Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.
Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, х wayaaqaam (H6965)] - ascended the throne; appeared in totally different circumstances from those of a regular succession: for so the word is used 1 Kings 3:12; 2 Kings 23:23. х melek (H4428) chaadaash (H2319), a new king. The Septuagint has: anestee de basileus heteros, 'Now there rose up another king' (cf. Acts 7:18)]. He might be only different in character; but there is the greatest probability that he was different in dynasty also (cf. Josephus, 'Antiquities,' b. 2:, ch. 9:, sec. 1). We have assumed (see the note at Genesis 41:1-57) that the reigning sovereigns of Lower Egypt, during the time of the patriarch's contact with Egypt, were of the Hyk-Shos, or shepherd race - i:e., of the 15th, 16th, and 17th dynasties, the limits of whose territorial dominions, though varying according to the fortunes of war, comprised the Memphitic nome and the whole of the Delta (Poole's 'Horae Egyptiacae'). Sometime after the death of Joseph a revolution took place, by which those military usurpers were expelled, after having held Egypt in subjection for a period of 259 years, and the old Theban kings regained their ascendancy, uniting Upper and Lower Egypt into one kingdom.
Which knew not Joseph. On the hypothesis that 'the new king' had formerly reigned in Thebes, it is probable that he would know nothing about the Hebrews-that he might ignore the important services of Joseph as being mainly instrumental in consolidating the power, as well as rendering popular the government, of the Hyk-Shos king; and that he would from the first regard the occupiers of Goshen with dislike and scorn, as foreigners and shepherds. The chronology of these events being still an unsettled point, we cannot with certainty determine the name of this king.
Sir G. Wilkinson, who assigns Joseph's elevation to the reign of Osirtasen, or Sesertesen I., of the 12th dynasty, considers Ames or Amosis the Diospolite, the head of the 18th dynasty, to be 'the new king who knew not Joseph.' But having assumed Joseph's patron to be one of the shepherd kings, we cannot accept this view of the originator of the oppression. Bunsen takes him to have been Thothmes, or Tuthmosis III., of the 18th dynasty. The Duke of Northumberland (Wilkinson's 'Ancient Egypt,' vol. 1:, p. 77) fixes upon Rameses
I., of the 19th dynasty. Lepsius, ('Chronology of Egypt'), Osburn ('Mon. Hist.'). and Chabas ('Melanges Egyptologiques,' 1862) contend for Rameses II (Sesostris).
Poole, who thinks that the peaceful sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt commenced during the shepherd rule, places this change of policy at a much earlier date, and, founding on Isaiah 52:4, thinks that this new king was not an Egyptian, but an Assyrian conqueror. He believes that this conclusion derives confirmation from the fact, that sovereigns bearing a name which seems clearly the translation of an Assyrian or Babylonian title are among those of the shepherds in the Turin Papyrus (Smith's 'Dict.,' Art. Pharaoh). The consideration of this point, though very interesting in connection with the antiquities of Egypt, does not materially tend to illustrate the condition of the Israelites; and therefore we shall only add, that, assuming this 'new king, who knew not Joseph,' to have been of another dynasty, it was easy for him to rescind the engagements by which his predecessors were bound to that people.