Комментарии к Библии

18. We will not hide] The LXX μή ποτε ἐκτριβῶμεν = “lest we be utterly ruined,” misunderstood the Hebrew.

our bodies, and our lands] The inhabitants propose that Pharaoh should become the feudal lord of all Egypt, with complete possession of the land and absolute control over the lives of the people. The proposal is represented as emanating from the people themselves. Joseph’s authority is unquestioned; his popularity never in doubt.

20. Joseph bought all the land] This transaction, by which, at a single stroke of business, Joseph, the Hebrew, was said to have purchased for Pharaoh the whole land of Egypt, and all the people to be Pharaoh’s slaves, as the price of seed corn (cf. 23), probably sounded in the ears of an ancient Oriental people a masterpiece of cleverness. In our days it would rank as an outrageous piece of tyranny, that the king’s Grand Vizier, taking advantage of his own monopoly in corn and of the people’s destitution, should deprive them of the last shreds of their independence.

21. he removed them] Better, as Samar., Sept. and Vulg., he made bondmen of them, from &c. The reading in the text, followed by the R.V., in all probability is due to the recollection of Joseph’s policy of storing the grain in the cities, Genesis 41:35; Genesis 41:48. The reading of R.V. marg., which is that of the versions, differs extremely slightly from that of the Massoretic text. The verb “he removed” only differs from the verb “he enslaved” by one letter; the former having “R” (ר) and the latter “D” (ד); cf. Genesis 10:3-4. The latter gives a distinctly better sense. Genesis 47:20 has already described the sale of the land, and now Genesis 47:21 describes how the people became servants, or serfs, to Pharaoh. Thus Genesis 47:20-21 describe the carrying out of both parts of the people’s proposal in Genesis 47:19.

to the cities] R. V. marg. according to their cities. The rendering “to the cities” agrees with the verb “he removed.” But, with the preferable reading “he made bondmen,” we should here read “for slaves or serfs,” as LXX εἰς παῖδας. The difference in the Hebrew text, between “to the cities” and “for slaves,” is very slight.

There would have been no advantage to be derived from the redistribution of the people in the cities except for convenience in feeding them. They were needed to work the soil which now belonged to Pharaoh.

22. Only the land of the priests] The priests of Egypt enjoyed special privileges. They were greatly enriched by the kings of the 18th Dynasty (b.c. 1587–1328). It is doubtful whether their position was so favourable under the Hyksos (see Appendix E). But they were not under the necessity of selling their land. Erman quotes an inscription from which it appears that 185,000 sacks of corn were given annually by Rameses III (b.c. 1202–1171) to the Egyptian temples (Life in Ancient Egypt, p. 129).

a portion] Cf. the use of this word in the sense of a fixed rate or “due,” Leviticus 10:13; Proverbs 30:8 (marg.).

24. a fifth] Cf. Genesis 41:34. This seems an immense impost. But it is said to compare favourably with the ruthless standard of taxation by Oriental governments, in which corruption was rife and liberty did not exist: cf. the letter of King Demetrius, 1Ma 10:30, “the third part of the seed,” “the half of the fruit of the trees which falleth to me to receive.”

26. a statute] The Israelites preserved this tradition concerning the origin of the system of land-tenure which prevailed in Egypt at a later time. For the expression “unto this day,” cf. Genesis 22:14. Unfortunately it does not supply us with the date at which this section was written.

27. and they gat them, &c.] This clause concludes P’s narrative of the settlement of Jacob and his sons in Egypt.

28. seventeen years] This verse, giving the years of Jacob’s life, comes from P: see Genesis 47:9. Note that 147 = 7 × 7 × 3, sacred numbers.