Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

guished. Only in v.28 they are so put together, that a confusion arises from referring the verbs to the wrong subjects, which disappears at once when the different portions are separated. We have only to take out the clause, ‘and they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver,' and join it with the preceding v.27 to which it belongs,—and the verse will now run, ‘And there passed by Midianites, merchants, and they drew-up Joseph out of the pit,' (i.e. the Midianites drew him up, whereas in the present connection it can only be understood of the brothers,) and they brought Joseph to Egypt.'(5) And this connects itself with v.24, where we are told that the brothers at Reuben's suggestion put him into the empty pit, or rather with v.25*, 'and they sat-down to eat bread,' which probably belongs to this document, and perhaps will explain why the Midianites were able to do the business unobserved.(6) In this way there comes to light a fact hitherto unperceived, viz. that the Midianites secretly carried away (i.e. kidnapped) Joseph; and this is confirmed in the sequel by Joseph's words, xl.15, that he had been 'stolen out of the land of the Hebrews';(7) whereas the expression in xlv.4, that his brothers had sold him into Egypt, agrees with the other account.

And HUPFELD says the first account (with Reuben) must be due to E, and the second (with Judah) to J. For the second point he produces reasons such as those exhibited in our analysis, to which, of course, we fully assent. For the first point he merely alleges (i) that it must belong to E,, because the other belongs to J,®—(ii) that it employs an, 'bring,' v.28", whereas the Jehovist uses constantly in, bring down,' xxxvii.25, xxxix. 1, (iii) that it is also connected with the substance of Joseph's history in xl, &c., by using the expression 'captain of the guard.')

284. To the above reasoning, however, we reply as follows.

(1) There is nothing inconsistent in both the brothers making their proposals in the same document. Reuben's suggestion, though intended by him to be the means of saving Joseph's life, was only to the effect that they should avoid shedding his blood; they were not 'to lay hands upon him,' but only to put him into the pit, and leave him there to perish. The purpose therefore was undoubtedly still to kill him,' but not with their own hands. The statement in v.21, that Reuben delivered him out of their hands, which seems rather to anticipate that in v.22, may mean that he, as the elder brother, took hold of him, and held him, as it were, in his charge, while talking to the others.

(2) We recognise fully this discrepancy, but suppose that the Midianites belong to the original statement of E, and not, as HUPFELD suppose, to E.

(3) If the brothers were supposed to be really as much in the dark as Reuben, as to what had become of Joseph, there surely would have been some note express

ing their surprise, whereas not a trace of this appears anywhere. It is easy to be understood, that they did tell Reuben of what they had done in his absence, of which he had no right to complain, as it was better to sell their brother than to leave him (as he had agreed to do) to die by starvation: and this seems rather to be implied in the sequel, xlii.21,22, though nothing is said about it here. At least, it is as easy to account for such a notice as this being omitted, as it is to explain why nothing is said about the surprise of the brothers at receiving from Reuben the account of his discovery that Joseph was not in the pit.

(4) There is, as we shall see, a difference in the sources, which is plainly betrayed -not, however, in xxxix, but-in xl; and there is also a difference here, but not (as it seems to us) of the kind which Prof. HUPFELD supposes.

(5) This suggestion is very ingenious: but it seems hard to believe that the story can have been written originally as HUPFELD supposes. Surely, something must have been said about the Midianites seeing or hearing Joseph in the pit, as they passed by. It could hardly have been stated so barely as here, 'There passed by Midianites, and they drew-up Joseph out of the pit.'

(6) It seems also impossible to account in this way for Joseph being carried off unobserved by a caravan of Midianites. These could hardly have been thought of as passing by without attracting the notice of the brothers.

(7) xl.15, as we shall see, is due-not to J, but-to E2, who had before him (as we suppose) the brief notice from the hand of E, which has been replaced by the more circumstantial Jehovistic story in xxxvii, and may be here referring to it. (8) All the difficulties of the case are met by assigning v.28,36, to E, and the rest to J.

(9) J does use of bringing down' to Egypt in xlii.20, xlvi.32.

(10) We shall see, in our examination of the sequel, that there is no force in this argument.

See especially on this point (301), where light seems to be thrown clearly, by the consideration of xlii.37, xliii.3-10, upon the composition of xxxvii; since in these chapters Reuben and Judah both come pre-eminently forward, and Judah's proposition is accepted, just exactly as here. But the above passages are undoubtedly (as BOEHMER allows) due both to the Jehovist.

285. HUPFELD, as has been said, does not profess to separate completely the sources in this part of Genesis: he only assigns certain portions to E, and J, and has not undertaken the difficult task of dealing with the rest. BOEHMER divides this chapter in a very artificial way between E2, J, and the Compiler. After careful examination, we cannot assent to his scheme: but the following remarks of his deserve notice.

[blocks in formation]

(i) The notice, that Joseph's brothers fed their sheep at Shechem, cannot be assigned to J for this reason, that they would certainly not have chosen as their pasture the neighbourhood of Shechem, which two of them, according to this writer, had so fearfully assaulted and sacked, and then left it as quickly as possible. Shechem is nowhere mentioned by E,; and hence the express mention of it in v.12 must have the more significance. We can discover, however, no other object for which Shechem is here mentioned, than that may it appear less strange if Joseph and his brothers are found so far north as Dothan, while the father is still in the valley of Hebron, v.14. Yet in the account of E, it would be strange that they should have removed even so far as Shechem from their place of abode, which according to him (see below) was Bethel. It must be the Compiler, then, who removes the sale of Joseph to Dothan on account of the name of this place (ini, 'two wells'), and who makes the brothers arrive there from Shechem, near which town he had made Jacob purchase a property, xxxiii. 19. p.258.

Ans. Very probably, Dothan was selected (by J, as we suppose) as the scene of Joseph's sale, because of the two notable 'wells' or 'pits' there: and then the brothers might be described as passing through Shechem on their way to Dothan,—— which accounts for the singularity of the narrative of their movements in v.15-17. It is the Jehovist, who makes Jacob buy the property at Shechem, xxxiii.19; and. though he records the sack of Shechem, yet he mentions also the dreadful terror which it caused on all the cities round-about, xxxv.5; so that he may very well have represented them here as going boldly into this neighbourhood some ten years afterwards, (since Joseph was then six, xxxi.41, and is now seventeen, xxxvii.1).

(ii) According to E2, Jacob's abode must have been rather at Bethel-[i.e. not at Hebron, as in v.14.] Thither God had commanded him to go, in order to fulfil his vow, xxxv.1: subsequently to his arrival there, xxxv.6, no change of place has been mentioned by this writer. According to E, Jacob is at this time, no doubt, with his father Isaac at Kirjath-Arba, i.e. Hebron, xxxv.27. But, except v.1, nothing belonging to E can be traced in this chapter. Nor can the notice [about Hebron in v.14] have been derived from J: for with him Jacob's last-named resting place was the 'tower of the flock,' xxxv.21,22, i.e. Jerusalem. HUPFELD is wrong in saying, p.192, that 'Hebron here belongs most probably to the Jehovist, but without doubt is common to both sources (E, and J).'

Ans. We assign xxxv. 1,5,-not to E, but-to J. But BOEHMER's difficulty only exists for those who maintain the independence of all three sources. It seems to us, with HUPFELD, that 'Hebron' in v.14 does belong to J: but we hold that he has merely taken it from the last-preceding notice of E in xxxv.27.

(iii) BOEHMER also notes, p.89, that in v.29, which he gives to E, we have in the expression 'rent his clothes' the word used, not ibpix, as in xxxvii.34, xliv.13, which he assigns to J, who, he says, p.116, is wont to employ the latter word.

Ans. But J certainly employs the former word in xxiv.53, xxvii. 15,27, xxxviii. 14,19, xxxix. 12,12,13,15,16,18, all which passages BOEHMER himself ascribes to the

Jehovist; and the only other passages in Genesis, where it occurs, are xxviii. 20, xli.42, which we give also to this writer.

N.B. See also with respect to this Chapter (299) below.

286. xxxviii.1-30, Jehovist.

(i) v.1, and it came to pass at that time,' as in xxi. 22(E2).

*(ii) v.1,16, ₪2, ‘extend,' (59.x).

[ocr errors]

(iii) v.1,2, 'and his name,' v.6, and her name,' (85.iii. N.B.).

*(iv) v.2,8,9,16,16,18, i, 'go-in,' used of sexual intercourse (99.liii). *(v) v.5, 'add and bear,' v.26, 'add to know,' (5.iv).

(vi) v.6, 'and Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn,' (120).

(vii) v.7,10, 'be evil in the eyes of,' (86.vii).

*(viii) v.7,10, ɲņņ, 'put-to-death,' (97.xl).

*(ix) v.9, na, 'except,' (4.xii).

*(x) v.12, and the days became many,' (128.iv).

*(xi) v.12, □n], 'comfort,' (11.ii).

*(xii) v.13, ‘and it was told to Tamar,' v.24, ' and it was told to Judah,' (137.ii).

*(xiii) v.14,19, D, 'turn-aside,' (43.v).

*(xiv) v.14,19, 71, 'vestment,' (141.lviii).

(xv) v.14,19, the veil,' as in xxiv.65.

(xvi) v.14, and she covered herself with the veil';

comp. and she took the veil and covered herself,' xxiv.65.

(xvii) v.15, ‘harlot,' as in xxxiv.31, comp. play the harlot,' 'harlotry,' xxxviii. 24,24.

*(xviii) v.16, man, ‘give-here,' (55.iv).

*(xix) v.20, 'take out of the hand of,' (5.xv).

*(xx) v.20,22,23, NYŊ, ‘find,' (3.xiv).

(xxi) v.21,22, men of the place,' (166.i).

(xxii) v.21,22, m, 'in this (place),' as in xlviii.9, comp. ♫❤ (277.xx).

(xxiii) v.25, ‘discern, I pray,' as in xxxvii.32.

*(xxiv) v.25,26, 7, 'discern,' (180.xxiii).

(xxv) v.26, ¡p-by-, for therefore,' as in xviii.5—see (3.xvii).

(xxvi) v.27, ‘and it came-to-pass at the time of her bearing, and behold twins in her womb!'

E has and her days were fulfilled to bear, and behold twins in her womb!' xxv.24,-see (160.(4)).

*(xxvii) v.27, 'and it came-to-pass at the time of her travail,' (218.xxvii).

(xxviii) v.28, 'midwife,' as in xxxv.17.

(xxix) v.28, ip, ‘bind,' (216.xxiv).

*(xxx) v.29, at his drawing-back his hand,' (141.xlvi).

*(xxxi) v.29, 7p, 'break-forth,' (186.xii).

287. xxxix.1-23, Jehovist.

[ocr errors]

(i) v.1, ‘Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard,' refers to the E. statement, xxxvii.36, to which J adds the further description, an Egyptian,' v.1,2,5. (ii) v.1, 'the Ishmaelites,' as in xxxvii.25,27,28.

*(iii) v.1, ‘buy out of the hand of,' as in xxxiii.19, comp. (5.xv).
(iv) v.2,3,21,23, ‘Jehovah was with (ny) Joseph (him),' (163.x).
(v) v.2,3,23, 'making to prosper,' as in xxiv.21,40,42,56.

(vi) v.3, ‘his master saw that Jehovah was with () him';
comp. 'we surely saw that Jehovah was with (y) thee,' xxvi.28.

(vii) v.3,23, 'all which he is doing,' v.22, ‘all which they are doing';

comp. 'all which Laban is doing,' xxxi.12:

E has 'what ELOHIM is doing,' xli.25,28.

*(viii) v.4, 'find favour in the eyes of,' v.21, 'put his favour in the eyes of,' (13.xii).

*(ix) v.4, y find,' (3.xiv).

(x) v.4,5,5,6,8,

(), all which was his,' (59.xxviii).

(xi) v.4,5,8, vi, 'there is,' (141.xxxviii).

(xii) v.4,5, 7'pņa, 'appoint,' xxxix.4,5, xli.34—also E2(x1.4).

(xiii) v.4,8,22, 'give into the hand of,' v.6, 'leave in the hand of,' v.23, 'sea anything in the hand of,' (216.xvii).

*(xiv) v.5, ‘Jehovah blessed the house of the Egyptian, on account of Joseph'; comp. 'Jehovah blessed me on account of thee,' xxx.27.

(xv) v.5, ha, ‘on account of,' as in xii.13, xxx.27.

(xvi) v.5, 'all which he had in the house and in the field';

comp. 'what was in the field, and all which was in the house,' xxxiv. 28, 29.

*(xvii) v.6,12,13,15,18, y, ‘leave,' (3.xviii).

(xviii) v.6,9, DN, 'except,' (186.xxiii).

*(xix) v.6, ‘the bread which he was eating,' (186.xxxi).

(xx) v.6, 'fair of appearance and fair of form,' xxix.17—comp. E.(294.iv). (xxi) v.6, 'fair of form,' (59.xvi).

(xxii) v.7, 'and it came to pass after these things,' (133.i).

*(xxiii) v.7,12,14, by ay, 'lie with,' (99.lv).

(xxiv) v.8, 'and he refused,' (281.xii).

*(xxv) v.9, jp 473, ‘be greater than,' (5.xviii).

(xxvi) v.9, qiņ, ‘keep-back,' as in xxii.12, also E2(xx.6), D(xxii.16).

(xxvii) v.9,23, xg, 'because,' as in xxxix.9,23, comp.

*(xxviii) v.9, 'do evil,' (171.xxxiv).

= ¬ng, vi.3.

*(xxix) v.10, ‘at her speaking,' v.13, 'at her seeing,' v.15,19, ‘at his hearing,'

(141.xlvi).

(xxx) v.12, ven, handle,' take hold of,' as in iv.21.

*(xxxi) v.12,12,13,15,16,18, 7, 'vestment,' (141.lviii). *(xxxii) v.14, 'see ye!' (63.xxi).

(xxxiii) v.15,18, 'lift-up the voice and cry,' (180.xl).

« ZurückWeiter »