PART FORTY-FOUR

EDOMITE GENEALOGIES
(Genesis 3 6 :1-43)
The Biblical Account
1 Now these are the generations of Esau (the same
is Edom). 2 Esau toolt his wives of the daughters of
Canaan: Adah the daughter of Eloiz the Hittite, aizd
Oholibainah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon
the Hiuite, 3 a?zd Basemath Ishmael's daughter, sister of
Nebaioth, 4 And Adah bare to Esau Eliphaz; aiid Base-
math bare Reuel; r and Oholibanzah bare Jeush, and Jalam,
and Korab: these are the sons of Esau, that were born
unto hinz in the land of Canaan. 6 And Esau took. his
wives, and his sons, and his daughters, and all the souls
of his house, and his cattle, and all his beasts, and all his
possessions, which he had gathered in the land of Canaan;
and went into a land away f i p o i n his brother Jacob. 7 For
their substance was too great for them to dwell together;
and the land of their sojournings could not bear them be-
cause of their cattle. 8 And Esau dwelt in mount Seir:
Esau is Edom.
9 And these are the generations of Esau the father
of the Edoinites in inount Seir: 1 0 these are the names of
E s a d s sons: Eliphaz the son of Adah the' wife of Esau,
Reuel the son of Baseinath the wife of Esau. 11 And the
sons of Elipbaz were Teinaiz, Oiizar, Zepho and Gatam, and
Kenaz. 12 And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's
son; and she bare to Eliphaz Aina1eK:'these are the sons
of Adah, Esau's wife. 13 And these are the sons of Reuel:
Nabath, and Zerah, Shamnzah, and Mizzah: these were
the sons of Basenzath, Esau's wife, 14 And these were
the SOBS of Oholibamah the daughter of An,ah, the daugb-
ter of Zibeon, Esau's wife: and she bare to Esau Jeush,
and Jalam,and Korah.
45 1
 GENESIS
1J These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau: the s o d
of Eliphaz the first-born of Esau: chief Teman, chief
Omar, chief Zepho, chief Kenaz, 16 chief Korah, chieif
Gatam, chief Amalek: these are the chiefs that came of
Eliphuz in the land of Edom; these are the suns of Adah;
17 And these are the sons of Reuel, Esau’s son: chicf
Nahath, chief Zerab, chief Shammab, chief Mizzah: these
are the chefs that came of Reuel in the land of Edomj
these are the sons of Basemath, Esau’s wife. 1 8 And these
are the sons of 0holibum&, Esau’s wife: chief Jeush,
Jalam, chief Korah: these are the chiefs that came of
ibamah the daughter of Anah, Esads wife. 19 These a
the sons of Esaab, and these ure their chiefs: the same
Edom.
20 These me the sons of Seir the Hwite, the inhabi
tants of the land: Lotan and Shobal aGd Zibeolz and Anah,
21 and Dishon and Ezer and Dishan: these are the chiejs
thpt came of the Horites, the children of Seir in the land
of Edom. 22 And the children of Lotan were Hori and
Hemun; and Lotun’s sister was Timna. 23 And these
are the children of Sbobal: Alvan and Manahath and Ebal,
Sbepho and Onam. 24 And these are the children of
Zibeon: Aiah and Anah; this is Anah who found the hot
springs in the wilderness, as he f e d the asses of Zibem
his father. 2 j And these are the children of Anah: Disholz
and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah. 26 And these are
the children of Dishon: Hemdan and Eshban and Ithan
artd Cheran. 27 These are the children of Ezar: Bilhan
and Zaavan and Akan. 28 These are the children of Dis-
ban: U z and Aran. 29 These are the chiefs that came of
the Horites: chief Lotan, chief Shobal, chief Zibeon, chief
Anah, 30 chief Dishon, chief Ezer, chief Dishan: these are
the chiefs that came of the Hovites, according to their
chiefs in the land of Seir.
31 And these are the kings that reigned in the land uf
Edom, before there reigqed any king over the children of
452
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES
Israel. 32 A n d Bela the SOIZ of Beor reigned in E d o m ;
hn,d the name of his city was Diiihabab. 3 3 And Bela
?lied, aiZd Jobab the son of Zerah o f Bozrah reigned in his
itead. 34 A n d Jobab died, and H u s h a m of the land of
i%e Teiizaiaites reigiied in his stead. 3 j A n d Husham died,
&id Hadad the son of Bedad, who siizote Midian i,n the field
of Moab, reigned iia his stead: and the name of his city
was Avith. 36 A n d Hadad died, and Saiizlah of Masrekab
reigned in his stepd. 37 Aiid Sainlah died, and S h a d of
Reboboth by’the River reigned in his stead. 3 8 A n d Shaul
died, aizd Baal-haizan the soiz of Achbor reigned in his
stead. 39 Aiid Baal-banan the son of Achbor died, and
Hadar reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was
Pau; and his wife’s name was Mebetabel, the daughter o f
Matred,
‘
the daughter of Me-zahab.
40 A n d these are the naines of the chiefs that came
of Esau, according to their fanzilies, after their places, by
)heir naines: chief Tiiima, chief Alvah, Chief Jetheth, 41
chief Obolibanzah, chief Elah, chief Pinon, 42 chief Kenaz,
chief Teinaiz, chief Mibzar, 43 chief Magdiel, chief Iranz:
these are the chiefs of Edom, accordiisg to their habitatiovs
in the land of their possessions. This is Esau, the father
of the Edomites.
1. The History of Esau.
‘‘ ‘Esau and Jacob shook hands once more over the
corpse of their father. Henceforth their paths diverged,
to meet no more’ (Delitzsch). As Esau had also received
a divine promise (25:23), and the history of his tribe was
already interwoven in the paternal blessing with that of
Israel (27:29 and 40), an account is given in the book of
Genesis of his growth into a nation; and a separate section
is devoted to this, which, according to the invariable plan
of the book, precedes the tholcdoth of Jacob” (K-D,
3 2 0 ) . The account subdivides into six (or perhaps 7)
sections, depending on the inclusion of vv. 6-8 into the
45 3
36:l-43 GENESIS
first section which woul hen begin with v. 1 an
clude with v. 8, as in the pages here infra. Skinne
gests seven sub-divisions as follows: ( 1 1 “Esau’s wives.
and children (vv. 1-5) ; (2) His migration to Mounb:
Seir (vv. 6-8) : (3) a list of Esau’s descendants (vv. 9-
14) ; (4) an enumeration of clans or clan-chiefs of Esad’
(vv. 15-19> ; (J two Horite lists: a genealogy (vv. 20-
2 8 ) , a list of clans (vv. 29-30); (6) the kings of Edonw
(vv. 3 1-39) ; ( 7 ) a second list of clans of Esau (vv. 40n.
4 3 ) . The lists are repeated with variations ’in 1 Chrowb
1 :3 5-54) ” (ICCG, 4 2 8 ) . Kraeling suggests the followingc.
subsections: ( 1 ) the tribes that could claim descent from;
Esau; (2) the “dukes” or chiefs of the sons of Esau, ‘%e
probably the centers furnishing a thousand-man unit f o
the Edomite army”; ( 3 ) the tribes of the pre-Edomitb
inhabitants who are called Horites; ( 4 ) the Edomite kings
who had reigned before Israel had a king. (See Kraeling,
BAY8 9 ) .
“The Edomites apparently had an illustrious history.
Little is known about them beyond this summary account
(Gen. 3 6: 1-43 ) which indicates that they had several
kings even before any king reigned in Israel. In this way
the Genesis narrative disposes of the collateral line before
resuming the patriarchal account” (OTS, 3 7 ) . “Conform-
ably to the plan pursued in the composition of this his-
torical book, the Tholedoth of Esau precedes the ensuing
account of the family history of Jacob, as the Tholedoth
of Ishmael (25:12-17) that of Isaac; the Tholedoth of
Japheth and Ham (10:1-20) that of Shem; and the
Tholedoth of Cain (4:18) that of Seth. Esau, who is
Edom. The latter name was applied to him in reference
to the peculiar color of his skin at birth, rendered more
significant by his inordinate craving for the red pottage,
and also by the fierce sanguinary character of his descend-
ants (cf. Ezek. 25: 12, Ohad. l o ) . The name Edom is
prominently introduced a t the commencement of this
454
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 36:1-8
genealogical record, because it formed the national desig-
nation of Esau’s posterity” (Jamieson, CECG, 226). We
prefer the subdivisions suggested by Keil-Delitzsch, and
repeated in The Jerusalem Bible as given infra.
2. ,Esag’s Wives aizd Children in Canaan,, and Their
Settleirceizt iiz Seir (vv. 1-8; cf. Chron. l:3Sff).
“Our chief difficulty (here) arises from a comparison
of the names of Esau’s wives as they previously appeared.
In 26:34 the Canaanite wives bore the names, ‘Judith, the
daughter of Beeri the Hittite,’ and ‘Basemath, the daughter
of Elon the Hittite,’ whereas in 28:9, the Ishmaelite wife
is described as ‘Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael.’ Ap-
parently, then, Judith must be identified with Oholibamah,
Basemath with Adah, for both are followed by the name
of the same father ‘Elon,’ and Mahalath must be the Base-
math of our list, because in each case follows the father’s
name, ‘Ishmael.’ The reason for identifying Judith with
Oholibamah may be made somewhat more convincing by
noting that Oholibamah is described (v. 2 ) as ‘the daugh-
ter of Anah,’ Now Anah, according to v. 24, discovered
‘hot springs’; but be’er is the Hebrew word for spring.
However, in the former list he is described as Bee-ri-
‘spring-man.’ Such changes of names need surprise no
one, for Orientals commonly go under several names,
especially the women, who frequently received a new name
a t marriage. Men should, therefore, not speak here of a
‘contradiction as to Esau’s wives’ and call this ‘a crucial
difficulty’ ” (EG, 934). Again: “Since the Anah of v. 2
no doubt is a man (cf. v. 2 5 ) , the word bath (‘daughter’)
following it cannot refer to him but must be used in the
looser sense of ‘granddaughter’ and naturally refers here
to Oholibamah. This same Anah appears here as a ‘Hivite’
but in 26:34 as a ‘Hittite.’ The difficulty resolves itself
quite readily when we observe that ‘Hittite’ is simply a
more general designation of Canaanites, which use of the
term is found in Josh. 1:4, 1 Kings 10:29, 2 Kings 7:6.
45 5
 . r
36:l-8 ‘ . .
8 ,

For the‘ Hittites-we up among tM

inhabitants of stand for allba€
them. If in v. as. a Horite,m
term meaning ‘cave dweller,’ why should not one, originally
a Hivite, also be able to dwell in a cave and so merit the
additional cognomen ‘Horite’?” (ibid., p. 9 3 5 ) . (“Cave
dweller,” that is, a troglodyte: Horite may not even have
been a tribal or ethnic designation),
ferred to Part 40 of the present text,‘se
the caption “Esau Takes Anoth
several standard works which deal
that occur in this chapter ( 3 6 ) .
commentaries on Genesis: by Keil and Delitzsch (BCOTP)!,
by Whitelaw (PCG) , by Jamieson (CECG) , by Lange
(CDHCG) , and especially the thoroughgoing analysis OX
the chapter by William Henry Green (UBG, pp. 4 1 5
429), . in which the composite theory is clearly refute.&
Every argument put forward by the critics i s answerk4d
clearly io this great work in which the nit-picking meth-
odology of the self -styled analytical
if ever agree among themselves, is e
reason for devoting any more time or space here to this
phase of our ’subject, C.C.C.) .
(For interesting comments
by Jewish sources on these various wdmen and their
relatives, the student is referred to The- Soncino Chumash,
published by the Soncino Press, London.).
We now read that Esau took his wives, sons,
ters, servants, livestock, “and all his possessions” w
had accumulated in Canaan and went into a lan
from Jacob. The separation evidently was similar to that
which had occurred between Abraham and Lot in earlier
times. “We are brought to the time where Esau Sees
the necessity of leaving the land of Canaan, which has
definitely been assigned to his brother Jacob. It will be
difficult to determine whether he took this step before
Jacob’s return from Mesopotamia or some time thereafter.
45 6
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 36:1-8
For there is the possibility that Esau’s and Jacob’s flocks
could not subsist together even when the flocks which
were potentially Jacob’s were still in reality under Isaac’s
care, The more likely construction to put upon the case
.would be that Jacob with his large flocks and herds,
freshly returned from Mesopotamia, made the problem a
mitical one. (The land could hardly support both
groups). But Esau on his part was by this time resigned
to his lot that he yield the preference to his brother to
whom the better blessing had been given, and when a clash
like that which threatened between Abraham’s and Lot’s
herdsmen seemed imminent, Esau showed prudence in
.promptly yielding” (EG, 936). “This journey was under-
taken after Jacob had returned from Haran and settled
’in Canaan, possibly after their father’s death. Esau h>d
probably settled in Seir before Jacob’s return, but dwelt
.only in the plain, the inhabitants of the mountains not
allowing him to settle higher up. Now that Jacob re-
turned, Esau recognized that the land would be his,
whereupon he made an expedition and captured the Moun-
.
tain country” (SC, 21 5 )
It seems obvious that Esau, too, had grown enormously
wealthy (cf. 27:39-40). It is certainly to be doubted,
however, that he had grown spiritually, that is, in the
direction of putting aside his profanity. --We recall the
words of the old Catechism: “Why does God, seemingly
a t least, often permit the wicked to prosper while evil
befalls the good?” The answer: “For two reasons: 1.
Because the righteous can be confirmed in true holiness
only by trials and sufferings; and 2. Because God will
not allow even the little good which the wicked may do,
to go unrewarded; and therefore as He cannot reward it
in the next world, He takes this means of allowing it to
be rewarded in this present world.’’ (Cf. Matt. 5:45,
13:27-30; Rom. 12:19, Acts 17:31, Rom. 2;16, etc.).
457
36:1-8 GENESIS
It must be true that these .patriarchs were at a great
disadvantage for the time being. Canaan was literally
only “the land of their sojournings.” (Cf. v. 7 ) . Hence,
they must have been moving about, utilizing unclaimed
pasturage, “and yet, no doubt, wealthier than the actuaI
inhabitants of the land. The resulting jealousy of
native inhabitants will have made their position more
difficult” (EG, 937). The text seems to indicate clearly,
however, that this was a separation between the brothers.
Esau simply moved to a land away fpiom his brathi. Jacob.
“Since Jacob had purchased the birthright, he was natu-
rally Isaac’s heir and became entitled to the hetitage of
the land of Canaan. Hence Esau sought another country
.\
(Sforno) The Midrash explains that he left on account
of the decree that Abraham’s children would be strangers
in a foreign land before they inherited Canaan; whereupon
Esau declared, ‘I want neither the land nor the prior
payment,’ viz. to be a stranger elsewhere; hence he left.
Another reason was his feeling of shame a t having sold
the birthright (Rashi) ” (SC, 216). (Cf. Gen. 15:12-16),
“So Esazb dewlt in Mount Seir: Esau is Edom.” This
means that he chose this land south of the Dead Sea for
his permanent home. “Seir”-or “Mount Seir,” since it
is such mountainous terrain-was the original name of the
land. “Exactly how this occupation proceeded we do not
know. .. . .As we have suggested, a process of conquest
may have been involved. As the material of this chapter
suggests, intermarriage with native Seirites or Horites
figured quite largely in the process. Sometimes inter-
marriage may have preceded, sometimes may have followed
upon certain stages of the conquest, until the aboriginal
inhabitants were eliminated and the Edomite stock had be-
come the dominant factor” (EG, 937). Jamieson writes:
“The design of this historical sketch of Esau and his family
is to show how the promise (27:39, 40) was fulfilled. In
temporal prosperity he far exceeds his brother; and it is
45 8
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 36:1-8
remarkable that, in the overruling providence of God,
the vast increase of his worldly substance was the occasion
of his leaving Canaan, and thus inaking way for the return
of Jacob, Thus dwelt Esau iiz i i z o m t Seir, This was
.
divinely assigned as his possession (Josh. 24:4, Deut. 2: J )
It was not a ‘land of promise’ to him, as Canaan was to
Jacob; but as the prediction in his father’s testamentary
blessing pointed, so he received it as the fulfilment of his
destiny, Providence paving the way for it in the natural
course of events. Having become allied by marriage with
the family of Seir, he removed to the mount, and settled
there with his family. Upon the rapid increase of his de-
scendants into a tribe, it became evident that both the
Edomites and the Horites could not find room enough in
the country, and that the one or the other must give way;
the former disputed the possession, and having, by Heaven
favoring his arms, proved superior in the contest, Esau
destroyed the great mass of the Horites, and, incorporating
the remnant with his own race, finally ‘dwelt in mount
Seir,’ as the dominant power: (hairy, rough, rugged)
Mount Seir, inhabited by the Edomites, included that
mountainous region which extends from the Dead Sea to
the Elanitic Gulf” (Jamieson, 2 2 7 ) . (The earliest mention
of Mount Seir is in the account of Chedorlaomer’s cam-
paign in the days of Abraham (Gen. 14:6) : here it is said
that the Horites were then its inhabitants. “The Horites
were the Hurrians, now known so well from the cunei-
form tablets from ancient Nuzu and other sites, who in-
vaded N. Mesopotamia, between 1780 and 1600, and
gradually spread over Palestine and Syria” (UBD, 99 1 ) .
The route of the Exodus would have been through Seir
(Deut. 2 : l ) , but as God had given this region t o Esau
for a possession, the Israelites were forbidden to enter it
(Deut. 2: 5 ) . The mention of Esau’s removal to Mount
Seir follows immediately the mention of Isaac’s death and
burial (Gen, 3J:27-29, 36:l-8; cf. 3 2 : 3 ) . In his fare-
459
36:8-10 GENESIS
well address Joshua spoke of God’s giving Mt. Seir to Esau
(Josh. 24:4). Chieftains of the Horites were called ‘the
children of Seir in the land of Edom’ (Gen. 36:21, 30;
cf. Ezek. 35:2ff.). Esau is said to have dispossessed the
Horites of Mt. Seir (Gen. 32:3; 36:20ff.; Deut. 2:l-29,
Josh. 24:4). Simeonites drove out the Amalekites who had
hidden in Seir (1 Chron. 4:42ff.). “The majesty of God
was associated with the awesome grandeur of Mt. Seir
(Deut. 33:2, Judg. 5:4) ,” The Chronicler relates how
King Amaziah of Judah (c. 800-783 B.C.) went to the
Valley of Salt and slew 10,000 men of Seir but paid
homage to their gods (2 Chron. 2 5 :11-24). Isaiah’s words,
‘Watchman, what of the night?’ came from Seir (ha.
21:ll).
The sons of Esau that were born in Canaan were five
in number: by Adah, Eliphaz; by Basemath, Reuel; ‘by
Oholibamah, Jeush, Jalam and Korah. Adah and Base-
math had each one son, while Oholibamah was the mother
of three sons, all of whom became heads of different tribes:
but in the case of the other two wives, it was their grand-
sons who attained that distinction.
3. Esads So,m and Grandsons as Fethers of Tribes
(vv. 9-14; cf. 1 Chron. 1:35-37).
Esads descendants in Seir. Through his sons and
grandsons Esau became the father of Edom, i.e., the
founder of the Edomitish nation on the mountains..of Seir.
This, it should be noted, is the history of Esau in Moulzt
Seir. The section which preceded it was his history in
the land of Canaan. Where in vv. 1-8 we have only the
names of those who in the strictest sense were ‘sons of
Esau,’ here the same expression is used in the looser sense
and takes in the grandsons, a t least those of Eliphaz and
Reuel, and incidentally also those of Amalek.
Of all those persons mentioned in this section, Amalek
(vv. 12, 16) is the one who must be studied especially,
in connection with Old Testament history. Among the
460
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 36:9-14
sons of Eliphaz we find this Amalelr;, whose mother was
Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz. (See 1 Chron, 1:36:
here “Timna and Amalek” is a more concise form of
saying, “and from Timna, Amalek”) , “Amalelc was, of
course, the ancestor of the Amalekites, who attacked the
Israelites a t Horeb as they were coming out of Egypt under
Moses (Exo, 17: 8-16) , and not merely of a mixed tribe of
Amalekites and Edomites, belonging to the supposed orig-
inal Amalekite nation. . , . The allusion to the fields
of the Amalekites in ch. 14:7 does not imply that the tribe
was in existence in Abraham’s time, nor does the expres-
sion ‘first of the nations,’ in the saying of Balaam (Num.
24:20), represent Amalek as the aboriginal or oldest tribe,
but simply as the first heathen tribe by which Israel was
attacked. The Old Testament says nothing of any fusion
of Edomites or Horites with Amalekites, nor does it men-
tion a double Amalek. , . . If there had been an Amalek
previous t o Edom. with the important part which they
took in opposition to Israel even in the time of Moses,
the book of Genesis would not have omitted to give their
pedigree in the list of the nations. At a very early period
the Amalekites separated from the other tribes of Edom
and formed an independent people, having their head-
quarters in the southern part of the mountains of Judah, as
far as Kadesh (14:7; Num. 13:29, 14:43, 45), but, like
the Bedouins, spreading themselves as a nomad tribe over
the whole of the northern portion of Arabia Petrea, from
Havilah t o Shur on the border of Egypt (1 Sam. l J : 3 , 7;
27:8) ; whilst one branch penetrated into the heart of
Canaan, so t h a t a range of hills, in what was afterwards
the inheritance of Ephraim, bore the name of the moun-
tains of the Amalekites (Judg. 12:15, 5:14). Those who
settled in Arabia seem also to have separated in the course
of time into several branches, so that Amalekite hordes
invaded the land of Israel in connection sometimes with
the Midianites and the sons of the East (the Arabs, Judg;
461
36:9-14 GENESIS
6:3, 7 : 1 2 ) , and a t other times with the Ammonites (Judg.
3:13). After they had been defeated by Saul (1 Sam.
14:48, 15:2ff.), and frequently chastised by David (1
Sam. 27:8, 30:lff.; 2 Sam. 8:12), the remnant of them
was exterminated under Hezekiah by the Simeonites on
the mountains of Seir (1 Chron. 4:42, 43)” (K-D, 323-
324).
Thus it will be seen that the Amalekites were in-
veterate enemies of Israel. The Edomites generally were
equally so (Ezek. 35:5), although God forbade His people
to hate or to despoil them (Deut. 23:7; 2:4-6; 2 Chron.
2O:lO). As a matter of fact, “Edom became a symbol
of the hardened unbelief and hostility of the world to
the people of God and as such was declared by the prophets
to be the object of God’s wrath and conquering power in
the Last Days (Isa. 11:14; 34:5-6; Obad. 1:l-4, Amos
9:12)” (HBD, 59).
The distinguished Jewish commentator, Maimonides
(1135-1204), has some very important things to say about
the fate of the Amalekites and the Edomites. Cf. Exo.
17:13-15, Deut. 25:17-19. He writes as follows: “There
are in the Law portions which include deep wisdom, but
have been misunderstood by many persons; they require,
therefore, an explanation. I mean the narratives contained
in the Law which many consider as being of no use what-
ever e.g., the list of the various families descended from
Noah, with their names and territories (Gen. l o ) ; the
sons of Seir the Horite (ibid., 26:20-30); the kings that
reigned in Edom (ibid. 3 1 . seq.), and the like... . Every
narrative in the Law serves a certain purpose in connexion
with religious teaching. It either helps to establish a
principle of faith, or to regulate our actions, and to pre-
vent wrong and injustice among men; and I will show this
in each case.’’ As a case in point, Maimonides asks: “Had
Moses nothing else to write than, ‘And the sister of Lotan
was Timna’ (Gen. 36:22)?” He continues: “The list
462
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 36:9-14
of the families of Seir and their genealogy is given in the
Law (Gen. 36:20-30)) because of oiw particular conz-
maidiizenf. For God had distinctly commanded the
Israelites concerning Ainalek to blot out his name (Deut,
2J:17-19). Ainalek was the soil of Eliphas and Timna,
the sister of Lotan (Gen. 36:12, 2 2 ) . The other sons of
Esau were not included in this commandment. But Esau
was by marriage connected with the Seirites, as distinctly
stated in Scripture; and Seirites were therefore his chil-
dren; lie reigned over them; his seed was mixed with the
seed of Seir, and ultimately all the countries and families
of Seir were called after the sons of Esau who were the
predominant family, and they assumed more particularly
the name Amalekites, because these were the strongest in
that family. If the genealogy of these families of Seir
had not been described in full they would all have been
killed, contrary to the plain words of the commandment.
For this reason the Seirite families are fully described, as
if to say, the people that live in Seir and the kingdom of
Amalek are not all Amalekites; they are the descendants
of some other man, and are called Amalekites because the
mother of Amalek was of their tribe. The justice of God
thus prevented the destruction of an (innocent) people
that lived in the midst of another people (doomed to ex-
tirpation); for the decree was pronounced only against
the seed of Amalek” (GP, 380-382),
“If we note Amalek as belonging among the Edomites
(v. 12), we can understand how, being the son of a
concubine, he may have been discriminated against and
how that may have resulted in his separation from his
brethren. For according to Exod. 17:s and Num. 13:29
and 14:25 the Amalekites must have held territory much
farther to the west. According to Judg. 5:14 and 12:1J
they must have once occupied territory much farther to
the north. Gen. 14:7 points to the fact that Amalekites
had once dwelt much farther eastward, although in this
463
35:16-19 GENESIS
passage the term refers to territory which later was occu-
pied by Amalekites. All of this cannot seem strange if it
be borne in mind that all these tribes may have been more
or less nomadic in their day” (EG, 939).
4. The Clan-Chiefs (Tribe-Princes) of Edom ’(vv.
1s-19).
That is, dukes-phylarchs, leaders, chieftains of tribes.
“The term [allztphim], though used in the general sense
of ruler by the later Hebrew writers (Jer. 13:21; Zech.
9:7, 12: 5-6), is exclusively employed in the Pentateuch
as a designation of the Edomite princes (see Exod. 15:1J),
corresponding t o the title of shiekhs among the modern
Bedouins. Fourteen alluphim are mentioned here, and
each Edomite tribe took the name of its founder, or, as
some conjecture from v. 40, the duke was called after the
name of the tribe. From Eliphaz, the eldest son of Esau,
sprang seven dukes, three of whom have obtained promi-
nent notice in Scripture history” (Jamieson, 227) : ( 1 )
Duke Teman, eldest son of Eliphaz, was chief of a tribe
which gave its name to a province of Idumea frequently
mentioned by Scripture writers (Jer. 49:7, 20; Ezek.
25:13, Amos 1:12, Obad. 9, Hab. 3:3). This tribe seems
to have risen to a position of great importance, and ex-
tended over a large portion of the territory of Edom; so
that duke Teman was entitled to be mentioned first, not
only as the eldest son of Eliphaz, but as the premier duke
of Edom. (2) Duke Kenaz was founder of the Kenezite
tribes, some of whose distinguished members, as Caleb and
Qthniel (Josh. 14: 14, Judg. 3 : 9 ) were adopted into Israel.
( 3 ) Duke Amdek, whose independence and widespread
occupancy of Palestine and Syria, caused them to be men-
tioned frequently in the Old Testament records. All the
other ducal sons of Eliphaz ruled over tribes in the south,
their territorial names indicate, Those of Reuel (v.
17) abode in the original territory of Esau, as seems evident
464
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 37:20-30
from the designation, “Zerah of Bozrah” (v. 3 3 ) . “But:
they roam over a wide circuit [to this day] to the
neighborhood of the Hauran, and the country between the
Euphrates and the Tigris; and in the north and west of
the Persian Gulf the names of Reuel’s descendants are to
be traced in the classical writings and in modern times”
.
(Jamieson, ibid., 22 87
5. Descendants of Seir the Horife (vv, 20-30; cf. 1
Chron. 1:3 8 -42 ) ,
According to Deut. 2:12, the Horites of Seir were
supplanted by the descendants of Esau. In vv. 20-30
here the inhabitants of the land, or pre-Edomite popula-
tion of the country. The Horite, that is the Troglodyte,
the dweller in caves, which abound in the mountainous
country of Edom. “The Horites, who had previously been
an independent people ( 14:6) , were partly exterminated
and partly subjugated by the descendants of Esau (Deut.
2:12, 22)” (IC-D, 324). “Seir, with a colony of Horites
from Lebanon, settled in the mountains south of Canaan
a generation before the time of Abraham, and in their
new possessions continued that mode of life to which they
had been accustomed in their original settlement, viz., that
of dwelling in caves on account of the intense heat (Jer.
49:7-22). Hence they were called Troglodytes (in our
version, Horites) ; and doubtless they were the excavators
of those wonderful rock-habitations which abound in the
ravines and the soft limestone cliffs around Petra” (Jamie-
son, 2 2 8 ) . The names of the sons of Seir who became
heads of tribes are listed here, as were the ducal descendants
of Esau in the earlier part of the chapter. Their form of
government must have been the same as that which was
first adopted in Edom-that of alluphiw or shiekhs-
exercising independent authority over district tribes. These
chiefs were Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer,
Dishan,
46 5
37:31-39 GENE§IS
6. The Kings of E d o m (vv. 31-39; 1 Chron. 1:43-
50).
“The kings in the land of Edom,” that is, “before
the children of Israel had a king” (K-D). “‘Before an
Israelite king ruled Edom,’ rather than the sense understood
by the Greek: ‘before a king ruled in Israel’ ” (JB, 59).
It is interesting to note “in connection with the eight
kings mentioned here, that whilst they follow one another,
that is to say, one never comes to the throne till his prede-
cessor is dead, yet the son never succeeds the father, but
they all belong to different families and places, and in
the case of the last the statement that ‘he died’ is wanting.
From this it is unquestionably obvious that the sovereignty
was elective: that the kings were chosen by the phylarehs,
and, as Isa. 34:12 also shows, that they lived or reigned
contemporaneously with these. The contemporaneous ex-
istence of the Allztphim and the kings may also be inferred
from Exo. 1 5 : l j as compared with Num. 20:14ff. Whilst
it was with the king of Edom that Moses treated respect-
ing the passage through the land, in the song of Moses it
is the princes who tremble with fear on account of the
miraculous passage of the Red §ea (cf. Ezek. 3 2 : 2 9 ) .
Lastly, this is also supposed by the fact, that the account
of the seats of the phylarchs (vers. 40-43) follows the list
of the kings. .. . Of all the kings of Edom, not is
named elsewhere” (K-D, 326). “Of the last king, Hadm
(v. 39; not Hadad, as it is written in 1 Chron. I:SO), the
wife, the mother-in-law, and the mother are mentioned:
his death is not mentioned here, but is added by the later
chronicler (1 Chron. 1: 5 1 ) . This can be explained easily
enough from the simple fact, that at the time when the
table was first drawn up. Hadad was still alive and seated
upon the throne. In all probability, therefore, Hadad
was the king of Edom, to whom Moses applied for permis-
sion to pass through the land (Num, 20:14ff.)0 At any
rate the list is evidently a record relating to the Edomitish
466
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 37: 3 1-39
king o f a pre-Mosaic age. But if this is the case, the
heading, v, 3 1 , does not refer to the time when the
monarchy was introduced into Israel under Saul, but was
written with the promise in mind, that kings should come
out of the loins of Jacob ( 3 J :11, cf, 17:4ff .) , and merely
expresses the thought, that Edom became a kingdom a t an
earlier period than Israel. Such a thought was by no means
inappropriate to the Mosaic age. For the idea, ‘that Israel
was destined to grow into a kingdom with monarchs of
his own family, was a hope handed down to the age of
Moses, which the long residence in Egypt was well adapted
to foster’ (Delitzsch)” (K-D, 328). Concerning v. 31,
especially the statement, before there reigized aizy kiizg over
the cbildreiz of Isruel, Jamieson interprets: that is, “pre-
vious to the time of Moses, who was virtually the first king
of Israel (cf. Exod. 18:16-19 with Deut. 3 3 : J ) , though the
words are usually considered as pointing to the reign of
Saul.” Skinner writes: “This may mean either before the
institution of the monarchy in Israel, or before any Israel-
itish sovereign ruled over Edom. The natural ternziii-us ad
q u e m is, of course, the overthrow of the Edomite inde-
pendence by David. The document bears every mark of
authenticity, and may be presumed to give a complete
list of Edomite kings. Unfortunately the chronology is
wanting. An average reign of 20 years for the eight kings
is perhaps a reasonable allowance in early unsettled times;
and the foundation of the Edomite monarchy may be
dated approximately from 1 ~ 0to 200 years before the
time of David” (ICCG, 434). Concerning this monarchy
Skinner adds : “The monarchy was obviously not hereditary,
none of the kings being the son of his predecessor; that it
was elective is more than we have a right to assume.
Frazer finds here an illustration of his theory of female
succession, the crown passing to men of other families
who married the hereditary princesses; but v. 39 is fatal
to this view. The fact that the kings reigned in different
467
 ,
37:3 1-39 GENESIS
cities supports an opinion that they were analogous to the
Hebrew Judges, i.e., local chiefs who held supreme power
during their Life, but were unable to establish a dynasty,
A beginning of the recognition of the hereditary principle
may Le traced in the story of Hadad ‘of the seed of
royal’ ( 1 Ki. 1 1 : 14ff.), who is regarded as heir-presump-
tive to the throne’’ (ibid., 435). Suffice it here to con-
clude with the opinions of the Rabbis: “ ‘These m e the
kings.’ Eight are enumerated, and corresponding to this
number eight descended from Jacob who overthrew Edom’s
independence, making it tributary. The eight are: Saul,
Ishbosheth, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa and
Jehoshaphat. In the reign of Joram, Jehoshaphat’s son,
Edom rebelled and regained its independence (2 Ki. 8:20)
(Rashi). ‘Before there reigned any king over the childrep
of 1’s~mZ.’ Some believe that this phrase was written pro-
phetically. Yitschaki maintained that it was written in
the time of Jehoshaphat, but for expressing this opinion
his book deserves to be burnt. King here refers to Moses,
and the meaning is that Edom had eight kings before the
time of Moses (Ibn Ezra). Sforno explains similarly”
(SC, 218).
Again this word from Maimonides (GI?, 3 8 2 ) : “The
kings that have reigned in the land of Edom are enumer-
ated (Gen. 36:31ff.) on account of the law, ‘Thou mayst
not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother’
(Deut. 17: 1 5 ) . For of these kings none was an Edomite;
wherefore each king is described by his native land: one
king from this place, another king from that place. Now
I think that it was then well known how these kings that
reigned in Edom conducted themselves, what they did,
and how they humiliated and oppressed the sons of Esau.
Thus God reminded the Israelites of the fate of the Edom-
ites, as if saying unto them, Look unto your brothers,
the sons of Esau, whose kings were so and so, and whose
deeds are well known. Lear therefrom that no nation
468
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 37:40-43
ever chose a foreigner as king without inflicting thereby
some great or small injury upon the couiitry.)’
7. More Chiefs of Edow (vv. 40-43; cf, 1 Chron,
1:51-54)*
K-D entitle this section: Seats of the Tribe-Princes of
Esau accordiizg t o their Faiizilies. It seems evident from
the wording of the caption here, “qfter their pkces, by
their iiaiws,” by way of comparison with v. 43, “according
to their babitations in the laiZd of their possessioii,” that
the names t h a t follow v. 3 1 are not a second list of Edomite
tribal princes (that is, of those who continued the ancient
regime, with its hereditary aristocracy, after the death of
Hadar), but refer to the capital cities of the old phylarchs.
Therefore there is nothing surprising in the fact that out
of the eleven names only two correspond to those given in
vv. 15-19. “This proves nothing more than that only two
of the capitals received their names from the princes who
captured or founded them, viz. T i m a h and Keizaz.
Neither of these has been discovered as yet” (K-D, 3 2 8 ) .
Aholibavzah (site unknown) probably got its name from
the Horite princess (v. 2 5 ) . Pinon apparently is Phu?zoiz,
an encampment of the Israelites (Num. 33:42-43), cele-
brated for its mines, between Petra and Zoar, in which
many Christians were condemned to hard labor under the
Roman emperor, Diocletian. Some authorities hold that
Mibzar is Petra; but this is called Selah ( 2 ICi. 1 4 : 7 ) , we
are told by way of objection. The objection, however, is
not valid, because in the ASV and the RSV, this term is
actually translated as “the rock,” seemingly an allusion
t o Petra (cf. Judg. 1: 3 6 , 2 Chron. 25: 12, Obad. 3 ) . As
far as we know, the names of the other capitals or districts
in the list have not as yet been identified. The concluding
sentence, This is Esau, the father (founder) o f Edoiiz,
(that is, from him sprang the great nation of the Edomites,
with its princes and kings, upon the mountains of Seir),
both terminates this section and prepares the way for the
469
 37:40-43 GENESIS
history of the later life of Jacob, and particularly for what
is often designated the Saga of Joseph. /

Much light has now been shed, we are told, on the

Edomite names in these lists from inscriptions gathered in
recent years, notably through the excavations of Jaussen
and Savignac, So writes Kraeling. He adds: “The allusion
to the Horites (Gen. 36:20ff., cf. 14:6) requires brief
attention. We are told in Deut. 2:12, 22, that they were
an earlier population whom the Edomites dispossessed. The
name was formerly thought to mean‘ cave dwellers,’ but
the Egyptian inscriptions provided a name Khmu, which
was used for southern Syria, and this was found com-
parable to the name Horites. Since the decipherment of
the Hittite inscriptions, the Khurri (from whom the Egyp-
tian name was doubtless derived) have become well known
as an element in Mesopotamia and Armenia in the sixteenth
and seventeenth centuries B.C. The Mitannians belonged
to this group, and a Hurrian grammar has even been
written in recent years. According to the laws of the
Hebrew language K h w i would become KboYim-Horites,
and so the equation is perfect. That some Hurrian group
got down as f a r as Edom and held control there for a time
need not be doubted. It is easier to believe than the
suggestion that Horites is an error for Hivites, in three
different connections. In the period of migration, splinter
groups often push very far in their desperate search for a
place to settle. Such groups bring little with them that
is distinctive and that could be found archaeologically”
(BA, 89). The survey of Nelson Glueck in 1936-38, this
author goes on t o say, has shown that the early agricultural
civilization in this region, as in Moab and points farther
north, was wiped out about 1900-17jO B.C. This was the
time of the Amorite migration, and it seems reasonable
to believe that the Amorites were the agent of destruc-
tion. There is no mention of Edomite places in the
Amarna letters of the fourteenth century. About 1300
470
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES 37 :40-43
B G , however, so Glueck discovered, a new agricultural
civilization arose in Edom, Its founders could have been
the Horites, who then were soon succeeded by the Edom-
ites” (BA, 89), (We do not have space here to delve
into the problems associated with the respective identities
of the Hurrians, Hivites, Horites, Hittites, Canaanites, ctc.
Dr. Speiser has some very pertinent suggestions about this
problem which the student may want to investigate: see
ABG, pp, 280-283). Unfortunately, most of the late
modern critics seem obsessed with the notion that the
names of these persons whose lives are narrated in the
Patriarchal Age were not names of persons, but names
of tribal groups rather than the names of their eponymic
founder-ancestors. This notion must be evaluated as
purely gratuitous. The same assumption has generally
prevailed with respect to the “heroes” of early Greek and
Roman times. However, archaeology has definitely proved
that these names are not mythical, not even legendary, one
might well say, but names of actual personages; and, the
events associated with their names have been proved to
have been actual historical events, No more positive proof
of this fact could be offered than the story of the Siege
of Troy.
REVIEW QUESTIONS ON
PART FORTY-FOUR
1. Give the subdivisions of this chapter as suggested by
Keil and Delitzsch and by The Jerusalem Bible.
2. Explain the phrase, “Esau, who is Edom.”
3 . For what purpose is the line (toledofh) of Esau in-
serted a t this point? How is this method in line
with t h a t of the entire content of Genesis?
4. Where and when does Esau himself disappear from the
narrative?
5 . What probably brought about the separation of the
tribes of Esau and Jacob?
471
 GENESIS
6. How was the divine promise of Gen. 27:39-40 ful-
filled for Esau?
7. I n what way does the separation of Esau and Jacob
remind us of that which took place between Abra-
ham and Lot?
8. In what respect were the patriarchs at a great dis-
advantage with regard to the land of Canaan?
9. Where was Mount Seir? What Biblical events are
associated with this region?
10. What are the most significant references to it in the
Old Testament?
11. Name Esau’s wives and their sons as they were in
Canaan.
12. What specific reason is assigned Scripturally for Esau’s
migration t o Seir?
13. Which one of Esau’s grandsons came to figure most
prominently in Old Testament history?
14. Trace the relationship between the Israelites and the
Amalekites as presented in the patriarchal records.
1 Y. What specific command did God enjoin with respect
to the Amalekites? Tell the story of Saul’s disobedi-
ence to this command and the consequences thereof.
16. What is the Maimonidean explanation of the Divine
purpose in inserting the various Edomite genealogies
into the Old Testament record? What principle does
he lay down with respect to these O.T. stories?
17. Could the fact that Amalek was the son of a concu-
bine have affected his separation from his people?
What was the general geographical distribution of the
Amalekites, and what does this suggest?
18. When and by whom were the Amalekites exterm-
inated?
19. In connection with Gen. lY:l6, what does this ulti-
mate destruction of the Amalekites teach us with re-
spect to Divine Providence?
472
 EDOMITE GENEALOGIES
20, What general function did the clav-chiefs o f Edom
serve? What general names are applied to them?
21, What does the name Horite mean? Does this have
any significance in identifying this people?
22. How is this people to be associated with the topology
of the country around the rock-city of Petra?
23, What are some of the possible conclusions with re-
spect to Hadad, king of Edom?
24, What are various interpretations of the clause 3 1b?
25. What significance is there in the fact that the eight
kings named in vv. 31-39 did not succeed one an-
other in the royal office? State the views of Keil-
Delitzsch, Skinner, Jamieson, Sir James Frazier, and
the Rabbis on this subject.
26. What is the Maimonidean explanation of this listing
of the kings that reigned in Edom, as these are given
in vv. 31-39?
27. Explain what is meant by the phrases in v. 40, “aftey
their places, by their naiwes.”
28. Why is it generally considered that the names in
section (vv. 40-43) are names of districts or their
capital cities?
29. What special significance is attached to the name
Pinon
3 0. For what further development of the Biblical story
does the last statement in v. 43 prepare us?
3 1. What archaeological discoveries by Glueck and others
throw light on the history of Edom and especially on
the succession of peoples that occupied this region?
32. What is the great fallacy ( a priori) that characterizes
the conclusions of modern critics with reference to
the names of the patriarchs and their descendants?

47 3