Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Portrait of Joseph in Chapter 40 of Genesis

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Portrait of Joseph in Chapter 40 of Genesis
  • Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 10:23:01 -0400 (EDT)


Portrait of Joseph in Chapter 40 of Genesis

Joseph is portrayed in chapter 40 of Genesis as being an assistant to the
Captain of the Guards, with Joseph playing a role in uncovering a plot
against Pharaoh. Pharaoh finds out about the role Joseph had played 2 years
later. If the Patriarchal narratives are accurate history, then one might
expect
Pharaoh to have commissioned a portrait of two members of his security
detail who had helped uncover a plot against Pharaoh. In Genesis, we are
told
only of Joseph, an “Asiatic”/Hebrew, but if I understand what historical
time period is involved here, that pharaoh is well known to have had Nubian
bodyguards. So Pharaoh may have commissioned a magnificent portrait of two
members of his security team who helped uncover a plot against him: a Nubian
(about whom the Bible is silent), and Joseph -- the Joseph of chapter 40 of
Genesis.

This was before Joseph adopts Egyptian dress at Genesis 41: 42, so Joseph
would be portrayed as wearing classic Hebrew/Canaanite clothing. Without
getting into a complicated discussion of ages, it may be implied that the
historical Joseph was age 28 years in chapter 40 of Genesis. Joseph at that
time
would have had a full beard.

Now picture in your mind’s eye what Joseph in chapter 40 of Genesis would
look like: age 28 years, with a full beard, and wearing Hebrew/Canaanite
clothing akin to the “coat of many colors”. That’s exactly how Joseph is
portrayed in a magnificent cane head commissioned by Pharaoh in Joseph’s
honor,
here:

_http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/perl/gi-ca-qmakedeta.pl?sid=71.108.77.217-1332
363480&qno=1&dfnam=050uu-p0341_
(http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/perl/gi-ca-qmakedeta.pl?sid=71.108.77.217-1332363480&qno=1&dfnam=050uu-p0341)


Unfortunately, Howard Carter, who found this magnificent object in Tut’s
tomb, mistakenly thought that the figures represent “an Asiatic and an African
captive with feet tied together”:

_http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/perl/gi-ca-qmakedeta.pl?sid=71.108.77.217-1332
363480&qno=1&dfnam=050uu-c050uu_
(http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/perl/gi-ca-qmakedeta.pl?sid=71.108.77.217-1332363480&qno=1&dfnam=050uu-c050uu)


But that is not the case. The cane’s grip goes around the figures’
ankles, but that grip cannot represent binding, for two reasons. First, the
grip
is extremely thick and wide, whereas binding in Egyptian New Kingdom
iconography is always portrayed as being done with very thin rope. Secondly,
binding figures only by the ankles would be ridiculous, because the person
could
simply bend down and untie the binding!

The key is that the elbows of these figures are not bound. Egyptian
iconography virtually always portrays bound captives as having their elbows
bound,
forcing the captives’ arms to be in an unnatural position that immobilizes
their arms. You can see that such is not the case here. Moreover, this is
indirectly confirmed by the fact that after the death of the Pharaoh who
commissioned this fine portrait, Tut later modified this cane head slightly,
in
order to make it, retroactively, fit into standard Egyptian iconography
that showed Asiatics and Nubians as bound captives. Carter writes: “Arms of
captives had originally been tied with linen threads.” So after the fact,
after the Pharaoh of chapter 41 of Genesis died, Tut modified this cane head
by having linen threads added which, retroactively, showed these figures as
being bound.

Everyone has missed the great historical significance of this magnificent
portrait of Joseph in chapter 40 of Genesis, because they have passively
adopted Howard Carter’s mistaken view that the grip of the cane somehow
represents a binding of captives. It doesn’t. Rather, this Hebrew and this
Nubian
are shown in a very positive light, not being bound at all, and rather being
honored as having helped Pharaoh escape some nefarious plot by the “Baker”
. [For the historical basis of the Baker’s treasonous act against Pharaoh,
see the third to the last word at Genesis 40: 16 and give that Hebrew word
its normal meaning, instead of the ultra-fanciful array of meanings that have
been dreamed up for that word by creative translators who want to hide the
historical nature of the Baker’s treason, and who thereby unwittingly hide
why it was that Joseph knew from the Baker’s dream that the Baker would be
duly impaled 3 days hence. The normal meaning of that Hebrew word, as the
basis for an historically treasonous act, makes sense o-n-l-y in the reign
of
the Pharaoh who preceded King Tut.]

No matter how much people may dislike this historical pharaoh, the fact of
the matter is that he commissioned a magnificent portrait of Joseph in
chapter 40 of Genesis. It’s been sitting there for years on the second floor
of
the Cairo Museum. Instead of being written off as just one more in the
dozens [if not hundreds] of Egyptian artifacts that show Asiatics and Nubians
as
being bound captives, we should recognize this magnificent object for what
it is: a superb, proud portrait of Joseph in chapter 40 of Genesis, looking
exactly like a Hebrew Patriarch straight out of Hollywood central casting.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page