3

In Genesis 41, Joseph interpreted Pharoah's dreams as predicting 7 years of plenty followed by 7 years of famine. In verse 34, he recommends a 20% tax on grain during the good years to provide food during the "bad" years:

Let Pharaoh appoint commissioners over the land to take a fifth of the harvest of Egypt during the seven years of abundance.

How was this enough to "cover" all 7 years of famine (especially given the fact that they were evidently supplying grain to other parts of the Ancient Near East, given that Joseph's brothers eventually went there to get grain)? Also, if the grain was stored, the grain would've needed to last a minimum of 8 years. How would they have made it last that long? Is there any possibility that they would've planted at least some of the grain that they had collected, for example?

Improve this question
1
  • 5
    A "year of famine" doesn't necessarily mean that zero food is produced. It just means that less is produced than what would be needed by the population. Commented Apr 1, 2022 at 6:29

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
8

This is a fun one. Unfortunately, Genesis does not preserve the Egyptians' inventory projections for these years. But, in addition to the helpful insights by Dottard, the following are probable contributors:

  • Egypt was a regional superpower. We don't have as much data on their agriculture as we do for more recent superpowers, but where we do have data there's a fairly stable trend: superpowers produce more food than they eat. It's very difficult to stay on top of the world if you are dependent on neighboring nations for your next meal (Peloponnesian War, anyone?). At the height of its power, Egypt was almost certainly a net exporter of food. Therefore, 100% output was already more than what was needed to feed the population.
  • The first 7 years were years of great plenty, and there's no suggestion at all that people were asked to tighten their belts during the years of plenty--ergo, 80% of the harvest was at least as much (if not quite a bit more) than was necessary to feed Egypt's population plus trading partners.
  • In times of famine animals are slaughtered in greater numbers a) because animals are a reliable long-term storage of protein that can be utilized when other sources are unavailable & b) because if there's not enough food for the humans and the animals, the humans get priority (e.g. Shackleton's men eating their dogs). Since the grain would feed humans and animals, as the animal population shrank over the 7 years, the total Egyptian consumption of grain would go down each year.
  • Total food production during the famine was not zero, so there would still have been a marginal contribution to the food supply from ongoing production, slowing the rate of inventory depletion.

Grain, if kept dry, can be stored for decades. 7-8 years would present no difficulty for well-stored wheat (source).

Improve this answer
2
  • We actually have scriptural witness that Egypt was exporting food: Jacob sent his sons there to buy food when the famine was in force. Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 19:39
  • @EvilSnack agree they certainly did export food during the famine. The argument in my post is that they were probably an exporter before the famine as well. Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 20:49
3

This is an excellent question that has been asked several times before. Here are some of the usual answers as to why only one fifth of the harvest would have been sufficient to last seven years:

Note the comments of Ellicott:

(34) Take up the fifth part of the land.—Heb., let him fifth the land, that is, exact a fifth part of the produce. It has been supposed that it had been usual in Egypt to pay to the king a tithe of the crop, and the doubling of the impost would not press very heavily on the people in these years of extraordinary abundance. As the reason of the enactment would be made known, it would also induce all careful people to store up a portion of their own superabundance for future need.

Benson is more specific:

Let him appoint officers to take up a fifth part — ... why only a fifth part, seeing the years of famine were to be as many as the years of plenty?

  • 1st, Because people would live more sparingly in the time of the famine.
  • 2d, It is likely that many persons, in all parts of the country, besides the king, would lay up great quantities of corn [= "grain" in modern English], both because they could not easily consume it all, and in expectation of a time of greater scarcity and dearness, when they might either use it themselves, or sell it to their advantage. Add to this,
  • 3d, That even the fifth part of the produce of those years of plenty might be more than the half, yea, equal to the whole crop of ordinary years.

Matthew Poole gives almost identical three reasons, as does Gill.

Improve this answer
9
  • 1
    Corn? Never corn! Grain, yes, but corn? How did the Egyptians get corn, a plant native to Americas at that time? Commented Apr 1, 2022 at 11:34
  • 4
    @jo1storm - "corn" in the Elizabethan word for "grain" generally; hence the KJV translation. In modern American English, the meaning of "corn" is much more restricted. Commented Apr 1, 2022 at 19:45
  • 2
    @jo1storm - you are missing the point - "corn" in England still means Grain generally; Benson is a 19th Century English commentator. It is American English where ":corn" means "maize" as in England. Note the translatiuon of the KJV which these commentators quote - see Gen 41:5, 35, 49, etc, use "corn" Commented Apr 2, 2022 at 20:05
  • 1
    You are missing the point. We are not in 19th century England. Corn has a different and very specific meaning today. And there was no corn in Egypt at the time being discussed. So we can say that "It is likely that many persons, in all parts of the country, besides the king, would lay up great quantities of corn" is simply false. There was no corn anywhere in Middle East/Egypt/general area. Now, if you wrote grain or food or crops, it would have been ok. Corn or maize? No. Just no. I'll accept it if you were scholar from 19th century in which case... Please tell me the secret of immortality. Commented Apr 2, 2022 at 20:22
  • 3
    @jo1storm - look at my answer - I did NOT say corn - I quoted an English commentator who said that, and when he said it, that was correct. The KJV (which he quotes) still says it. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Benson I have added an explanatory note to help you. Commented Apr 2, 2022 at 20:34
0

Others have written plenty over the usage and production of grain across this period, so I will not repeat that here. However, let us not forget that Egypt sits on a huge river, emptying into the Meditterranean Sea. This gave them access to abundant fish, as well as products from both up and down river. We should certainly assume that the Nile dwindled over time, and may even have dried up entirely, but this is not remarked upon in the text - indeed, one might expect this to be mentioned in the text if such a thing did take place.

We have evidence from around Joseph's period (~2000-1600 BC and earlier) that Egypt established direct trade with distant kingdoms right down the African coast, as well as indirect trade through third parties. In fact, it's likely that they had direct connections with other world powers like Mesopotamia even a millennium earlier.

Never underestimate the lengths that a trader will go to in order to make profit, or from what distance they can smell that profit potential! If Egypt was raking in funds from selling grain during a famine, it would then have funds available to purchase grain and foodstuffs from surrounding regions.

So in summary:

  1. The grain they had stored was able to be rationed sensibly, especially as they had a good idea of how long it needed to last for.
  2. Egypt and the coastal settlements had access to abundant fish from their own locale as well as further out into the Mediterranean where necessary.
  3. We have evidence that Egypt had established many trade routes in various directions by this point in history, and so if they were accruing wealth through the selling of scarce grain, they would likely have used this wealth to purchase food or other necessities from surrounding powers. Where there is wealth, there is usually a way!

Given that they had seven years to plan for this event and all of Joseph's God-given wisdom to do so, it's worth considering that they may have built additional boats or established routes and plans to cope with the extended famine.

Improve this answer
0

Mathematics
Consider the following as an answer to this dilemma posed in the question:

  • "Fifth of the HARVEST! The scripture did not say just a fifth of Domestic usage, but a fifth of the Harvest. This abundance would include Domestic AND Foreign export amounts combined. So this was a great, more than usual, abundance stored.
  • During the famine, Egypt would "not be exporting grain" as usual. The fact that the Israelite family had to "go to Egypt" for supplies, shows that the exporting during the famine was none existent. What was once meant for others was now given to the people of Egypt for domestic use.
  • When God commanded the Israelite to have a "fallow year" every seventh year, He promised that the sixth year would produce an abundance to tide them over for two years! So it probably was similar with this Egyptian famine. God was not beyond making sure the Egyptian crops supplied more than usual for seven years "of plenty."
  • While some answer that the Egyptians lived on meat (cattle), we remember that cattle live on grain! So without grain, no cattle! [But we can safely assume that the Egyptians did try to keep their starving cattle alive as long as possible (the ones that weren't eaten). And remember that the bull was was one of the important Egyptian gods (Avis?), so they would even give some of their precious grain to the family cow.]

Whatever the provision, we know it was enough because of the LORD's providential intervention, and forewarning...AND the providential placement of Joseph in a place of respect.

Improve this answer

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.