Rohl's Joseph in Egypt

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
Japhethite
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 2:39 am

Rohl's Joseph in Egypt

Post by Japhethite »

I've been unfairly practically banned by Rohl from the Rohl group in groups.io (previously in Yahoo groups) and on facebook because of disagreements on which dynasty Joseph was in Egypt, and on the locations of Goshen, Ramses, Yam Suph, Sinai/Horeb.
So I can't reply to the comments on things like this in those groups, so I have to comment in other places like this.

Rohl believes that Joseph's Hebraico-Egyptian name
Zafenat/Zaph(e)nath(-paneah)
is really
*Zatenaf/Zat(h)(e)nap(h)/S-t-n-p
by metathesis/transposition,
and he equates this with
Djat-naf/Djad_tu-naf
Ddnf/Djed((u)-)en-ef pa'anakh
Dd-n.f_'ip'ankh'
D(ja)d(u)-naf_((')i)p(i)-(a)n(k)h(u)
"He who is called Ipu/Ipiankhu".

Fro the first part of the name (Zafenat) I wish to point out that although I agree in some cases of metathesis/transposition, this one I think is totally dubious and is visibly a very unlikely "butchering", regardless of if the word/phrase "Zatenaf" in Egyptian means "he who is called" which seems to strike some sort of cord. Just because it is also the opinion of Kitchen doesn't mean it is right. The only possible evidence I can see for it is Tsethaentiphans in Jubilees, but this is not very reliable.

There is not any strong enough evidence reason for assuming/asserting that Zaphenath means "he who is called". In fact it would not make sense for the bible to say they called/named "him he who is called Paneah". Plus "'He who is called' is not a title for someone in high office."

I would also question one or two or three of the letters interchanges between Stnp/Ztnf/Z(t)np(h) and D(j)d(t)nf.

There have been numerous theoretical reconstructions of what Zaphenath-paneah was and meant in Egyptian, and none of the proposed original Egyptian spellings are found as a name of any prominent person in Egyptian history (who matches all the details of Joseph's story).

Besides which, if metathesis is possible then
Djed((u)-)en-ef pa'anakh
can very well match Djedef-re who is one of our 6 major Joseph candidates in the 2nd-5th dynasties period.

I am aware that Rohl also equates the 2nd part of the name (Paneah) with Ipiankhu, but this is also dubious for various reasons.
What happened to the I-? (and the -i/-i-? and the -u?)
It is not even totally definite that Paneah contains Ankh (I use the common spelling of that word not the "expertly correct" Egyptian spelling). And even if it does there are plenty of other persons in Egyptian history with ankh in their names (or with khet which Palmer says similarly means "living").
"Ipiankhu is an artificial construct".
There is no prominent person Ipiankhu, except for a vizier Ipi/Ipu who doesn't much match Joseph very well?
If anything it is more likely the Zaphenath is the name and the paneah extra, rather than the Zaphenath the extra and the Paneah the name.

Rohl says the name (Zatenaf or Ipiankhu?) "is a common name for a foreigner/slave in Egyptian society". But this is not a fit name for Joseph as adon over the land 2nd only to pharaoh.

When it comes down to it Rohl equates Zaphenath-paneah with Ipi/Ipu. I just can not see this names (and persons) match is very convincing or likely at all.

He has no person called Zaphenath-Paneah.
He has no person called Zaphenath.
He has no person called Paneah unless Ipiankh(u) is an attested prominent person's name (but even if he is he seems pretty unknown while Joseph was so famous he should be found easily and match a well known prominent person)?
He has no person called Aneah/Ankhu?
He only has a person called Ipi/Ipu who doesn't match very greatly.

Khety the vizier of Amenemhet III also seems like a poor match for Joseph. He doesn't even have a name Joseph or Zaphenath/Paneah?
And how can Rohl have Joseph as both vizier Ipi and vizier Khety?

As for (Rohl's?) In(yo)tef/Antef as possibly matchig Joseph, where are all the details matches between the 2 persons? And if Inyotef could match Joseph, then why can't Imhotep who has alot more better matches with Joseph?

For the statue of a person in a coloured garment I am very sceptical about that person's details matching Joseph's. But its a long time since I read he book about that person and I don't have the details here to discuss them.

Moreover, the 2nd/3rd-4th/5th dynasties period have alot more matches with all the details of the Genesis story of Joseph than the 11th-12th dynasty does. And Rohl has his "Joseph in the (11th? and/or) 12th dynasty too close to his "Moses in the (12th? and/or) 13th dynasty. And the 12th dynasty is too late in over all Egyptian history for Joseph who was earlier in overall Egyptian history (13th generation after Flood, 1st book of the bible, only 290/350/420 + 215 yrs after the Flood in Massoretic). Even if one accepted the longer period between Flood and Abraham iin the Septuagint and Samaritan, placing Joseph in the 11/12th dynasty still means sqeezing 10/11 dynasties (plus Lower Nubia dynasty, plus 1 or 2 or 3 predynastic dynasties) into just 13 generations between the Flood and Joseph (or even less between Babel and Joseph).
Also there is no 7 yrs worldwide famine in the 12th dynasty that I am aware of.
Post Reply