Chapter XLI · Joseph becomes Viceroy of Egypt (Jehovist, Priestly-Code).

Two years after the events of chapter 40, the king of Egypt has a wonderful double dream, which none of his magicians is able to interpret (^1‒8). The chief butler is naturally reminded of his own experience, and mentions Joseph, who is forthwith summoned into the royal presence (^9‒14). Having interpreted the dreams as a prophecy of a great famine (^15‒32), Joseph adds some sage advice on the right way to cope with the emergency (^33‒36); and Pharaoh is so impressed by his sagacity that he entrusts him with the execution of the scheme, and makes him absolute ruler of Egypt (^37‒46). In pursuance of the policy he had foreshadowed, Joseph stores the surplus of seven years of plenty, and sells it during the subsequent famine (^47‒57).

Analysis.—The connexion of this chapter with the preceding appears from ^1a and ^9‒13: note שר המשקים, ש׳ האפים, ש׳ הטבחים, משמר, קצף (40²); Joseph the servant of the ש׳ הט׳; the officers confined in his ‘house’; Joseph ‘with them’ (¹⁰, compare 40^{3. 4}); and compare ¹¹ with 40⁵. In the first half of the chapter there is no sufficient reason to suspect a second source except in ^14b (Yahwist); the repetitions and slight variations are not greater than can be readily explained by a desire for variety in the elaboration of detail. The whole of this section (^1‒28) may therefore be safely assigned to Elohist (compare ואין־פותר אותם, ⁸, ופתר אין אתו, ¹⁵ with 40^8a; ¹⁶ with 40^8b).—In the second half, however, there are slight diversities of expression and representation which show that a parallel narrative (Yahwist) has been freely utilised. Thus, in ³³ Joseph recommends the appointment of a single dictator, in ³⁴ the appointment of ‘overseers’; in ³⁴ a fifth part is to be stored, in ^{35. 48} all the corn of the good years; in ^35bα the collection is to be centralised under the royal authority, in ^bβ localised in the different cities; צבד בר alternates with קבץ אכל (^{35bα. 49 ∥ 35a. 48}). Further, ³⁸ seems ^{∥ 39}; ^{41 ∥ 44}; and ^{45b ∥ 46b}; ^45a פוטי פרע = פוטיפר can hardly be from Elohist, who has employed the name for another person (37³⁶). Some of these differences may, no doubt, prove to be illusory; but taken cumulatively they suffice to prove that the passage is composite, although a satisfactory analysis cannot be given. For details, see the notes below; and consult Holzinger 234; Gunkel 380 f.; Procksch 43 f.—^46a is from Priestly-Code, and ^50b is a gloss.

1‒8. Pharaoh’s dreams.—2. from the Nile (v.i.)] the source of Egypt’s fertility (Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 425 ff.), worshipped as ‘the father of the gods,’ and at times identified with Osiris or Amon-re (Erman, A Handbook of Egyptian Religion, 14 f., 80 ff.).—seven cows, etc.] “According to Diodorus Siculus i. 51, the male ox is the symbol of the Nile, and sacred to Osiris, the inventor of agriculture (ib. i. 21).... The Osiris-steer often appears accompanied by seven cows, e.g. on the vignettes of the old and new Book of the Dead” (Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 389).—4. The devouring of one set of cows by the other is a fantastic but suggestive feature of the dream; the symbolism is almost transparent.—5‒7. The second dream is, if possible, more fantastic and at the same time more explicit.—6. blasted with the east-wind (LXX ἀνεμόφθοροι)] the dreaded sirocco or, Ḥamsīn, which blows from the South-east from February to June, destroying vegetation, and even killing the seed-corn in the clods (Ebers, 340; Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 9; Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, 67 ff.).—8. all the magicians and wise men of Egypt] The possessors of occult knowledge of all sorts, including the interpretation of dreams (see page 461); compare Tacitus, Histories iv. 83: “Ptolemæus ... sacerdotibus Ægyptiorum, quibus mos talia intellegere, nocturnos visus aperit”; see Ebers, 341‒349. The motive—the confutation of heathen magic by a representative of the true religion—is repeated in the histories of Moses (Exodus 7‒9) and Daniel (chapters 2. 5); compare Isaiah 47¹² etc.

1. ופרעה חלם] Participial clause as apodosis; see Driver A Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew § 78 (3).—היאר] An Egyptian loan-word (’iotr, ’io’r = ‘stream’), used in Old Testament of the Nile and its canals (except Isaiah 33²¹, Job 28¹⁰, Daniel 12^{5 ff.}); found also in Assyrian in the form ya’aru. See Ebers, 337 f.; Steindorff, BA, i. 612 (compare 171).—2. אחו (41¹⁸, Job 8¹¹†)] ‘Nile-grass’ = Egyptian aḥu, from aḥa, ‘be green’ (Ebers, 338). LXX ἄχει occurs also verses ^{3. 19}, Isaiah 19⁷, Sirach 40¹⁶.—3. ודקות] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch ורקות (so verse ⁴). It is naturally difficult to decide which is right; but Ball pertinently points to the alliterations as determining the choice: read therefore ר׳ in ^{3. 4. 19. 20. 27}, but דּ׳ in ^{6. 23},—in other words, ר׳ always of the cows and דּ׳ always of the ears.—אצל] LXX omits, thus making all the 14 cows stand together.—4. ותאכלנה] LXX + שֶׁבַע; so ^{7. 20. 24}. LXX has many similar variations (which need not be noted), revealing a tendency to introduce uniformity into the description.—8. ותפעם] ‘was perturbed’; as Daniel 2³ (2¹ Hithpael), Psalms 77⁵.—חרטמים] Only in this chapter, in Exodus 7‒9 (Priestly-Code), and (by imitation) in Daniel 2². The word is thus practically confined to Egyptian magicians, though no Egyptian etymology has been found; and it may be plausibly derived from Hebrew חֶרֶט, stylus.—אתם] Read with LXX אֹתוֹ, after חלמוֹ; the dream is ‘one’ (verses ^{25. 26}).

9‒14. Joseph summoned to interpret the dreams.—9. The butler’s ungrateful memory is stimulated by the opportunity of ingratiating himself with his royal master, though this requires him to make mention of his old offence.—12. according to each man’s dream he interpreted] Note the order of ideas as contrasted with verse ¹¹ (40⁵): there is a pre-established harmony between the interpretation and the dream, and the office of the interpreter is to penetrate the imagery of the dream and reach the truth it was sent to convey.—13. I was restored ... he was hanged] Literally ‘Me one restored,’ etc., according to Gesenius-Kautzsch § 144 d, e. To suppose the omission of Pharaoh, or to make Joseph the subject, is barely admissible.—14. and they brought him hastily from the dungeon] is a clause inserted from Yahwist.—shaved himself] his head and beard,—a custom which seems to have been peculiar to the priests under the New Empire (Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 219; compare Herodotus, ii. 37).

9. את־פרעה] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch better אל פ׳.—חטאַי] LXX חטאִי (singular). The resemblance of the clause (^9b) to 40¹ does not prove it to be from Yahwist (Gunkel).—10. אתי] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch אתם, LXX אתנו.—11. ונחלמה] Gesenius-Kautzsch § 49 e.—12. ויפתר—פתר] LXX καὶ συνέκρινεν ἡμῖν.

15‒24. Pharaoh’s recital of his dreams.—15. thou canst hear a dream to interpret it] i.e., ‘thou canst interpret a dream when thou hearest it’: Hebrew subordinates the emphatic clause where we would subordinate the condition.—16. Compare 40⁸.—The answer (on the form, v.i.) exhibits a fine combination of religious sincerity and courtly deference.—17‒21. The first dream.—The king gives a vivid subjective colouring to the recital by expressing the feelings which the dream excited. This is natural, and creates no presumption that a parallel narrative is drawn upon. Similarly, the slight differences in phraseology (תאר for מראה, דַּלּוֹת, etc.) are due to the literary instinct for variety.—22‒24. The second dream.

15. תשמע] Oratio obliqua after לֵאמֹר (without כי), Gesenius-Kautzsch § 157 a; Davidson § 146, R. 1.—16. בִּלְעָדַי] literally ‘Apart from me’ (Targum^Onkelos לא מן חוכמתי), used as 14²⁴. The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch, LXX read בִּלְעֲדֵי אלהים לא יֵעָנָה = ‘Apart from God, one will not be answered,’ etc.; compare Peshiṭtå (‘Dost thou expect that apart from God one will answer?’ etc.). Vulgate Absque me Deus respondebit, shifting the accent. There seems a double entendre in the use of יענה: ‘answer’ and ‘correspond’: ‘God will give an answer corresponding to the welfare,’ etc.—19. דלות] ‘flaccid’; LXX omitted.—21. קרבֶנָה] On the suffix compare Gesenius-Kautzsch § 91 f.—מראיהן] Singular (ib. § 93 ss).—23. צנמות] Aramaic = ‘dried,’ ‘hardened.’ The word is ἅπαξ λεγόμενον in Old Testament, and is omitted by LXX, Vulgate, Peshiṭtå.—אחריהם] MSS and The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch הֶן—. The irregular gender of Massoretic Text only here in this chapter.

25‒32. The interpretation.—25‒27a. The general outline of the interpretation: the dream is one; it is a presage of what is to happen; the number seven refers to years. The methodical exposition is meant to be impressive.—27b brings the climax: There shall be seven years of famine (so Procksch v.i.).—28. It is uncertain whether הוּא refers back to ^25b (‘This is what [I meant when] I said to Pharaoh’), or to ^27b (‘This is the announcement I [now] make to Pharaoh’). In any case 29 looks like a new commencement, and may introduce a variant from Yahwist (v.i.).—31. ולא יִוָּדַע goes back to the ולא נוֹדַע of ²¹.—32. If the dream is one, why was it twice repeated? Because, says Joseph, the crisis is certain and urgent. So he rounds off his finished and masterly explanation of the dreams.

26. פרת] Omission of article may be justified on the ground that the numeral is equivalent to a determinant (Gesenius-Kautzsch § 126 x); but The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch הפרות is much to be preferred.—27. הרֵקוֹת] ‘empty.’ The pointing is suggested partly by the contrast to מלאֹת (²² etc.), partly by the fact that (in Massoretic Text) רַק has not been used of the ears. We ought undoubtedly to read הַדַּקּוֹת (The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch, Peshiṭtå).—יהיו וגו׳] The translation above is not free from difficulty; it omits a prediction of unusual plenty preceding the famine, which is, nevertheless, presupposed by what follows. But the ordinary rendering is also weak: why should the seven thin ears alone be fully interpreted? Besides, שִׁבֳּלִים is feminine.—28‒32. The critical difficulties of the chapter commence in this section. Procksch assigns ^29‒31 to Yahwist (∥ ^{27 f.} The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch), instancing כִּלִּה (compare 18³³ 24^{15. 19} 27³⁰ 43² 44¹²), and כָּבֵד (12¹⁰ 43¹ 47^{4. 13}) as characteristic of Yahwist; but they are not decisive. Gunkel limits Yahwist to ^{29. 30a. 32bβ} (∥ ^{27 f. 30b. 31. 32abα} Elohist). This is on the whole more satisfying, since ונשכח and ולא יִוָדַע appear to be doublets (Dillmann); but a positive conclusion will hardly be reached.

33‒36. Joseph’s advice to Pharaoh.—Here Joseph proves himself to be no mere expert in reading dreams, but a man with a large reserve of practical wisdom and statesmanship.—33‒35. There is an apparent discrepancy between the appointment of a single official (^33a) and that of a commission of ‘overseers’ (^34a); and again between the fifth part (^34b) and the whole (^35a); we note also the transition from singular (וחמש) to plural (ויקבצו, etc.). For attempts at division of sources, see below.—34. The taxing of a fifth part of the crop seems to have been a permanent Egyptian institution (see on 47²⁴), whose origin the Hebrews traced to the administration of Joseph.—35. under the hand (i.e. the authority) of Pharaoh] compare Exodus 18¹⁰, 2 Kings 13⁵, Isaiah 3⁶.

33‒36. The passage is certainly composite, and can be resolved into two nearly complete sequences as follows: Elohist = ^{33. 34b. 35bα} (to פרעה)^{. 36aβγ}; Yahwist = ^{34a. 35abβ} (from אֹכֶל)^{· 36aαb}. Characteristic of Elohist are איש בר, ארץ מצרים, צבר, against Yahwist’s פקידים (with פִּקָּדוֹן), הארץ, קבץ אכל; and the only necessary change is יצברו to יצבר. The result corresponds pretty closely with Gunkel’s analysis; that of Procksch differs widely.—33. יֵרֶ֫א] see Baer-Delitzsch page 78; Gesenius-Kautzsch § 75 p. Strack, however, holds the true reading to be יֵ֫רֶא.—34. יעשה] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch ויעש. To the peculiar idiom, Delitzsch compares the Latin fac scribas; יעשה may, however, mean ‘take action,’ as 1 Kings 8³².—וחמש] LXX plural.—35. אכל בערים ושמרו] Ball prefixes וְיִתְּנוּ (as verse ⁴⁸); some such expedient is necessary to make sense of the last word.—For ושמרו, The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch, Peshiṭtå have ישמרו; LXX συναχθήτω (יצברו?).—36. פִּקָּדוֹן] Leviticus 5^{21. 23}†; obviously suggested here by פקדים in verse ³⁴.

37‒46. Joseph’s elevation.—37, 39 (Elohist) ∥ 38 (Yahwist).—The thing that was pleasing to Pharaoh, etc., is not the interpretation of the dreams, but the practical suggestion with which it was followed up, though it was the former which proved that Joseph was truly inspired. The statement that the policy commended itself comes from Elohist; in Yahwist, Pharaoh improves upon it by entrusting the supervision to Joseph himself instead of to the ‘overseers’ he had proposed.—38. the spirit of God] here first mentioned in Genesis as the source of inward illumination and intellectual power. The idea that eminent mental gifts proceed from the indwelling of the divine spirit, which is implied in Pharaoh’s exclamation, was probably ancient in Israel, although the proofs of it are comparatively late (compare Exodus 31³, Numbers 27¹⁸; see Stade, Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments § 43. 1).—40. over my house] The dignity may be compared to that of “Mayor of the palace” under the Merovingian kings; compare 1 Kings 4⁶ 16⁹, Isaiah 22¹⁵ etc.—41. over all the land of Egypt] The most coveted civic office in Egypt was that of the T’ate, the chief of the whole administration, “the second after the king in the court of the palace” (see Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 87 ff., 69). The elevation of Syrian slaves to such dignities is likewise attested for the age of the New Empire (ib. 106, 517 f.).—42. The form of investiture is specifically Egyptian.—his signet-ring] used in sealing documents (Esther 3¹² 8⁸), and given as a token of authority (Esther 3¹⁰ 8², 1 Maccabees 6¹⁵ etc.).—fine linen] the weaving of which was carried to extreme perfection in Egypt; Erman, 448 ff.—the golden collar] There is probably an allusion to ‘the reward of the gold,’ a decoration (including necklets of gold) often conferred in recognition of eminent service to the crown (Erman, 118 ff.: see the engraving, 208¹).—43. the second-best chariot] Horses and carriages first appear on monuments of the 18th dynasty, and must have been introduced “during the dark period between the Middle and the New Empire” (Erman, 490).—they cried before him ’Abrēk] A very obscure word; for conjectures, v.i.—44. An almost exact parallel (Yahwist) to ⁴¹ (Elohist).—45a. Joseph’s marriage.—The conferring of a new name naturally accompanied promotions like that of Joseph (Erman, 144).—the high priest of ’Ôn] was an important personage in the religion and politics of the New Empire (see Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 76, 83, 89, and passim), and the priestly college there was reputed the greatest in the country for learning (Herodotus, ii. 3; Strabo, XVII. i. 29). ’Ôn (Egyptian Anu) is Heliopolis, 7 miles North-east of Cairo, an ancient seat of the worship of the sun-god Ra.—On the other names in the verse, v.i.—45b and 46b are doublets.—46a (Priestly-Code). The chronology is altogether inconsistent with the assumptions of Jehovist regarding the relative ages of Joseph and Benjamin (see Bennett 360).—stood before Pharaoh] compare 47⁷ (Priestly-Code).

¹ Compare Heyes, Bibel und Ägypten: Abraham und seine Nachkommen in Ägypten 248 ff.

37‒46. Analysis.—To Elohist we may pretty confidently assign ^{37. 39} (נבון וחכם as ³³) ⁴⁰; to Yahwist ^{38. 44. 45}. Whether Yahwist’s parallel to ⁴⁰ commences with ⁴¹ (Procksch), or is delayed to ⁴⁴ (Gunkel), it is hard to decide. ^41b reads like a formula of investiture accompanying the action of ^42a, of which ^43b would be the explication. ^46bβ would be a natural sequel to ^43a (ויעבר). Hence, if a division must be attempted, that of Procksch may be followed, viz., Elohist = ^{40. 42b. 43a. 46bβ}; Yahwist = ^{41. 42a. 43b. 44. 45}.—38. הנמצא] 1st plural imperfect Qal.—40. ועל־פיך ישק] LXX ἐπὶ τῷ στόματί σου ὑπακούσεται. The meaning ‘kiss’ being obviously unsuitable, Tuch, Delitzsch, Dillmann render ‘arrange themselves’ (from Arabic nasaḳa); others point יָשֹׁק, ‘run’; but no explanation is quite satisfactory. על־פיך may, of course, mean ‘at thy command’ (45²¹, Exodus 17¹ etc.).—רק הכסא] ‘only as regards the throne’; Gesenius-Kautzsch § 118 h.—41. אתך] LXX + σήμερον.—42. שֵׁשׁ] Apparently an Egyptian word (Coptic šens), replaced in post-Exilic Hebrew by בּוּץ. It is disputed whether it means cotton alone, or linen alone, or both; see Dillmann’s exhaustive note on Exodus 25⁴, and Encyclopædia Biblica, 2800 f.—הזהב] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch זהב.—43. בְּמִרכבת] Gesenius-Kautzsch § 85 h.—ויקראו] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch, LXX, Peshiṭtå ויקרא.—אַבְרֵךְ] The word remains an enigma. The resemblance to Hebrew ברך has misled no ancient Version except Aquila (γονατίζειν) and Vulgate (ut genuflecterent). Peshiṭtå renders ; Targum^Onkelos דין אבא למלכא; Targum^Jonathan דין אבא למלכא רב בחכמתא ורכיך בשנייא; LXX has κῆρυξ as subject of verb (Vulgate also has clamante præcone). The speculations of Egyptologists are too numerous to mention: see Brown-Driver-Briggs, s.v., or Heyes, 254 ff. The best is that of Spiegelberg (Orientalische Litteraturzeitung vi. 317 ff.), who considers that it is a call to ‘Attention!’ (Egyptian ’b r-k; literally, ‘Thy heart to thee!’). Friedrich Delitzsch (Wo lag das Paradies? 225) suggested a connexion with Assyrian abarakku (the title of a high official), which his father declared to be a “neckischer Zufall”! Radical emendations of the text have been proposed by Ball ([ל]אמר כ׳ נין) and Cheyne (אַבִּר כינאתן = ‘Mighty one of Chuenaten’ [Amenophis IV.]: Orientalische Litteraturzeitung iii. 151 f.); these are wholly unsatisfying, and the latter has not survived the criticisms of Müller (ib. 325 f.): see Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, 467.—ונתון] ‘thus placing.’ As continuation of ויתן in ^42a, the infinitive absolute is grammatically correct (Gesenius-Kautzsch § 113 z); and though the idiom is infrequent, there is no reason to suspect the text.—45. צָֽפְנַת פַּעְנֵחַ] LXX Ψονθομφανήχ (transposing צ and פ? [see Nestle, Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, xxv. 209 ff.]). The old interpretations follow two lines: (1) ‘Revealer of secrets’ (Josephus Antiquities of the Jews ii. 91; Peshiṭtå, Targum^{Onkelos-Jonathan}, Patr.), connecting with Hebrew צפן; and (2) ‘Saviour of the world’ (Coptic p-sot-om-ph-eneḫ, Delitzsch, Holzinger); so Vulgate, Jerome Quæstiones sive Traditiones hebraicæ in Genesim. Of modern Egyptological theories the one most in favour seems to be that propounded by Steindorff in Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde xxvii. 41 f.: that it represents Egyptian De-pnute-ef‛-onḫ, and means ‘The god speaks and he lives.’ It is said (ib. 42) that personal names of this type (though with the proper name of a deity) are common from the beginning of the 22nd dynasty. See the discussion in Heyes, op. cit. 258 ff., who prefers the interpretation of Lieblein (Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, 1898, 202 ff.): defenti [or defenta]-pa-anḫ = “celui qui donne la nourriture de la vie.”—אָֽסְנַת] Explained, with some hesitation, as ‘belonging to (the goddess) Neith’ (Steindorff, Spiegelberg, al.).—פוטי פרע] (LXX Πετεφρῆ, etc.) is a fuller form of פוטיפר; see on 39¹.—It is worthy of remark that, except in the case of Asenath, the suggested Egyptian analogues of these names do not occur, save sporadically, earlier than the 22nd dynasty (that of Shishak).—45b. LXX omits.—46. פרעה מלך מצרים is an amplification in the style of Priestly-Code (Exodus 6^{11. 13. 27. 29} 14⁸).

47‒57. Joseph’s measures for relief of the famine.—47, 49 (Elohist) ∥ 48 (Yahwist). He stores corn during the seven years of plenty.—50‒52 (Elohist?). Joseph’s two sons.—Mĕnaššeh] interpreted quite grammatically as ‘causing to forget.’ The etymology is not to be taken too literally, as if the narrator meant that Joseph had actually forgotten his father’s house (compare Psalms 45¹¹).—52. made me fruitful] The name of the tribe is generally thought to contain the idea of fruitfulness, from the fertility of the region in central Palestine which it occupied.—54‒57. The beginning of the famine.—54, 55 contain a slight discrepancy. According to ^54b the Egyptians had no lack of bread, and consequently no need to apply to Joseph, though they were indebted to his forethought. In ⁵⁵ they are famishing, and have to buy their food from Joseph: this view is connected with 47^{13 ff.}.—56. opened all that was in them] Read with LXX ‘all the granaries,’ though the Hebrew text cannot be certainly restored (v.i.)—57. prepares for the next scene of the drama (chapter 42).

State granaries, for the sustenance of the army, the officials and the serfs, were a standing feature of Egyptian administration (Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, 107 f.; compare 433 f.), and were naturally drawn upon for the relief of the populace in times of scarcity (ib. 126). The ‘superintendent of the granaries’ was a high officer of state, distinct, as a rule, from the vizier or T’ate (page 469); but a union of the two dignities was just as easy under exceptional circumstances as the combination of the Premiership with the Chancellorship of the Exchequer would be with us (see Erman, 89). We can readily understand that such a wise and comprehensive provision impressed the imagination of the Israelites, and was attributed by them to a divine inspiration of which one of their ancestors was the medium (compare Gunkel 384).—Besides these general illustrations of the writer’s acquaintance with Egyptian conditions, two special parallels to this aspect of Joseph’s career are cited from the monuments: (1) Ameny, a monarch under Usertsen I. (12th dynasty), records on his grave at Beni-Hasan that when years of famine came he ploughed all the fields of his district, nourished the subjects of his sovereign and gave them food, so that there was none hungry among them. (2) Similarly, on a grave of the 17th dynasty at El-Kab: “When a famine arose, lasting many years, I distributed corn to the city in each year of the famine” (see Das Alte Testament im Lichte des alten Orients², 390; Driver 346 f.). For the sale of grain to foreigners, we have the case of Yanḫamu, governor of Yarimutu, in the Amarna letters (see below on 47^{13 ff.}).—It is impossible to desire a fuller demonstration of the Egyptian background of the Joseph-stories than chapter 41 affords. The attempt to minimise the coincidences, and show that “in a more original and shorter form the story of Joseph had a North Arabian and not a Palestinian and Egyptian background, and consequently that ‘Pharaoh, king of Egypt,’ should be ‘Pir’u, king of Miṣrim’” (Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, 454‒473), tends to discredit rather than confirm the seductive Muṣri-theory, which is pushed to such an extravagant length.

47‒57. Analysis.—Starting from the presumption that the storing of food in the cities and the direct appeal of the famishing people to Pharaoh are not from the same source, the best division seems the following: Elohist = ^{47. 49. 54a. 55. 56b}; Yahwist = ^{48. 53. 54b. 56a. 57} (compare Gunkel and Procksch). ^50‒52 are universally assigned to Elohist (on account of אלהים) in spite of the fact that the children are named by the father. Priestly-Code’s authorship is perhaps excluded by the explicit etymologies, to which there are no real analogies in that document. The verses in any case interrupt the context of Jehovist, and may be a supplementary notice inserted by a late hand at what seemed the most suitable place.—47. לקמצים] The √ is elsewhere peculiar to Priestly-Code (Leviticus 2² 5¹² 6⁸, Numbers 5²⁶†); and Ball assigns ^46‒48 to that source. But the sense ‘by handfuls’ is doubtful, and is represented by none of the old versions except the clumsy paraphrases of Vulgate and Targum^Jonathan; so that the text is probably at fault. LXX has δράγματα; Peshiṭtå and Targum^Onkelos and לאוצרין [with and וכנשר for זתעש]—48. שנים אשר היו] Read with The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch, LXX השנים אשר היה הַשָּׂבָע.—50. שְׁנַת] LXX τὰ ἑπτὰ ἔτη.—51. נַשּׁני] Piel only here; both the form and the irregular vocalisation (Gesenius-Kautzsch § 52 m) are chosen for the sake of assonance with מְנַשֵּׂה.—54. היה] LXX οὐκ ἦσαν; so Peshiṭtå—a natural misunderstanding.—56. אשר בהם] The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch אשר בהם בר. The context imperatively demands a noun [LXX σιτοβολῶνας, Peshiṭtå ]. Lagarde (Symmicta i. 57) suggested a Hebrew equivalent of Talmud. אישבורא; Wellhausen some derivative of שבר; Delitzsch, Ball, and Kittel (combining The Samaritan Recension of the Pentateuch and Peshiṭtå) אוצרות הַבָּר.—וישבר] Pointed וַיַּשְׁבֵּר (Hiphil); compare 42⁶.—ויחזק וגו׳] LXX omits.—57. הארץ¹] Better הארצות as LXX (compare ⁵⁴).