The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 80 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Contested Kingship: Joseph, Jehoiachin, and Judah in Genesis 49
Open accessAbstract
The so-called blessings of Jacob in Gen 49 are full of textual and interpretive difficulties. The concentration of these difficulties in the verses concerning Judah (Gen 49:8–12) and Joseph (Gen 49:22–26) points to their origin in conflict over the locus of legitimate kingship. This article argues that a number of these problems are a result of disputes between the descendants of those deported to Babylon with Jehoiachin in 597 BCE and the descendants of those left behind with Zedekiah in the homeland. The high concentration of textual problems in Gen 49 is consistent with similar textual difficulties in other texts concerned with this conflict.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Genesis 49’s concentrated textual and interpretive problems in the Judah (49:8–12) and Joseph (49:22–26) blessings are argued to stem from a sixth-century BCE contest over legitimate kingship. The paper reads Joseph as a cypher for Jehoiachin and the 597 BCE Babylonian deportees, and Judah as a cypher for Zedekiah and those left in the homeland, with Gen 49:8 as a later pro-Judah editorial intervention.
Key findings
- The difficulties in Gen 49:8–12 and 49:22–26 are not random but point to conflict between Judah and Joseph over legitimate royal authority.
- Joseph’s blessing in Gen 49:22–26 is read as affirming Josephite/Jehoiachin authority: Joseph is called “son of the Euphrates” (v. 22), his offspring are imagined along Babylonian waterways, and v. 26b declares him “set apart from his brothers” with royal-crown language.
- Judah’s blessing in Gen 49:8–12 is read as originally negative: v. 9 uses lion imagery linked to Ezek 19’s negative portrayal of Zedekiah, v. 10 alludes to Judah’s sexual/moral failure with Tamar in Gen 38, and vv. 11–12 depict foolishness and excess.
- Gen 49:8 is identified as an editorial attempt to claim Joseph’s fraternal authority for Judah, contradicting the novella’s consistent pattern in which the brothers bow down to Joseph (Gen 37:7, 9; 42:6; 43:26, 28).
Methods
- Text-critical and exegetical analysis of Gen 49:8–12 and 49:22–26, with attention to Hebrew consonantal text, Masoretic pointing, versions, and proposed emendations.
- Intertextual comparison with other Hebrew Bible passages concerned with sixth-century displacement and royal legitimacy, especially Ezek 37:15–22, Ezek 19, 2 Kgs 25:27–30, Jeremiah, Obadiah, and Zechariah.
- Historical-contextual argument using recent work on sixth-century BCE identity politics, distinguishing the 597 BCE deportees with Jehoiachin from those left with Zedekiah, and later deportations in 586 and 582 BCE.
Limitations
- The paper states that its aim is not to dispel all difficulties completely, but to identify their primary cause and clarify implications.
- It states that some extant text concerning Judah remains “stubbornly obscure,” and that a detailed analysis of Judah’s appearances in the rest of the novella is beyond its scope.
- It states that it is not arguing that either the extant novella as a whole or Gen 49 specifically must date to the early sixth century; it instead connects these chapters to a longer history of conflict.
- Evident from the text: the argument depends on reconstructed redactional history and cypher-based identity mapping, and it repeatedly acknowledges that certainty about some textual readings and historical referents remains elusive.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
72 Own interpretation · 55 Sources not found · 17 No basis given · 3 Own result · 1 Not checked yet
In the paper
“from Judah's own lips issues the conclusion that ›she is more righteous than I‹ (Gen 38:26).3”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:26
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Genesis 49 contains several of the Hebrew Bible's most puzzling textual and interpretive difficulties, concentrated in the verses concerning Judah (Gen 49:8-12) and Joseph (Gen 49:22-26).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Judah's first appearance depicts him as a self-interested opportunist, intervening in his brothers' plot to kill Joseph by proposing an alternative that achieves the brothers' ends and financial gain in addition (Gen 37:26-28).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37:26-28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 22 depicts this watery שור as something beside which one might go for a walk .)צעד(”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The novella repeatedly describes Joseph's destruction at the hands of his brothers using this root's verbal form, טרף ›to tear‹.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37:33
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 44:28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To put it plainly: nowhere else do the other sons of Jacob make obeisance to Judah.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These interactions between Joseph and his brothers tell a clear story, because every single instance of obeisance in the entire novella involves members of the family bowing down to Joseph.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the verb is not common, all of its other occurrences refer unambiguously to ambulatory activity -walking, striding, marching, and so on.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact v. 8 has succeeded remarkably well, if this was its intended purpose: primed by v. 8's enthusiasm, the following verses have been read by interpreters overwhelmingly in positive terms.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Given the ambivalence of this material, the conclusion that the novella's depiction of Judah is meant positively is largely dependent on the ›blessing‹ spoken over him in Gen 49:8-12.5”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 69
- It may state two separate claims as one. 52
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“His next appearance is equally ignominious: a lengthy account of his ill treatment of Tamar that runs the gamut from cruelty -sending the twice-widowed woman back to her father's house, rather than provide for her appropriately as her father-in-lawto the absurd -soliciting the veiled Tamar for sex, then failing to recognise her despite extended conversation and (presumably) close personal contact.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Authority among the brothers is otherwise clearly and consistently granted to Joseph, with the only real question in the novella being how Joseph's authority is to be established.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More specifically, it is due to v. 8, which introduces this blessing with an announcement of Judahite supremacy, promising the other brothers' obeisance and priming the reader for a thoroughgoing paean to Judah's superiority in the following verses.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The blessing's sweeping scope -›blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that rests beneath‹ תחת( רבצת תהום ברכת מעל שמים )ברכת -is emphatic, and its manifestation in abundant fertility is explicit: ›blessings of breasts and womb‹ ורחם( שדים .)ברכת”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As the text stands, it appears to say that these paternal blessings on Joseph have prevailed over those of הורי ›the one who bore me‹.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Upon inspection, what actually follows is rather less favourable than v. 8 leads the reader to expect: the leonine imagery in v. 9 depicts Judah's fraternal cruelty; v. 10 recalls his sexual and moral shortcomings; and the absurd imagery in v. 11 underscores his reputation for foolishness.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the novella, the Tamar episode appears immediately after the account of Joseph's disappearance, to which v. 9 just referred, and several elements of v. 10 appear to allude to this next phase of the story.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This is explicit in the first verse, which iden-tifies Joseph as פרת בן ›son of the Euphrates‹ (v.22).14”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The main problem in v. 10bβ lies with ,יקהת which -apart perhaps from Prov 30:17 -is otherwise unknown and difficult to make sense of.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Prov 30:17
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The unusually high concentration of textual problems contained in Gen 49:8-12,22-26 is, moreover, in keeping with similar difficulties in other texts concerned with this conflict.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The result is a ›sanitized self-portrait‹ that fools Jacob, but should not fool the reader.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Curiously, however, the attention to Judah that these passages effect fails to clearly improve the novella's overall depiction of Judah's character or his standing vis-à-vis Joseph.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The ›shepherd's legacy‹ refers to Jacob, whose lengthy employment as shepherd to Laban's flocks is a central plot point in the traditions surrounding him.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 46-47
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, it argues that ›Judah‹ represents those left behind in the land with Zedekiah after 597 BCE and that ›Joseph‹ represents those taken to Babylon with Jehoiachin.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Viewed in these terms, the novella's preference for Joseph falls in line with a widespread biblical preference for the 597 BCE deportees, whilst the lesser positioning of Judah reflects the tradition's negativity regarding those who stayed in the homeland.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this is difficult to explain for those who view the whole of Gen 49 as very old, but makes sense if the Joseph material in its extant form reflects the hopes and claims of the Mesopotamian diaspora.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Joseph, in contrast, is depicted throughout the narrative as the brother who has the right to rule over the others, as a man who is blessed by the presence of God, and in overall positive terms (esp.Gen 37; 39; 41; 45; 50).8”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 39
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 41
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 26a thus appears to be a further affirmation that Joseph will surpass his father, Jacob: Jacob's blessing of Joseph will prove even stronger )גבר( than the blessing for Jacob obtained by Rebekah.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The book of Ezekiel, which seeks, in the face of a traumatic experience of involuntary migration, to preserve a sense of community rooted in the deportees' shared Israelite heritage.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ezekiel
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the one side was Jehoiachin, supported by the deportees with whom he had been taken to Babylon; on the other was Zedekiah, viewed by those in the homeland as the legitimate king of Judah after Jehoiachin's departure.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Wherever the term appears, it is an image of death.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most immediately, understanding that this blessing speaks of Joseph as a ›son of the Euphrates‹ and imagines his copious offspring strolling along the moats and canals of Babylon allows the interpretive gymnastics involving ambulatory flora -the daughterly branches running awkwardly over dubious walls -to be abandoned with a sigh of relief.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Judah's character is aptly described as מטרף ›rapacious‹; his opposition to Joseph's death is motivated not by fraternal amity but by desire for profit (Gen 37:26-27) and his actions vis-à-vis his nuclear family are callous and self-serving (Gen 38).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37:26-27
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 38
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The blessing upon Joseph thus concludes with a robust affirmation of his royal authority over his brothers, despite the wider context of displacement from the family homeland -a message that is fully in keeping with the favour shown”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The principal target of the allegory is Zedekiah, and both the immediate depiction of the lions and the book's overall antipathy for this last king of Judah (Ezek 12:8-16; 17:1-24; 21:29-32; cf.22:6-12) make it highly improbable that the likening of this part of the royal family to a pride of lions was meant positively.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ezek 12:8-16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ezek 17:1-24
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ezek 21:29-32
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the subject of צעד is elsewhere invariably divine or human, and the evidence in this regard is sufficiently robust and sufficiently consistent as to lead to a strong expectation that צעד should have a personified subject also in v. 22.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Especially notable is that the Joseph traditions are intensely concerned with issues of authority and leadership, and the deportation of Jehoiachin in 597 BCE and the appointment of Zedekiah as a rival king in Jerusalem provoked a fierce dispute over the locus of royal legitimacy.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The deportees' claims mine Joseph's leadership and, by extension, the legitimacy of the northern kingdom or its successor province.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although שבט may be used for a (royal) sceptre, its more frequent use is ›tribe‹ or (punitive) ›rod‹.48”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites HALOT 4:1387-1390
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The offensiveness of the union is made clear by the admission that ›he did not know her again‹ (Gen 38:26, cf.Lev 18:15; 20:12).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:26
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Lev 18:15
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Lev 20:12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Almost every word here emphasises Joseph's leadership role.ראש ›head‹ is a common, somatically-informed metaphor for authority; קדקד”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Evidence of these various efforts appears first after the deportation of Jerusalem's senior elites in 597 BCE, intensifies over the course of the kingdom's final decade, and is sustained finally by the kingdom's provincialisation in 586 BCE.9”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [9]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Read with an eye for Joseph's ability to represent Jehoiachin, these verses affirm Jehoiachin's claim to the throne and assure the deportee community that they will not merely survive in Babylon, but thrive.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This argument over the locus of kingship could be articulated in terms of a contest of authority between Joseph and Judah, with Joseph representing Jehoiachin and the deportees taken into exile and Judah representing Zedekiah and those left in the homeland.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By the time the chapter concludes, Judah's failure to give Tamar to Shelah in marriage has been compounded by a self-absorbed stupidity that leads him to have sex with Tamar, without even realising who she is.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That this is not the natural way to read vv.9-12 is indicated first by the text-critical and exegetical quagmire that surrounds these verses.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ease with which the statements of v. 8 may be understood with reference to Joseph suggests that most of this verse probably originated as a description of Joseph, not Judah.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The section climaxes with a re-affirmation of Joseph's superiority amongst the siblings, declaring that these abundant blessings will fall ›upon the head of Joseph, upon the crown of the head of the one who is set apart from his brothers‹ יוסף לראש אחיו נזיר ולקדקד (v.26b).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah is presented remarkably negatively in the novella proper, beginning with his first appearance in Gen 37 and persisting even into his apparently selfless offer to stand surety for Benjamin, which instead serves to highlight his shortcomings vis-à-vis Jacob.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The final form of the text, however, has interfered with these assessments.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If Jacob is the imagined speaker, the latter would then refer to Rebekah.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The family profession is subsequently adopted by his sons, who are introduced as shepherds (Gen 37) and insist upon this identification when they encounter pharaoh in Egypt (Gen 46-47).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 37
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 46-47
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The root ,נזר in general terms ›to set apart, consecrate‹, is used in several contexts of royal authority, including the identification of a crown prince, heir presumptive to the kingship (2Chr 11:22).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 2Chr 11:22
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lack of any other serious candidate for leadership in the novella instead supports the conclusion that commentators seem determined to avoid, namely, that -as he twice dreamt -Joseph is meant to rule over his brothers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Reading בנות as it appears -›daughters‹ -not only provides a suitable subject for צעד but also a female counterweight to the description of Joseph as a ›son‹.20”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The transfer was probably inspired -and certainly facilitated -by the assonance of the verb )ידה( with the name Judah ,)יהודה( yet even this is a tell-tale sign that something is amiss.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The dispute between those deported to Babylonia by Nebuchadnezzar and those left behind in the land of Judah is well known and widely discussed; it is first and vividly attested in the sixth century prophetic books of Ezekiel and Jeremiah, and its long shadow falls across almost all literature of the sixth and fifth centuries.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ezekiel
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Jeremiah
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This negative assessment of Judah's character extends into the rest of the blessing.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The resulting textual quagmire attests to both the vehemence and the persistence of these struggles.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In keeping with the dominant narrative thread of the novella and the disposition of the Hebrew Bible more broadly, the blessings of Gen 49 originally expressed a preference for Joseph (the Babylonian deportees), accompanied by a rejection of Judah (those left behind in the homeland).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Less recognised is that this dispute could be articulated in terms of a contest between Israel and Judah: those taken to Babylonia claimed to be the true Israel, whilst those left in the land coalesced around the Judahite homeland.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The thrust of the blessing is to insist that Joseph's royal claim cannot be eliminated simply by expelling him to a foreign land: even as his offspring long for home, they retain their claims to authority over the entire people of Israel.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but the use of צעד elsewhere vies against this; בנות ›daughters‹ is never otherwise used to mean ›branches‹”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The picture of Judah's character painted by the story is not a complimentary one.He is shown having a lengthy (by biblical standards) conversation with his daughter-in-law, yet is so unobservant that he fails to realise who she is.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:26
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Judah's ill-advised behaviour further extends to getting drunk and overeating: he is described as having ›eyes dull from wine‹ מיין( עינים ,חכלילי v. 12a) and teeth smeared with fat מחלב( שנים ,לבן v. 12b).58”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [58]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As with similar efforts elsewhere, the consequences are awkward: clumsy syntax, followed by an interpretive quagmire that has stymied commentators for centuries.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a similar vein, the Greek and Hebrew versions of Ezek 37 interfered with a text that originally favoured Joseph, bringing Judah into prominence at the cost of a painfully mangled text.62”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [62]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This leaves the final word, ;עמים in light of the preceding, this seems to be either an error for or an allusion to ענים ›Enaim‹”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the latter, those left in the land with Zedekiah between 597 BCE and 586 BCE are portrayed as having been given a temporary reprieve, of which they failed to take advantage.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high concentration of textual problems in Gen 49 is consistent with similar textual difficulties in other texts concerned with this conflict.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In v. 18 the verb קוה ›to wait‹ is similarly disconnected from its immediate context, suggesting that v. 10bβ could have originated as a pious gloss, since distorted, but the absence of a divine epithet weighs against this.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 10, taken altogether, thus warns that Judah's punishment will not be forgotten; it serves as ›a witness that he entered her skirts, whilst she waited for him at Enaim‹ ענים( קותה ולו שולה יבא כי .)עד”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The final two verses of the oracle turn from Judah's specific crimes to a more general depiction of his foolishness.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Punishment has been decreed )מחקק( and Judah will not escape.54”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [54]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Commentators are surprisingly insistent that binding donkeys to vines (v.11a) is an image of overabundance, but it is patently stupid to bind herbivorous animals to edible plants.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For the most part, the novella affirms the Josephites' rightful dominance, even as it acknowledges the possibility that Joseph might misuse his power.65”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [65]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the novella as in other texts concerned with post-597 BCE leadership claims, Judah's standing vis-à-vis Joseph forms a point of particular concern.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“With an eye to the novella we might note that the reference to sheepshearers צאנו( )גזזי in Gen 38:12 intimates that Judah had been eating and drinking heavily by the time he encountered Tamar on the road to Enaim (cf.2Sam 13:23-28).60”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 2Sam 13:23-28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [60]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Part of the fault for this lies at the feet of Ezekiel, which insistently champions the 597 BCE contingent.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This preference for the deportees, over and against those left in the homeland, extends also to the literature of the postexilic period; whilst not quite absolute, its canonical dominance is overwhelming.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“That there was not one but several sixth century deportations is often ignored by the scholarly literature on this period, which tends to elide the deportation of Jehoiachin and others of Jerusalem's upper class in 597 BCE with the later deportations of 586 BCE and 582 BCE.63”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [63]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This might explain his failure to recognise herthough it might also have proved an impediment to Tamar's procreative aims.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In revealing this Judahite sleight of hand, the foregoing has identified the origins of this textual confusion in the wider and well-known context of struggles between those left in the homeland and those deported to Babylonia.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a few places, as in Ezek 37 and Gen 49, these annotations go beyond assertions of equal standing and claim Judahite superiority.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once a straightforward affirmation of Josephite authority, Gen 49's extant form takes the traditional language of Josephite rule and applies it to Judah, claiming on behalf of those with lingering ties to the homeland the prerogatives otherwise clearly and exclusively granted to their brothers in Babylonia.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of these annotations distinguish these later deportees by referring to them as ›Judahites‹ -recognising that their unique experiences differentiated them from earlier deportees and marking this difference with nomenclature developed in the homeland.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Likewise, washing one's garments in wine (v.11b) is a quick route to ruined clothing.57”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [57]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, in Gen 49, an originally condemnatory word over Judah was given a pro-Judah preface -forcing a more positive evaluation of Judah, even as it made an interpretive quagmire of what follows.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As noted above, the biblical traditions express a strong preference for those taken to Babylonia, together with a highly negative attitude toward those left in the homeland.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whatever the contextual nuances of this final comment, it seems to be a continuation of these verses' poor assessment of Judah's character.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This association is reinforced by ,בוא which has well-known sexual connotations (Gen 16:2; 19:31; 30:3-4; 38:8; Deut 22:13; 25:5; 2Sam 16:21)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 16:2; 19:31; 30:3-4; 38:8; Deut 22:13; 25:5; 2Sam 16:21
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The verb סור ›to turn, set aside‹ also nods to the Tamar episode: Tamar was able to set aside )סור( her widow's attire (Gen 38:14) and then the veil she had used for disguise (Gen 38:19), but here Judah will not be able to set aside )סור( the consequences of his own behaviour (v.10bα).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:14
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:19
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The otherwise unknown form חכלילי is probably derived from ,חכל cognate with the Akkadian ekēlu ›to be dark‹, and indicative of a gloomy or dull demeanour, rather than the ›sparkling‹ eyes most commentators seek.59”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [59]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the penultimate chapter of the story, however, supporters of Judah's claims have made a final, valiant effort to assert Judah over Joseph.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Yet, despite Ezekiel's rejection of anyone left in Judah after 597 BCE, the fall of Jerusalem brought another wave of the kingdom's former inhabitants to Babylonia, first in 586 BCE and probably again in 582 BCE (Jer 52:30).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jer 52:30
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“whilst the proximity of שולה/שילה to שלה ›Shelah‹, the name of the son whom Judah ought to have given to Tamar (Gen 38:11,14,26), adds a further layer to the connection.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gen 38:11,14,26
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the history of interpretation shows that commentators have by and large been duped by v. 8, and by their own expectations of Judahite superiority, into reading vv.9-12 as though they spoke positively of Judah.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The novella's determined preference for Joseph, the first brother to go into exile, echoes the claims of those deported with Jehoiachin.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Jehoiachin deportees claimed a special affinity with Joseph.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once Joseph is recognised as a cypher for the Jehoiachin deportees, Gen 49's preference for Joseph falls into line with the rest of the Hebrew Bible's similar preference for the deportees, with Judah's lesser status in keeping with the Hebrew Bible's denigration of those who had been left behind in the homeland (and their descendants).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Jehoiachin deportees claimed a special affinity with Joseph.
In the paper
“Proverbs 23:29-30 uses an abstract noun from the same root to refer to the עינים חכללות ›dull eyes‹ of those who spend too much time drinking.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Proverbs 23:29-30
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Apart from v. 8, which primes the reader to read otherwise, the text is an unremittingly negative litany of Judah's shortcomings: his ruthless involvement in efforts to get rid of Joseph, his manifold offences vis-à-vis Tamar, and his persistent foolishness.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The extant form of Gen 49 may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.
“the following assumes that its extant form may be legitimately interpreted in conversation with the preceding narrative.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Jehoiachin deportees claimed a special affinity with Joseph.
“although the former may also be identified with reference to Joseph, with whom the Jehoiachin deportees claimed a special affinity.”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Judah -you! Your brothers will praise you, your hand is on the neck of your enemies; your father's sons will bow down to you. 9 Judah is a lion cub: rapacious, my son, you rise. 34 Deut 28:13 (cf. Deut 28:44); Judg 10:18; 11:8-9,11; 2Sam 22:44 // Ps 18:43; Jer 13:21; Ps 118:22; Lam 1:5; 1Chr 11:6; 26:10; 29:11; 2Chr 11:22; for ,קדקד Jer 2:16,45, cf. Akkadian qaqqadu. On the royal enten- dre of this verse see Kristin M. Swenson, »Crowned with Blessings: The Riches of Double-Meaning in Gen 49,20b,« ZAW 120 (2008) 422-425.
- David M. Gunn and Dana N. Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, OBS (Oxford: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1993), 34-45; Wünsch, »Genesis 38«: 792-794.
- Vincent L. Tollers and John R. Maier (London: Associated University Press, 1990) 215-232: 219 f.
Cited by
Still being checked.
Metadata
- Authors
- Crouch, C. L.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Crouch, C. L.
- ORCID
- Crouch, C. L.
- Venue
- Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2025-05-01
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 185-211
- ISSN
- 0044-2526 (ISSN-L)
- 1613-0103
- OpenAlex
- W4410532632
- Semantic Scholar
- e5901b2889affdd1a130fb9edeb9a1c7a62de477
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient Near East History
- Keywords
- Genesis 49, Jacob's blessing, Joseph, Judah, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah, Babylonian exile, kingship, textual criticism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
