170 HEATH DEWRELL these are”. After which Judah does indeed discern (rkyw) and says (rmayw): “She is more righteous than I”. In Gen 37,32-33, Joseph’s brothers likewise send (wxlXyw) Joseph’s coat to their father, and they too say (wrmayw): “Discern (an rkh) whether the garment is your son’s or not”. In response, their father also discerns it (hrykyw) and says (rmayw): “It is my son’s garment” 22. While Cassuto argued that this is evidence that the Tamar and Judah story was part of the Joseph narra- tive from the beginning, more recent work has suggested that the par- allels are more likely the result of an editor’s having carefully woven the Tamar and Judah story into the Joseph story, connecting the two either by introducing language from the Tamar and Judah story into the surrounding Joseph material 23 or vice versa 24. In any case, it is clear that the Tamar and Judah story was not simply inserted into its current location, but that both the story and the surrounding narrative have undergone a degree of reworking in the process. For instance, Carr sees the insertion of the Tamar and Judah story as a “broader composition level spanning the Jacob-Joseph story”, the purpose of which was to emphasize Judah’s future ascendancy. other material that Carr assigns to this level are Gen 30,21; 34,1-31; 35,21-22a; 49,1b-29, the latter of which itself shows signs of having been reworked in a pro-Judah direction before its insertion into its present location 25. Whether or not one follows his argumentation in all its 22 u. CASSuTo, “The Story of Tamar and Judah”, Biblical and Oriental Studies 1 (Jerusalem 1973) 30-31. As Cassuto notes, these parallels were already observed as early as the Talmud (see b. Soṭa 10b; so also Gen. Rabba lxxxiv:xix and lxxxv:xi). So also R. ALTER, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New york 1981) 5-12; R.J. CLIFFoRD, “Genesis 38: Its Contribution to the Jacob Story”, CBQ 66 (2004) 519-532; and J. KRuSCHWITz, “The Type-Scene Connection between Genesis 38 and the Joseph Story”, JSOT 36 (2012) 383-410. 23 So E. BLuM, Die Komposition der Vätergeschichte (WMANT 57; Neurkirchen-Vluyn 1984) 244-245. 24 So W. DIETRICH, Die Josephserzählung als Novelle und Geschichtsschrei- bung. zugleich ein Beitrag zur Pentateuchfrage (Biblisch-Theologische Studien 14; Neukirchen-Vluyn 1989) 51 n. 144, and approvingly cited by CARR, Reading the Fractures of Genesis, 250 n. 51. 25 CARR, Reading the Fractures of Genesis, 248-253. The full redactional (pre-) history of Genesis 37 is (thankfully) beyond the scope of the present article. For two recent attempts at untangling the story’s various layers, which come to quite different conclusions on the matter, see P. WEIMAR, “Gen 37 — Eine vielschichtige literarische Komposition”, ZAW 118 (2006) 485-512, and B.J. SCHWARTz, “How the Compiler of the Pentateuch Worked: The Composition of Genesis 37”, The Book of Genesis. Composition, Reception, and Interpretation (eds. C.A. EVANS – J. N. LoHR – D. L. PETERSEN) (VTS 152; Leiden 2012) 263-278.