The interpretation timeline

Gen 39:14

How this passage has been read — the sources, oldest to newest.

From the early Church Fathers to now.

3 Patristic · 2 Jewish

Gen 39:14 · Douay-Rheims
“She called to her the men of her house, and said to them: See, he hath brought in a Hebrew, to abuse us: he came in to me, to lie with me: and when I cried out,”
Patristic before A.D. 750
397
A.D.
Ambrose of Milan Patristic
A.D. 339–397
“Indeed, Joseph went out of doors while she spread the news of the temptation that arose from her own adultery; she said in a loud voice that the Hebrew had fled and left his garment behind. Thus she revealed what she should have concealed, so as to do harm to an innocent man by inventing a crime. But the just man Joseph did not know how to make accusation, and so the impure woman accomplished this with impunity. Therefore I might say that she was the one who had really been stripped, although she was keeping the clothing of another. She had lost all the coverings of chastity, whereas he was sufficiently provided for and protected; his voice was not heard, and yet his blamelessness spoke for itself.”
Source
407
A.D.
John Chrysostom Patristic
A.D. 347–407
“But despite such a victory, despite such wonderful fortitude for which Joseph ought to have been rewarded, for which he ought to have been extolled, once more he endures countless troubles as though a guilty party. You see, the Egyptian woman did not take kindly at that stage to her shame and insult brought on herself by attempting the impossible. First she summoned those in the household and accused the young man and tried to mislead them all by claiming that the commands given by her in her frenzy had been uttered by him. This, in fact, is the way with wickedness, that it endeavors to attribute its own faults to the virtue that is under attack. That is exactly what she did in this case, portraying the young man as incontinent and giving herself the guise of chastity, saying that was the reason he had abandoned his clothes and she was left with them.”
Source
444
A.D.
Cyril of Alexandria Patristic
A.D. 376–444
“When Joseph was still young and at the end of his adolescence, he overcame the impudence of the Egyptian woman, even though he was dragged with great force to commit what was not lawful. In fact, this woman arguing with him impudently took the clothes off him and urged him to sin against his will. Actually he escaped from the furious lust of the woman after abandoning his cloak and could not be defeated by her strong will. Therefore he was accused of that action, since the woman turned the fault to him. In that dishonorable accusation, however, Joseph demonstrated great modesty and nobility. And he was thrown into the prison. Christ also was among the pagans, especially in the person of the holy apostles, who declared that they carried around on their own body his scars. They did not want to adjust themselves to those things that belong to the world but kept away from any desire of the flesh. And such is always the life of the saints. Therefore, for this reason, they were the object of many plots and were oppressed by the slander of those who were accustomed to regard those who wanted to live in Christ as unbearable, so that they fell into tremendous temptations and were imprisoned. However, they always bore in mind Christ's saying: "If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own. Because you do not belong to the world, therefore the world hates you," exactly as the lustful woman hated Joseph.”
Source
661 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
Scholastic c. 1100 – 1500
1105
A.D.
Rashi Jewish
1040–1105
“ראו הביא לנו SEE, HE HATH BROUGHT IN UNTO US — This is an elliptical phrase: “he hath brought in to us” without stating plainly who brought him in She was referring to her husband. עברי A HEBREW — is one who came from the other side (עבר) of the river Euphrates, being at the same time of the sons of Eber (אדניו).”
165 years pass — nothing from this stretch is hosted yet
1270
A.D.
Ramban Jewish
1194–1270
“SEE, HE HATH BROUGHT IN A HEBREW UNTO US. The meaning thereof is that the Hebrews were hated by the Egyptians. They did not eat with them, this being a matter of abhorrence to them. They did not purchase them as servants except as vinedressers and plowmen, but they would not permit them to come into their homes. This is why she said: “Behold, the master has done us evil by bringing a Hebrew into our home, and he has further appointed him as overseer and ruler, and now he has fittingly seen to mock us.” [The point of her statement] is similar to that which is said in the verse, He that delicately bringeth up his servant from a child shall have him become a master at the last. This is the meaning of her saying, Whom thou hast brought unto us, as his being brought into their house was in itself embarassing to them. In the verse before us, the expression, He has brought us, refers to her husband. She does not mention him by name out of respect, or perhaps because such is the ethical way for women to speak, or perhaps because it is known who brought Joseph into the house. Similarly, in many places in the book of Job it speaks of Almighty G-d anonymously because the conversants know that they are speaking of Him. Similarly, in the verse, And he said to Abner, Why hast thou gone in unto my father’s concubine? the name of the speaker is not mentioned, and no reference is made to him at all in the above verse because it is known that he was Ish-bosheth.”
Source
Modern · 1953 →

The in-app commentary runs from the Fathers to the early-modern record, then stops — that's where the public-domain sources end, not where the reading does. For the modern reading, follow the sources directly.