Old Testament Textual Commentary on Genesis 46:13

Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

Introduction to the Text

Genesis 46:13 states:

UASV:
“And the sons of Issachar: Tola, and Puvah, and Iob, and Shimron.”

Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT):
וּפֻוָּ֖ה וְי֥וֹב
“…Puvah, and Iob…”

This verse appears within a genealogical listing that records the sons of Jacob who went down into Egypt with him. These genealogical notations, which recur in various forms throughout the Pentateuch and the historical books, have long been the subject of textual scrutiny due to discrepancies across textual witnesses—most notably the Masoretic Text (MT), the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP), the Septuagint (LXX), the Syriac Peshitta (SYR), and the Hebrew Chronicles.

Analysis of the Names

1. Puvah (MT) vs. Puah (SP, SYR, 1 Chron. 7:1)

MT Reading: פֻוָּה (Puvah)
SP, SYR, and 1 Chron. 7:1: פוּעָה (Puah)

In Genesis 46:13, the MT reads Puvah (פֻוָּה), whereas the SP and SYR reflect the variant Puah (פוּעָה). The consonantal difference is minimal, involving only the interchange of ו (waw) with א (aleph) or possibly representing a textual vowel variation preserved through the oral tradition. The spelling in 1 Chronicles 7:1 confirms Puah (פֻעָה) as a valid and likely earlier or parallel tradition.

Evaluation:
Given that the Masoretic Text is the most meticulously preserved textual tradition, its witness is prioritized unless compelling evidence is presented. However, the alternative spelling in 1 Chronicles 7:1, which itself is part of the MT, lends internal corroboration to Puah. Thus, this is more of a variant orthography than a significant textual deviation. Such variants often reflect phonetic spelling adjustments or regional dialectal influences.

The preservation of Puah in both the SP and the SYR further supports the likelihood that this was the older form, with Puvah as a slightly later orthographic update or variant.

2. Iob (MT) vs. Jashub (SP, some LXX MSS, Num. 26:24; 1 Chron. 7:1)

MT Reading: יוב (Iob)
Alternative Reading: ישוב (Jashub)

This variation is more substantial. In Genesis 46:13, the MT reads Iob (יוב), while the SP and certain LXX manuscripts read Jashub (ישוב). This is particularly significant given that Jashub is the name found in two other parallel genealogical records:

Numbers 26:24: “These are the families of Issachar according to their clans: of Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Puvah, the family of the Punites.”
1 Chronicles 7:1: “And the sons of Issachar: Tola, and Puah, Jashub, and Shimron, four.”

This appears to be more than an orthographic variant. The names Iob and Jashub do not resemble one another phonetically or morphologically. It is unlikely that Jashub is a scribal error of Iob, or vice versa. Instead, we are dealing with a clear case of textual divergence.

Linguistic Considerations:
The name Jashub (ישוב) means “he will return,” derived from the root שׁוב (shuv, “to return”). This is a meaningful personal name, consistent with Hebrew naming conventions. In contrast, Iob (יוב) is difficult to analyze linguistically. It bears resemblance to the name Job (אִיּוֹב), but the forms are not identical, and there is no clear semantic meaning in this particular rendering of יוב.

Textual Considerations:
The reading Jashub is supported by both 1 Chronicles 7:1 and some LXX manuscripts. This creates a strong case for Jashub being the original name, with Iob being a scribal alteration or a rare variant tradition preserved in Genesis 46:13. The textual divergence may stem from a copyist error in which the yod (י) and waw (ו) were mistakenly transposed or confused in earlier script styles, such as Paleo-Hebrew or early Aramaic cursive forms.

Moreover, it is important to observe that Genesis 46:13 is part of an older text, and variations such as Iob might reflect an ancient reading preserved in only a few textual strands. However, the overwhelming agreement between SP, LXX (some), and 1 Chronicles 7:1 suggests Jashub is the preferred reading.

Historical and Textual Weighting

Following the sound principle of preferring the harder reading (lectio difficilior), one might argue for Iob as the more difficult and thus possibly original reading. However, this principle is secondary to external evidence when dealing with genealogical texts, where consistency across lineages is essential for the author’s intent.

Furthermore, since 1 Chronicles is believed to be written during the postexilic period and likely drew upon earlier genealogical sources, its alignment with SP and some LXX manuscripts strengthens the case for Jashub. It is more likely that Iob represents a copying error or a misreading in the MT of Genesis 46:13, especially given the weight of corroborating evidence from multiple textual traditions.

The Reading Culture of Early Christianity

Transmission and Scribal Behavior

Given that the MT, SP, LXX, and SYR traditions underwent separate copying traditions over centuries, divergences such as those seen in Genesis 46:13 often shed light on early textual instability in genealogical records. These records, often duplicated across multiple books, provide a fertile ground for tracing textual developments and clarifying original readings.

The Masoretes, inheriting the received text centuries later, preserved these readings with great care, but they did not attempt harmonization in every case—leaving traces of earlier forms such as Iob. This stands as testimony to their conservative textual philosophy, resisting the urge to align divergent readings without strong evidence.

Conclusion of Variant Readings in Genesis 46:13

The variant readings in Genesis 46:13 demonstrate the importance of cross-referencing parallel genealogical passages and consulting ancient versions. While the Masoretic Text offers Puvah and Iob, comparative analysis favors Puah and Jashub respectively. These readings are supported by 1 Chronicles 7:1 and other textual traditions such as the SP, LXX, and SYR. This supports the reliability of the biblical text while also showing how faithful transmission occasionally preserved regional or scribal variations. Through a conservative, historical-grammatical approach, we affirm the integrity and coherence of the genealogical record as accurately representing the descendants of Issachar in early Israelite history.

You May Also Enjoy

Textual Commentary on Genesis 41:56

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).