Now, to analysis.
Genesis was the story of a family, and the first verses of Exodus transition from the clan/family to the people.
The Hebrew title of the book is Sh’mot, the book of Names, because the opening lines are lists of names. Names and their implications will be important. The biblical literary convention is that the name of a thing or person is its definition, its purpose. The first appearance of the word “name” was back in Genesis 2:20, when Adam named the animals. In Gen 11:4, the Tower of Babel was built “to make a name for ourselves” – .e.g, to define ourselves. In Genesis 12:2, God changed Abram’s name to make it great. Take my word for it that there will be considerable attention to names and naming in future chapters.
Verse 8 is a critical sentence, the NIV translation misses an important connection. The literal translation is, “A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph.” The word “know” (Hebrew: yo-day-ah) will recur over and over in this story (over 20 times in the first 14 chapters.) The word is translated “to know” but the bible views knowledge as emotional and experiential (rather than simply intellectual.) The word includes intimacy and mutual relationship, even sexual intimacy. And the reverse: “to not know” implies indifference, disassociation, alienation, and disregard.
Pharaoh does not know Joseph – a model of righteousness and humility – so Pharaoh doesn’t know humility. I like the NIV “Joseph meant nothing” to him, that captures the spirit, but misses the echo/repetition of the phrase “to know.” The most powerful echoes of “to know” will be in Ex 3:7, when God says He knows the suffering of the slaves and Ex 5:2 when Pharaoh says he does not know God. Pharaoh begins by not knowing Joseph and not knowing God, and ends (Ex 14:18) knowing that God is God.
Verse 12: the word “oppressed” implies rape, pain and enslavement. The text says that enslavement originated with pharaoh’s political outlook. If the pharaoh is Ramses II (the most common assumption), this makes sense. A few centuries earlier, the eastern delta had been invaded by the Hyskos, a conglomeration of ethnicities with lots of Semites, who ruled lower Egypt until their expulsion in 1500s BCE. So, during the 19th Dynasty (about 1300 – 1200 BCE) fear of invasion from the east, and that the Israelites might “join our enemies” is compatible with the known Egyptian politics of that era.
Historically, Ramses II (reign roughly 1290 – 1224 BCE) moved his administrative center to the eastern delta, and undertook huge building projects that would have required enormous labor.
Verse 11: Pithom and Raamses are both names known in Egyptian sources, but the exact location is unclear. Pithom is from Egyptian, meaning “House of Atum” implying a major temple to that god, which could mean many sites, but most archaeologists think Tell el-Maskuta in the Wadi Tumeilat in the northeastern delta. As Prof P (welcome back!!!) has mentioned Raamses is assumed to be the palace of Ramses II. (For those who believe the story is entirely fictional, I do want to point out that there is plenty of indication that the author(s) were very familiar with the Egyptian court, farming, etc. )
In verse 15, the E-author has Pharaoh personally in charge, and the Israelites seemingly shoulder-to-shoulder with the Egyptians. (The J-author has the Jews segregated, living in Goshen only.)
The slaying of the boy babies will have repercussion later when the firstborn of Egypt is slain. We’ll talk about it when we get there, but the biblical notion of justice is a very harsh one to us moderns. And Prof P has noted the similar birth-massacre at Jesus’ birth, where the author(s) of that text want to portray Jesus as the “new” Moses.