As anyone who has seen the Ten Commandments knows, Ramses II was the Pharaoh upon whom the plagues were smitten, right? Well, maybe not. Perhaps there is a similar thread on here, but I found a few resources online and thought it was an interesting topic. It also makes me wonder what made Cecil B. DeMille choose to go with Ramses, since he was pretty much a super bad-ass who obviously didn't have his army crushed by the god of slaves.
What this really leads me to wonder, is why doesn't the Bible mention who the pharaoh was? Didn't God foresee that such knowledge would be useful for future generations in establishing a reasonable timeline of events? Hell, my Lord of the Rings book even includes multiple appendices that clearly establish a historical timeline, give explanation of the cultural contexts of the events as they pertain to the races in the book, important family trees, discussion of the origins of language in the book and their literal and symbolic meanings, additional short stories describing other events surrounding key characters that are not a part of the story proper, all which help the reader to better understand the context, literal and figurative meanings, and overall direction and meaning of the work itself. Why is God (or those to whom he breathed his word) not as good or sensible of an author as Tolkien? Why does Tolkien's masterpiece contain less (though still a few) internal contradictions and inconsistencies than God's masterpiece? Why then would most Christians not accept The Lord of the Rings as incontrovertible proof of the existence of Gandalf? Or Hobbits? Or magic rings?
The Christian might argue "well because this is obviously a work of fiction". I would respond that it is no more obviously fiction than the Bible is. It does not assert anything that is more unreasonable to believe than anything in the Bible. If Jesus can come back from the dead to save everyone, why can't Gandalf? I don't see how any argument that supports belief in Jesus but denies belief in Gandalf can be anything but special pleading.
SO, in conclusion, why would God omit the name of the pharaoh to whom he felt he had something to prove?
On a totally unrelated note: why doesn't the spellcheck recognize the word "Gandalf? or the word "spellcheck"?