distinctness, though without effort or conscious elaboration. He is an oppressor as merciless as either of his predecessors, as deaf to pity, as determined to crush the aspirations of the Hebrews by hard labour. To him belongs the ingenious device for aggravating suffering, which has passed into the proverbial phraseology of modern Europe, the requirement of "bricks without straw" (ch. v. 7-19). He disregards the afflictions of his own countrymen as completely as those of his foreign slaves, and continues fixed in his determination not to "let Israel go," until he suffers the loss of his own first-born (ch. xii. 29– 32). When finally he has been induced to allow the Hebrews to withdraw themselves from his land, he suddenly repents of his concession, pursues after them, and seeks, not so much to prevent their escape, as to

destroy them to the last man (ch. xv. 9). To this harshness and cruelty of temper he adds a remarkable weakness and vacillation-he will and he will not; he makes promises and retracts them; he "thrusts the Israelites out" (ch. xi. I; xii. 31), and then rushes after them at the head of all the troops that he can muster (ch. xiv. 5−9). Further-and this is most remarkable—unlike the generality of Egyptian monarchs, he seems to be deficient in personal courage; at any rate, there is no appearance of his having imperilled himself in the attack made on the Israelites at the Red Sea,-" the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his horsemen " (ch. xiv. 23); but not, so far as appears, Pharaoh himself. This, indeed, has been disputed, and Ps. cxxxvi. 15 has been quoted as a positive proof to the contrary; but the expression of a poet who wrote some centuries after the event would be very weak evidence with respect to the fact, besides which his statement is, not that the Pharaoh was killed, but that he was "overthrown." Neither the narrative in Exod. xiv. nor the song of rejoicing in the following chapter contains the slightest allusion to the Pharaoh's death, an omission almost inconceivable if he really perished with his warriors.2 Further, the Pharaoh of the Exodus seems to have

1 Canon Cook in the "Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 309.

2 That the Pharaoh did not perish is maintained by Wilkinson ("Ancient Egyptians," vol. i., p. 54), Chabas (" Recherches pour servir à l'histoire de l'Egypte,” pp. 152, 161), Lenormant (“Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 292, edition of 1883), and others.

been grossly and abnormally superstitious, one who put real trust in magicians and sorcerers, and turned to them in times of difficulty rather than to statesmen and persons of experience in affairs.

What, then, does profane history tell us of the Menephthah whom we have shown to be at once the traditional "Pharaoh of the Exodus" and the king pointed out by chronological considerations as the ruler of Egypt at the period? M. Lenormant begins his account of him by observing,1"Moreover, he was neither a soldier nor an administrator, but one whose mind was turned almost exclusively towards the chimeras of sorcery and magic, resembling in this respect his brother, Kha-m-uas.” "The Book of

Exodus," he adds, "is in the most exact agreement with historical truth when it depicts him as surrounded by priest-magicians, with whom Moses contends in working prodigies, in order to affect the mind of the Pharaoh."2

Later on in his history of Menephthah, M. Lenormant has the following passage.3 He is describing the great invasion of Libyans and others which Menephthah repulsed in his fifth year. "The barbarians advanced without meeting any serious resistance. The terrified population either fled before them, or made its submission, but attempted nothing like a struggle. Already had the invading army reached

1 "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne,” vol. ii., p. 281 (edition of 1883). 2 Ibid.

Ibid., p. 289. Compare "Records of the Past," vol. iv., pp. 41-44.

the neighbourhood of Pa-ari-sheps, the Prosopis of the Greeks; On (Heliopolis) and Man-nofri (Memphis) were seriously threatened. Menephthah assembled his army in front of these two towns, in order to cover them; he drew from Asia a number of mercenaries, to supply the lack of Egyptian soldiers of sufficient experience; at the same time he fortified the banks of the middle branch of the Nile, to prevent the enemy from crossing it, and to place in safety, at any rate, the eastern half of the Delta. Sending forward in advance, first of all, his chariot-force and his lightarmed auxiliaries, the Pharaoh promised to join the battle array with the bulk of his troops at the end of fourteen days. But he was not personally fond of actual fight, and disliked exposing himself to the chance of defeat. An apparition of the god Phthah, which he saw in a dream, warned him that his lofty rank required him not to cross the river. He therefore sent his army to the combat under the command of some of his father's generals, who were still living." Two features of Menephthah's character, as represented in Scripture, are here illustrated: his want of personal courage and his habit of departing from his promises with or without a pretext. The apparition of the god Phthah in a dream is clearly a convenient fiction, by means of which he might at once conceal his cowardice and excuse the forfeiture of his word.

The Egyptian monuments thus confirm three leading features in the character of Menephthah,-his superstitiousness, his want of courage, and his weak,

2

shifty, false temper. They do not, however, furnish much indication of his cruelty. This is, perhaps, sufficiently accounted for by their scantiness. Menephthah is a king of whom it has been said1 that he 'belongs to the number of those monarchs whose memory has been with difficulty preserved by a few monuments of inferior value, and a few inscriptions of but little importance." We have, in fact, but one inscription of any considerable length belonging to his reign. It gives mainly an account of the Libyan war, in which he was not personally engaged. A tone of pride and arrogance common to the autobiographical memoirs of Egyptian kings pervades it, but it contains few notices of any severities for which the monarch himself can be regarded as responsible. That he made slaves of the prisoners taken in the Libyan war merely shows that he acted like other monarchs of the time. He speaks, however, of having in a Cushite war “slaughtered the people, and set fire to them, and netted, as men net birds, the entire country." This last expression reminds one of a cruel Persian practice, whereby whole populations were exterminated, or reduced to slavery; the preceding one, if it is to be taken literally, implies a still more extreme and more unusual barbarity.

1 Brugsch, "Histoire d'Egypte," p. 175.

2 This inscription will be found translated in "Records of the Past," vol. iv., pp. 39-48, and in M. Chabas' "Recherches pour servir à l'histoire de l'Egypte," pp. 84-94.

3" Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 47, 1. 63.

4

* Ibid., 1. 67. .

5 Herod. iii. 149; vi. 31.