Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/558

 came out red). The forced etymology of Zeraḥ (v.$30$) could not have suggested it.—29. What a breach hast thou made for thyself!] The name Pereẓ expresses the violence with which he secured the priority.—30.' Zeraḥ] An Edomite clan in 36$13. 33$. On the etymology, v.i.

To the name Pereẓ, Cheyne (TBI, 357) aptly compares Plutarch's account of the birth of Typhon, brother of Osiris: "neither in due time, nor in the right place, but breaking through with a blow, he leaped out through his mother's side" (de Isid. et Os. c. 12).—The ascendancy of the Pereẓ clan has been explained by the incorporation of the powerful families of Caleb and Jeraḥmeel, 1 Ch. 2$5. 9$ (so Sta. GVI, i. 158 f.); but a more obvious reason is the fact that David's ancestry was traced to this branch (Ru. 4$18-22$).

—Joseph is cast into Prison (J).

Joseph is sold by the Ishmaelites (37$28. 36$) to an Egyptian householder, who finds him so capable and successful that ere long he entrusts him with the whole administration of his estate ($1-6$). But his master's wife conceives a guilty passion for him, and when her advances are repelled, falsely accuses him of attempted outrage, with the result that he is thrown into prison ($7-20$). Here again he wins the favour of his superior, and is soon charged with the oversight of the prison ($21-23$).

Source.—With the exception of a harmonising gloss in $1b_$, and a sprinkling of E variants (discussed in the notes), the whole passage is from J. It represents the chief divergence between the two recensions of the history of Joseph. In J, Joseph is first sold to a private Egyptian , v.$1$), then cast into the state prison in the way here narrated, where he gains the confidence of the (unnamed) governor, so that when the butler and baker are sent thither they naturally fall under his

29. ] An ungrammatical use of the ptcp. Rd. with Ball (cf. 19$15$).——] cogn. acc. The rendering as a question ( = 'why': De. Di. Dri.) is less natural than that given above; and to detach E] ] as a separate exclamation ('A breach upon thee!') is worse. [[G  VS take the vb. in a pass. sense.—] [E] ST$J$  (so v.$30$).—30. ] as a Heb. word would mean 'rising' (of the sun, Is 60$3$) or 'autochthonous' (= ). A connexion with the idea of 'redness' is difficult to establish. It is commonly supposed that there is a play on the Aram. [Language: **] (which is used here by ST$O$, and is the equivalent of Heb. ), and Bab. zaḫuritu (so De. Dri. Gu. al.); but this is not convincing.