ספר ואלה שמות or שמות for short.
Έχοδος Αιγύπτου, or Έχοδος for short.
Does anyone here know what שמות means?
Does anyone here know what Έχοδος means?
Are they synonyms?
According to the JSB (p. 102), the Greek title, meaning "Departure from Egypt", is used by the Septuagint. It is meant to convey the general theme of the book. It is from this Greek title that we derive the English title "Exodus". The Hebrew title, meaning "the book of 'And these are the names'" is simply derived from the first words in the book.
Let's see if the Hebrew title is OK...
(א) וְאֵ֗לֶּה שְׁמוֹת֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל הַבָּאִ֖ים מִצְרָ֑יְמָה אֵ֣ת יַעֲקֹ֔ב אִ֥ישׁ וּבֵית֖וֹ בָּֽאוּ׃ (ב) רְאוּבֵ֣ן שִׁמְע֔וֹן לֵוִ֖י וִיהוּדָֽה׃ (ג) יִשָּׂשכָ֥ר זְבוּלֻ֖ן וּבְנְיָמִֽן׃ (ד) דָּ֥ן וְנַפְתָּלִ֖י גָּ֥ד וְאָשֵֽׁר׃ (ה) וַֽיְהִ֗י כָּל־נֶ֛פֶשׁ יֹצְאֵ֥י יֶֽרֶךְ־יַעֲקֹ֖ב שִׁבְעִ֣ים נָ֑פֶשׁ וְיוֹסֵ֖ף הָיָ֥ה בְמִצְרָֽיִם׃
(1) NOW THESE are the names of the sons of Israel, who came into Egypt with Jacob; every man came with his household: (2) Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah; (3) Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin; (4) Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher. (5) And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls; and Joseph was in Egypt already.
The first words are indeed ואלה שמות. Check. And there are indeed a bunch of names mentioned. Check.
Now, how about the Greek title?
(כט) וַיְהִ֣י ׀ בַּחֲצִ֣י הַלַּ֗יְלָה וַֽיהוָה֮ הִכָּ֣ה כָל־בְּכוֹר֮ בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַיִם֒ מִבְּכֹ֤ר פַּרְעֹה֙ הַיֹּשֵׁ֣ב עַל־כִּסְא֔וֹ עַ֚ד בְּכ֣וֹר הַשְּׁבִ֔י אֲשֶׁ֖ר בְּבֵ֣ית הַבּ֑וֹר וְכֹ֖ל בְּכ֥וֹר בְּהֵמָֽה׃ (ל) וַיָּ֨קָם פַּרְעֹ֜ה לַ֗יְלָה ה֤וּא וְכָל־עֲבָדָיו֙ וְכָל־מִצְרַ֔יִם וַתְּהִ֛י צְעָקָ֥ה גְדֹלָ֖ה בְּמִצְרָ֑יִם כִּֽי־אֵ֣ין בַּ֔יִת אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵֽין־שָׁ֖ם מֵֽת׃ (לא) וַיִּקְרָא֩ לְמֹשֶׁ֨ה וּֽלְאַהֲרֹ֜ן לַ֗יְלָה וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ ק֤וּמוּ צְּאוּ֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ עַמִּ֔י גַּם־אַתֶּ֖ם גַּם־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וּלְכ֛וּ עִבְד֥וּ אֶת־יְהוָ֖ה כְּדַבֶּרְכֶֽם׃ (לב) גַּם־צֹאנְכֶ֨ם גַּם־בְּקַרְכֶ֥ם קְח֛וּ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּרְתֶּ֖ם וָלֵ֑כוּ וּבֵֽרַכְתֶּ֖ם גַּם־אֹתִֽי׃
(29) And it came to pass at midnight, that the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the first-born of cattle. (30) And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. (31) And he called for Moses and Aaron by night and said: ‘Rise up, get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said. (32) Take both your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.’
Pharaoh said, "be gone". Sounds like a departure to me, so 'check' on this one too. The only problem is that we have to wait until Parashat Bo for it to make any sense. So I'll stick the the Rabbis' tradition that gives the first parasha of each book the same name as the book itself.
This week we are in parashat Sh'mot, and we have a fine selection of names from which to choose. We can start with the nameless one, the "new king who arose over Egypt and did not know Joseph". The verse states:
(ח) וַיָּ֥קָם מֶֽלֶךְ־חָדָ֖שׁ עַל־מִצְרָ֑יִם אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹֽא־יָדַ֖ע אֶת־יוֹסֵֽף׃
(8) Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph.
Friedman notes (p. 169) that there are five Pharaohs in the Torah, and none of them are named. {the one who took Sarah, the one who knew Joseph, the one who did not know Joseph, the one who sought to kill Moses, and the one with the hard heart} Names of Pharaohs are given in later books. In this case, he is not even called "Pharaoh" -- a reverential Egyptian term. He is simply מלך חדש על מצרים.
Could it be that the author of this work didn't care about names? Hardly. He just named all of Jacob's sons, repeating what we read at the end of Genesis. Could it be that they weren't important? Doubtful. Charlton Heston would have been lost without Pharaoh playing the part of villain. Could it be that the author forgot who they were? Well, they were Pharaohs, with magnificent tombs and steles listing their feats. In an era in which oral tradition was so important, it doesn't seem likely that such important names wouldn't be remembered. We know many of their names 2000 years later.
Or...
Maybe they were "forgotten" intentionally. After John Wilkes Booth's accomplices were convicted and hanged, a newspaper editor wrote: "We want to know their names no more." Perhaps the Hebrews wanted to "remember Pharaoh no more".
The contrast is even more striking when we read later in the same chapter:
(טו) וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ מִצְרַ֔יִם לַֽמְיַלְּדֹ֖ת הָֽעִבְרִיֹּ֑ת אֲשֶׁ֨ר שֵׁ֤ם הָֽאַחַת֙ שִׁפְרָ֔ה וְשֵׁ֥ם הַשֵּׁנִ֖ית פּוּעָֽה׃ (טז) וַיֹּ֗אמֶר בְּיַלֶּדְכֶן֙ אֶת־הָֽעִבְרִיּ֔וֹת וּרְאִיתֶ֖ן עַל־הָאָבְנָ֑יִם אִם־בֵּ֥ן הוּא֙ וַהֲמִתֶּ֣ן אֹת֔וֹ וְאִם־בַּ֥ת הִ֖יא וָחָֽיָה׃
(15) And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of whom the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah; (16) and he said: ‘When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, ye shall look upon the birthstool: if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.’
The unnamed "king of Egypt" is juxtaposed with the names of two "mere women": our heroic midwives Shiphrah and Puah. Here the author -- who thought that Rebecca had only two sons and that Jacob's four mates produced only one girl -- goes out of his way to name these two heroines.
It would seem that the lesson here is that names -- and the absence of names -- was very important to the author(s) of the Torah.
And so it would seem that the Rabbis' seemingly non-descriptive title is much more fitting than Έχοδος Αιγύπτου after all.
JSB = Jewish Study Bible
Friedman = Commentary on the Torah, by Richard Elliott Friedman