On the Egyptian names found in 41", see above, vol. i. 665'' ; tne same explanations are accepted, and cordially approved, by Ebers {DIP 1798f.).§ It is singular that the three types of name are otherwise not common till an age much later than that to which Joseph must he referred ; those of the tj-pe Zaphenatli pa'aneah appear first at the end of the 20th dj'n. (one instance), and are frequent only in the 22nd (the dyn. of Shishak) ; of those of the type Potiphera,|| Mr. Tomkins cites one (though not borne by a native Egyptian)!! in the 18th dyn., but otherwise they appear first in the 22nd, and are frequent only in the 26th dyn. (B.C. 604-525) ; those of the type Asenath are found now and then earlier, but are frequent only in the 21st dyn. and become common after- wards.** It is, of course, unwise to build too much upon a negative ar-'ument ; but the nmbination of names, otherwise all either rare or unknown at an early period, is certainly remarkable ; and Stein- dortl', Bnigsch, and Ebers all agree in inferring from the facts mentioned that the names in ques- tion did not originate before the 9th cent. B.C.+t On AliRKCH (41-^), see vol. i. p. 18 : the explana- tion of Kenouf, there given, is likewise that of Bnigsch (Stoininschrift, 83f.).tJ
There are also four or five Egyptian words in this part of Gn : but they are all words which were naturalized in Hebrew ; they occur in other parts of the OT, and consequently atford no clue to the date of the narratives in which they are found. Thev are ' Pharaoh ' ; in; 41'- •• •• "• », the common Heo. name for the NUe (Is 7" and fre- quently) ; in(< reed-grass, 41'-" (also Job 8"t) ; c*;' /n« linen, 41" (also Ex 26' etc. [P], Ezk 16"- " 27',
• nudge, I.e. 179.
t CJS 1. i. S>- »■ » ; Driver, XoUt on Samuel, xxvi.
t Containint; the * Prec-cpU of Puh-hotep' (Mupero, Dawn ^ Cioili!. :!91)-40l) : mo /.'/', inil »er. iii. 34.
9 Hnipioh also {Stein\i\*ehr\ft, 83) otrreea In thoM of Potl- phi>ni (I'utiplmr), and (aifainal hii) former view, Hist. 122) /apticiiiitti-pa'aiiea^ : Aseiiath he duct* not here mention.
I Uf w'tiirh 'PoLiphftr' is usually regarded on a merely Hebrew variant.
i Petiil>ai>l, ■ (lift of Bool ' ; L\ftand Timet<>f Joseph, j>. 184: •re llruKsch, //Ml. i. 266 fed. lts»l, p. 118). The name ie evi- iK'iitly that of a Semite (Liebtein, RechercMM fur Chronologie, 13) (T), and not ininrohalily (Sayce. Kllll S.'i) formed in imita- tion of the Phan. .Vallanbaal (' gin of Baal ').
•• Kce SleiiidorfT, Z. /. A fit. Spractie, nxiii. (1802), 60-6i.
tt llontniel ^^A^/l^tlUe, Ibifi, p. 4) follows Lrfwarde in using the Kime fmctd as a clue to the date of the document E (e.
1W B.C.).
tt Llphleln {PSDA, 1808, p. SOI IT.) propOM* a dlfTerent ex- planation of Poliphar fnot of Poliphera) and Zaphenath- pa'aut-ah : he also explains 'Abrech as a gauche, toil i,t. ' go to the left I '
Pr 31--) ; and perhaps vii (p. 773*, note **), and D-CBin (p. 768*, note ii).* S. R. Driver,
JOSEPH THE Husband op Mary.
I. ly TUB NEW TESTAUH.ST.—il) He LS not mentioned by name in Mk,t and only indirectly in Jn r"6*^. (2) Nor are the meagre accounts in Mt and Lk easy to reconcile. Both evangelists state that he was a descendant of David (Mt 1", Lk 2*1:), and that the Virgin Mary was already espoused to him when she became with child of the Holy Ghost (Mt V\ Lk 1"- «), and that he lived at Nazareth after the birth of our Lord (Mt 2^, cf. 13", Lk 4=*, cf. ">); but they treat each of these details differently.
(a) The Davidie Descent. — Mt, making Joseph the son of Jacob, traces hia relation to David through kings, Lk through Heli and private per- sons (Mt l''*, LkS^'-'®).
(6) The Conception.% — Lk tells ns of the Angelio Annunciation, and of Mary's meekness and faith (las-as). 5,jt, begins at a later period (V^), and lets us see Joseph's character under a sharp trial. He was a man who strove to conform to the precepts of the law (Sdtaiot, cf. Lk 1* 2-*), and had a keen sense of personal honour, yet was not so bound by law as to be unmoved by kindly feelings. He did not ' proclaim ' Mary (SeiynaTlaai.), though it seemed to be his duty, but resolved to divorce her in as quiet and secret a way as possible.ll Yet though he had already come to this decision, the appear- ance to him, in a dreara, of an angel of the Lord, with the assurance of the true origin and the work of the Child, fully in accordance as the former was with the words of prophecy (' Quod si dubitas Isaiam audi,' Ephraem on Tatian, cf. Iren. iv. 23. 1, ed. Massuet), cominced him of his mistake. He therefore took Mary, and in full faith ' was dwell- ing in holiness with her' (Tatian's Diatess.) until she bare a son.
((•) Nazareth. — Lk tells us in 1"'- that Mary lived in Nazareth, and was espoused to Joseph ; and in 2* that Joseph went up out of Nazareth to Bethlehem with her. He therefore presumably (not quite necessarily) also himself lived in Nazareth before the birth of our Lord. Yet Mt 2*'*' gives no hint that Joseph had had any relation with Nazareth before his return from Egypt, and implies that he