Isaac Fried: You wrote: “Interpretersof the Hebrew bible fancied to discern in CAPNAT of Gen. 41:45 the root צפן CPN, a variant of ספן and שפןSPN, 'covered, hidden', as in Hag. 1:4 and Deut. 33:19. Consequently they saw פענחPANEAX as 'reveal', namely, 'the exposer of the things concealed'.”
That is truly fascinating. Although that traditional Hebrew interpretation long post-dates thecomposition of the Patriarchal narratives, nevertheless it lends some supportto my view that the ssade/C at the beginning of Joseph’s Egyptian name had longbeen viewed in ancient times as similar to a sin/% in sound. As such, it suggests that such ssade is rendering the Egyptian word sA,meaning “son”, rather than the current scholarly view that such ssade should beinterpreted, impossibly, as allegedly representing both D and d in Egyptian,with De-de/djed in Egyptian meaning “he said”. Moreover, since in chapter 41 of Genesis Pharaoh seems to treat Joseph asbeing the “son” that Pharaoh himself never had, it makes much more sense forthat ssade to mean sA/“son” in Egyptian. We should properly suspect that the Pharaoh of the Patriarchalnarratives desperately wanted a “son” of his own, but unlike Abraham Pharaohnever was successful in siring a son as his proper male heir. And since Jacob is said to be age 13 tenfoldwhen he meets with Pharaoh at Genesis 47: 9, that suggests Year 13 as the exactyear in question. A pharaoh who neverhad his own son to be his proper heir, and who had terrible troubles in unluckyYear 13, is what the Patriarchal narratives are talking about, with pinpoint historicalaccuracy, as recorded in writing by a contemporary Hebrew. Thank you very much for that insight as to the traditionalHebrew-based interpretation of Joseph’s Egyptian name. Fascinating, and much appreciated. Jim Stinehart Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
