Toledôt Explains Abram’s Pharaoh
by
Damien F. Mackey
Toledôt and chiasmus, the keys to the structure of the Book of Genesis,
may lead us to a real name for
this “Pharaoh”.
1. The Toledoth Guide
Since it
was common in ancient Egyptian documents for the ruler of Egypt to be referred
to therein simply as “Pharaoh” (Egyptian per-aa:
“The Great House”. “Palace”),
|
||
|
pr-aa
"Great house" in hieroglyphs |
critics
are not correct, therefore, in their claim that the lack of an Egyptian name (such
as e.g. “Khety”, “Thutmose”, or “Ramesses”) for the ruler in the case of the
Abram and Joseph narratives of Genesis (cf. 12:15 and 39:1) is a further
testimony, as they think, to these texts being unhistorical.
Since
these texts refer to the ruler of Egypt only as “Pharaoh”, it is argued that we
ought not to take them as being serious histories.
It
appears, however, from a consideration of the structures of the Book of
Genesis, that the Holy Spirit may have a trick for us all, at least in the case
of Abram’s history. From the now well-known theory of toledôt (a Hebrew feminine plural), we might be surprised to learn
that so great a Patriarch as Abram (later Abraham), did not sign off the record
of his own history (as did e.g. Adam, Noah, and Jacob).
No,
Abram’s story was recorded instead by his two chief sons, Ishmael and Isaac.
“These are the generations of
Ishmael ...” (Genesis 25:12).
“These are the generations of
Isaac ...” (Genesis 25:19).
So, there
were two hands at work in this
particular narrative, and this fact explains the otherwise strange repetition
of several famous incidents recorded in the narrative.
And it is
in the second telling of the incident of the abduction of Abram’s wife, Sarai
(later Sarah), that we get the name of the ruler who, in the first telling of
it is called simply “Pharaoh”. He is “Abimelech” (20:2).
Admittedly,
there are such seeming differences between the two accounts, as regards names,
geography and chronology, as perhaps to discourage one from considering them to
be referring to the very same incident; and that despite such obvious
similarities as:
- the Patriarch claiming that his
beautiful wife was his “sister”;
- the ruler of the land taking
her for his own;
- he then discovering that she
was already married (underlined by plagues);
- and asking the Patriarch why he
had deceived him by saying that the woman was his sister;
- the return of the woman to her
husband, whose possessions are now augmented.
The
seeming contradictions between the two accounts are that, whereas the first narrated
incident occurs in Egypt, and the covetous ruler is a “Pharaoh”, the second
seems to be located in southern Palestine, with the ruler being “King Abimelech
of Gerar”, and who (according to a somewhat similar incident again after Isaac
had married) was “King Abimelech of the Philistines” (26:1).
Again, in
the first narrated account, the Patriarch and his wife have their old names,
Abram and Sarai, whereas in the second account they are referred to as Abraham
and Sarah, presumably indicating a later time.
In the
first narrated account, the “Pharaoh” is “afflicted with great plagues because
of Sarai”, whereas, in the second, “God healed Abimelech, and also healed his
wife and female slaves so that they bore children” (20:17).
The
differences can be explained fairly easily.
Ishmael
understandably wrote his father’s history from an Egyptian perspective, because
his mother, Hagar, was “an Egyptian slave-girl” in Abram’s household, and she
later “got a wife for [Ishmael] from the land of Egypt” (cf. 16:1 and 21:21).
Ishmael names his father “Abram” because that is how he was known to Ishmael.
Moreover, the incident with “Pharaoh” had occurred while the Patriarch was
still called Abram.
Isaac was
not even born until some 25 years after this incident. His parents were
re-named as Abraham and Sarah just prior to his birth. So, naturally, Isaac
refers to them as such in the abduction incident, even though they were then
Abram and Sarai.
Again,
there is no contradiction geographically between Egypt and Gerar because we are
distinctly told in Ishmael’s account that it was just before the family went to
Egypt (12:11) that Abram had told his wife that she was to be known as his
sister.
Gerar is
on the way to Egypt.
Finally,
whether the one whom Isaac calls “Abimelech” was still, in Isaac’s day,
“Pharaoh” of Egypt - as he had been in former times - he most definitely was, at
least, ruler over the Philistines at Gerar. Perhaps he ruled both lands, Egypt
and Philistia.
Be that
as it may, the Holy Spirit has apparently provided the name of Abram’s
“Pharaoh”. But one needs to respect His literary structures to discover that
name. We now know his personal name: “Abimelech”. In Hebrew (אֲבִימֶלֶךְ) it means “Father is King”,
or “Father of the King”.
Since
Abimelech is not an Egyptian name, and since the other designation that we have
for him is simply “Pharaoh”, that data, in itself, will not take us to the next
step of being able to identify this ruler in the Egyptian historical (or
dynastic) records. But that our Abimelech may have - according to the
progression of Ishmael’s and Isaac’s toledôt
histories - ruled Egypt and then gone on to rule Philistia, could well enable
us to locate this ruler archaeologically.
Dr. John
Osgood has already done much of the ‘spade work’ for us here, firstly by
nailing the archaeology of En-geddi at the time of Abram (in the context of
Genesis 14) to the Late Chalcolithic period, corresponding to Ghassul IV in
Palestine’s southern Jordan Valley; Stratum V at Arad; and the Gerzean period
in Egypt (“The Times of Abraham”, Ex
Nihilo TJ, Vol. 2, 1986, pp. 77-87); and secondly by showing that,
immediately following this period, there was a migration out of Egypt into
Philistia, bringing an entirely new culture (= Early Bronze I, Stratum IV at
Arad). P. 86: “In all likelihood Egypt used northern Sinai as a springboard for
forcing her way into Canaan with the result that all of southern Canaan became
an Egyptian domain”.
2. The Chiasmus Guide
A reader,
Ken Griffith, in an e-mail, came up with the very interesting proposal of
chiasmus that he thought might even verify my view, Abimelech = Pharaoh.
He wrote:
…. Though
men can write chiastically, only God can write historical chiasmus by causing
events to happen in a symmetrical manner.
I am
quite open to the idea that Abimelech might have been the [Pharaoh]. However,
you need to deal with the literary structure of the passage in question. I
think chiasmus is a far better explanation in this case than having two
authors. ….
Ken has
thus further confirmed my merging of “Pharaoh” with “Abimelech” by kindly
providing the following chiastic structure for this part of the Book of
Genesis:
Genesis
12-
A -
Promise, Test (leave father's house), Worship
Promise
of Blessing
Leave and
go to another land.
Abraham and
Lot Depart
Promise
of Land
Builds
Altar
B -
Crisis, Attack, Conflict, Child
1 -
Attack on Woman (Pharoah)
Famine
Goes down
to Egypt
Call
yourself my sister
Plagues
Abram
leaves with wealth
2 -
Crisis with Lot and Canaanites (Sodom plundered)
Abraham
"comes up" from Egypt
Great
Wealth
Parts the
land with Lot
God
promises all the Land he can see.
dwelt by
Terebinth trees of Mamre
Amraphel
4 kings invade
Abram
Rescues Lot
Melchizedek
blesses Abram
Bread and
Wine
Plunderestored
3 -
Promise Hagar Sarah Conflict I
Vision
"I am your shield and reward"
Abram - I
have no children
Your
descendants shall be as stars
Proof of
giving land
Covenant
with halved animals
Prophesy
of Egyptian bondage
God goes
between pieces
Promise
of land from Nile to Euphrates
Sarai No
children
Gives
Hagar in 10th year
Child
Conceived
Hagar
offends Sarai
Hagar
flees pregnant, prophecy of Ishmael
Hagar
returns, bears Ishmael, Abram 86
C.
Abram 99,
God makes new covenant
Abram –
and Abraham, father many nations, very fruitful
Circumcision
Sarai –
and Sarah, will have son
Abraham
circumcised Ishmael, and household
B' –
Crisis, Attack, Conflict, Child (Sodom destroyed)
2'.
Crisis with Lot and Canaanites
Lord
appears by terebinth trees of Mamre, judgment on Sodom
Son will
appear in a year
Sarah
laughs, his name shall be laughter (Isaac)
Abraham
intercedes for Sodom
If there
were 50 I would save it.
If there
are 10 I would save it.
God and Abraham
depart
Angels
enter Sodom
Lot gives
lodging
Men of
City demand men
Angels
blind them
Angels
say, collect your family
Son in
laws don't listen
Lot flees
with family
Lot
escapes to Zoar
God
overthrows cities
Lot's
wife turned to vapor
Abraham
goes to where he had met with God
Sodom and
Gomorrah and plain smoking like furnace
God
remembered Abraham and delivered Lot
Lot with
his daughters
Birth of
Moab and Ammon
1' -
Attack on Woman II leading to Child (Abimelech – and Isaac)
Abraham
journeys South (goes down), dwelt between Kadesh and Shur
"she
is my sister"
Abimelech
King of Gerar sends for Sarah
God warns
in dream
Abimelech
judges Abraham sends him away with money.
Lord
visits Sarah as promised,
Sarah
conceived and bore Abraham a son, at set time.
Abraham
calls his son Isaac.
Abraham
circumcised Isaac.
Sarah
rejoices.
3.' [
Promise + Sarah – and Hagar conflict II ] (This time Hagar gets the promise.)
Child
weaned and feasted.
Ishmael
scoffed and sent away.
Hagar
meets God again in desert.
God
promises great nation to Ishmael
Hagar
finds water and gets a wife for her son from Egypt.
Abraham
makes a covenant with Abimelech
Abraham
finds his own well of water at Beersheeba.
Abraham
planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, in land of Philistines.
A'
Promise, Test, Worship
God calls
Abraham, tells him to go to Land of Moriah
Abraham
goes.
God tests
him with Isaac.
Builds
Altar
Abraham
obeys.
God
promises many descendants, stars of heaven and seashore, possess gates of
enemies. Blessing.
Abraham
returns to Beersheba and dwelt there.
[End of
Ken’s chiasmus]
Admittedly,
not well-formatted, but note how B. 1 and B’. 1’ merge beautifully with
“Pharaoh” in B. 1 reflecting “Abimelech in B’. 1’.
