Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

Hi,


> The authorship of Kings is of the latter case, written long after the
> events, therefore giving the names of the deceased so that the intended
> audience may know who was indicated. The authors of Genesis and Exodus
> wrote
> to an audience where merely a reference to “the Pharaoh” was sufficient
> identification so that they knew who was meant.
>
>
Yep. That's pretty much the way I see it. The fact that the author/s don't
seem to feel the need to name the Pharaoh seems to take it for granted that
the audience would know who they were talking about. If anything, this seems
to be a good hallmark of authenticity.

In Kings the author/s were talking about a foreign and distant nation. We
would expect and find it normal to see names mentioned.

However, if we take a closer look at the Torah we see the following:

1) Numbers 20, the King of Edom is not named
2) Numbers 21:1 the King of Arad is not named
3) Numbers 21 Amorite Kings are named
4) Numbers 22 Moabite Kings are named

We see an inconsistent pattern of King naming or of leaving anonymous. It
seems obvious how the Pharaoh could be left nameless. For Edom we can see
the stylistics of why the King is left nameless as the emphasis is of Israel
asking his brother Edom if he can pass through the land. Big brother says
no! As for the King of Arad. Not really to be expected that he would be left
nameless but the emphasis seems to be on justifying later butt kicking of
said bad guys, the Canaanites. Interesting that we have Amorite and Moabite
Kings named. If we could identify these guys and of which Pharaoh they were
contemporaries then the deal would be sealed and there would be no more
question over his identification.

James Christian