GE�ESIS 36 COMME�TARYEDITED BY GLE�� PEASE

Esau's Descendants

I�TRODUCTIO�S. LEWIS JOH�SO� JR. wrote, " I noticed in reading Professor Leupold's comments on the chapter that he omitted entir ely any reference to "homileticalsuggestions." He usually has them after his chapters, if only to tell us that we should not preach on certain chapters. On this one he evidently thought that no comment was necessary, for no one in his right mind would e ven entertain the slightest idea of preaching on it." "This chapter on Esau's genealogy, even if we should find it uninteresting, is evaluated differently by the Holy Spirit, it seems, for most ofit is included again in the Word of God in 1 Chronicles 1:35 -54. We, therefore, shall regard it as important and will do our best to treat it properly in this series of studies in the Book of Genesis."

Here is how Mackintosh deals with this chapter in its entirety: "Chapter 36 Furnishes a catalogue of Esau's sons, with their various titles and localities. We shall not dwell on this, but pass on to one of the most fruitful and interesting sections in the entire canon of inspiration."

Why do we have all of this detail in the Word of God about the family of Esau. He was rejected as the line to the Messiah, and so why are we to care about his line at all? I am sure most Bible readers skip over this chapter, or go through it so superficially that it is meaningless. There has to be a valid and valuable reason for it being here, for all Scripture is of value for the believer’s life.

SOME A�SWERS AS TO WHY THIS CHAPTER IS HERE.

1. Constable, "Moses included this relatively short, segmented genealogy (toledot) in the sacred record to show God's faithfulness in multiplying Abraham's seed as He had promised. He also did so to provide connections with the descendants of Esau referred to later in the history of Israel. Among his descendants were the Edomites (v. 8) and the Amalekites (v. 12). Lot, Ishmael, and Esau all walked out of the line of promise."

"It might seem unusual that such detail concerning the descendants ofEsau be included, but the relationship between Esau and Jacob, and thenbetween the nations of Edom and Israel, is a theme of the entire OldTestament."

"Perhaps the major lesson of this genealogy is that secular greatness develops faster than spiritual greatness. Consequently the godly must wait patiently for the fulfillment of God's promises."

2. Bob Deffinbaugh have chosen to briefly pass over the details of Genesis 36 because the primary purpose of this chapter has already been realized. You see, the first readers of this chapter were the Israelites who were about to cross over the River Jordan to possess the land of Canaan and to annihilate the Canaanites (cf. Deuteronomy 1:8; 20:16-18). There were, however, some people who were not to be attacked or annihilated, among whom were the Edomites, the descendants of Esau:

And the LORD spoke to me, saying, “You have circled this mountain long enough. �ow turn north, and command the people, saying, ‘You will pass through the territory of your brothers the sons of Esau who live in Seir; and they will be afraid of you. So be very careful; do not provoke them, for I will not give you any of their land, even as little as a footstep because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as a possession’” (Deuteronomy 2:2-5).

Lest this command be violated, it was most essential for those Israelites of Moses’ day to know who the Edomites were and to have a carefully documented record of the generations of Esau. That record is the substance of chapter 36. As you can see, this has no direct bearing upon Christians in our age, while it was indispensable for the first readers of this account.

Having said this, I do not wish to leave the impression that there is no value for us in these verses. I would like to suggest two avenues of consideration for us today. First, I am impressed with the fact that Esau was a very gracious man. While he had in the heat of anger threatened to kill his brother for his deception, he received him warmly (33:4ff.), and when prosperity necessitated it, he moved out of his brother’s way:

Then Esau took his wives and his sons and his daughters and all his household, and his livestock and all his cattle and all his goods which he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to another land away from his brother Jacob. For their property had become too great for them to live together, and the land where they sojourned could not sustain them because of their livestock. So Esau lived in the hill country of Seir; Esau is Edom (Genesis 36:6-8).

I have maintained that had God elected one or the other of these twins on the basis of likeability He would probably have chosen Esau. At least that is who I would have chosen. While Esau had no regard for spiritual things (Genesis 25:34; Hebrews 12:16-17), he had many fine qualities. In verses 6-8 above, it was Esau who moved out of Jacob’s way just as Abraham gave way to Lot (13:5ff.). God’s elect are not necessarily more likeable people, nor are they any more gracious and kind. That is why election is apart from works, so that God’s free choice is really free (cf. Romans

9:10-13).

Finally, while Esau was rejected on a spiritual plane, he was nonetheless a recipient of the common grace of God. Abraham begged God to bless his son by Hagar, Ishmael, which He did (Genesis 17:18-20; 25:16). But apart from any recorded request by Isaac on Esau’s behalf, God greatly blessed and prospered Esau. This even extended to God’s command to Israel not to attack the Edomites nor to take any of their territory (Deuteronomy 2:1-7; 23:7; �umbers 20:14ff.).

3. Gill, "Who was surnamed Edom, from the red pottage he sold his birthright for to his brother Jacob, (Genesis 25:30) ; an account is given of him, and his posterity, not only because he was a son of Isaac, lately made mention of as concerned in his burial; but because his posterity would be often taken notice of in the sacred Scriptures, and so their genealogy would serve to illustrate such passages; and Maimonides F13 thinks the principal reason is, that whereas Amalek, a branch of Esau's family, were to be destroyed by an express command of God, it was necessary that all the rest should be particularly described, lest they should all perish together; but other ends are answered hereby, as partly to show the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, concerning the multiplication of his seed, and the accomplishment of the oracle to Rebekah, signifying that two nations were in her womb, one of which were those Edomites; as also to observe how the blessing of Isaac his father came upon him with effect, (Genesis 22:17) (25:23) (27:39,40) .

4. Steven Cole writes, "This chapter is in the Bible for at least two reasons. First, Moseswas writing to people who were about to conquer the land ofCanaan. The Edomites, Esau’s descendants, lived on the bordersof that land. When Israel had sought to pass over their land enroute to Canaan, the Edomite king refused, even though Mosespromised to pay for any food or water they consumed (�um.20:14-21). Perhaps once Israel was established in the land,someone would say, “Let’s teach those Edomites a lesson!” ButGod commanded Israel not to provoke Edom and said that Hewould not give Israel any of their land (Deut. 2:2-5). So Israelneeded to know who these people were so that they would treatthem as the Lord had commanded.A second reason for this chapter is to make Israel and us considerthe outcome of Esau’s profane life, especially as contrasted withJacob’s life. There is an obvious contrast between chapter 36,which outlines the wealth, success and power of Esau and hisdescendants and 37:1, which says with understatement, “�owJacob lived in the land where his father had sojourned, in the landof Canaan.” While Esau was out conquering the land of Edom,founding a nation, fathering kings, and making a great worldlysuccess of himself, Jacob was quietly living in a land he didn’t evenown, the land where his fathers had sojourned. While Esau’s

descendants were mighty chieftains, famous in their day, Jacob’sdescendants were down in Egypt, enslaved to Pharaoh.

So the chapter in its context portrays two roads set before us all:The road to earthly success, fame, and power, which can bringquick, visible results; and, the road of obedience to the will ofGod, which is much slower and less visible in terms of the payoff.The worldly road focuses on the things which are seen, which,from God’s perspective, are destined to perish; God’s road focuseson the things which are not seen, but which are eternal and cannotbe taken from us (see 2 Cor. 4:18). So the chapter teaches:If we succeed by worldly standards, but failwith God, we fail where it really matters.The text reveals four areas where Esau and his descendantssucceeded in this world, but failed terribly in light of eternity:1. A beautiful family by the world’s standards does notequal a family blessed by God.Esau’s turn away from God is seen in that he took his wivesfrom the daughters of Canaan (36:2). Esau’s grandfather,Abraham, had made his servant swear by the Lord that hewould not take a wife for Isaac from the daughters of theCanaanites (24:3). But Esau shrugged off the strong warningof his godly grandfather and chose his wives from theCanaanites (26:34). Later, still lacking spiritual discernment,he took a wife from the descendants of Ishmael (28:9).It’s significant that there is no mention of barren wives whenit comes to Esau’s line. Abraham had God’s promise of manydescendants, but his wife Sarah was barren. Isaac had thesame promises, but Rebekah could not conceive for the firsttwenty years of their marriage. Jacob’s favored wife, Rachel,was barren for a long time. But Esau’s wives bore him fivesons and a number of daughters with no trouble (36:4-6).Esau represents the natural man--strong, capable,independent, able to cope with life’s problems with his ownresources. Who needs to depend on God for things when you

can take care of it yourself? Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, andtheir barren wives, represent God’s way of working. Hehumbles our pride by shutting us up with problems we areincapable of solving-- problems like barren wives in the faceof promises to make us into a great nation. Then, when wecall on Him, He proves Himself mighty to save.Esau had a beautiful family by the world’s standards. He wasthe founder of a dynasty. To be one of Esau’s descendants inthat culture was like being a Ford, Rockefeller, or Kennedy in

our day. Esau’s sons and grandsons became chiefs and kings.Esau’s wives were no doubt beautiful women, as their namesindicate. Their names present a problem, in that the namesgiven in earlier chapters do not correspond with the nameslisted here. In 26:34, it is said that Esau married Judith,daughter of Beeri the Hittite and Basemath, the daughter ofElon the Hittite. In 28:9 it reports that he added Mahalath,daughter of Ishmael, sister of �abaioth. But in 36:2-3,different daughters’ names are connected with each father.The best solution to this problem is that the wives probablytook different names, either when they moved from Canaanto Edom, or with changes in them over time (a commonpractice; Esau became known as “Red” [“Edom”] over theincident with the red stew which he traded for his birthright.)�ames weren’t given just because they sounded nice--theyhad meaning. So, perhaps, Basemath (“the perfumed one”)later took on the name Adah (“ornament,” “the adornedone”), as her focus shifted from perfume to jewelry andclothes. Mahalath (“the musical one”) took over as theperfume queen and changed her name to Basemath when shedeveloped a formula for homemade Chanel �o. 5. Judith(“the praised one”), a young teenager when Esau married her,grew tall and became known as Oholibamah (“tent height,”i.e., “tall, stately”). �ote that each of their names focuses onsome outward feature of beauty or sensuality.There is another problem: In 26:34, Judith’s father is called

Beeri the Hittite. Beeri means “well-man.” In 36:2 he is calledAnah. But it is mentioned that he is the Anah who found thehot springs (hence, he could easily be nicknamed Beeri,“well-man”). Also, Anah (Beeri) is called a Hittite (26:34); aHivite (36:2); and a Horite (36:20). Hittite is a broad term,roughly equivalent to Canaanite. Hivite is a branch of theHittites, and Horite means “cave-dweller.” So the terms arenot contradictory, but explanatory in a more particular sense,much as we might refer to the same man as an American, anArizonan, and a Phoenician (resident of Phoenix).While the precise meaning of many of these names isuncertain, it’s interesting that most of the names are notspiritual, but rather reflect the natural surroundings (H. C.Leupold, Exposition of Genesis [Baker], 2:932-933; James Boice,Genesis [Zondervan], 2:356). I’ve already mentioned this inreference to Esau’s wives. Eliphaz (36:4) means “pure gold.”Zerah (36:13) means “rising” or “east.” Dishon (36:21) means“gazelle.” Only two names out of 81 may hint at a belief inthe true God: Reuel (36:10), Esau’s son by Basemath, means

“friend of God”; Jeush (36:14), Oholibamah’s son, means“The Lord helps.” But even these may have been connectedwith idolatry. One later king has a name of a false god,Baal-hanan (36:38).The point is, Esau’s family was outwardly attractive. Hiswives were beautiful women who bore him children. His kidswere born leaders, talented and strong. Esau was a likable,popular man. He was a skilled outdoorsman, a man wholoved the taste of game, a man caught up with the enjoymentof the good life. But there was one big problem: God was nota part of this family. Esau, the grandson of the godlyAbraham, the favorite son of peaceful Isaac, was a thoroughlysecular man who lived for the pleasure of the here and now.He was a successful man whose sons and grandsons after himwere successful men, by worldly standards. But they all failedat what matters most because they left God out of their lives.

The most important thing you can impart to your kids is nothow to be a worldly success. It’s easy to encourage our kids tosucceed in the wrong ways. They may make the football teamor be the homecoming queen. They may score well on theSAT and go to the best colleges and get the best paying jobs.But if they fail with God, all that stuff doesn’t matter at all.We need to instill in our kids what it means to succeed withGod.There’s a second lesson we can learn by strolling throughEsau’s family cemetery:2. Material prosperity does not equal spiritual prosperity.Esau moved east because he was too prosperous to stay nearJacob (36:6-8). This took place before Jacob returned. Esaurealized that the inheritance was going to Jacob, so he lookedfor a new place to live. It was nice of Esau to be so agreeable.But, sadly, he had no vision for God’s promises to Abrahamconcerning Canaan. Ever since God called Abraham, He repeatedlyemphasized Canaan as the land He would give toAbraham’s descendants. But for Esau, any nice land woulddo. He had no spiritual vision. He was living for himself, notfor God’s purpose. He was materially rich, but spirituallypoor.To his credit, Esau was not greedy. When he saw Jacob aftertheir twenty years apart, he declined Jacob’s gift by saying, “Ihave plenty, my brother. Keep your things.” But it’s possibleto be generous, contented people, but still to be living formaterial things, not for God. The danger is that our materialprosperity dulls our senses with regard to our desperate needfor God. The Lord warned the church in Laodicea, “... you

say, ‘I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need ofnothing,’ and you do not know that you are wretched andmiserable and poor and blind and naked” (Rev. 3:17). WeAmerican Christians, who have been so blessed materially,need to be careful to become rich toward God by laying up

treasures in heaven (Luke 12:13-34).These tombstones reveal a third lesson about God’sperspective on success and failure:3. Political power does not equal power with God.Esau and his descendants were men of great political power.They are called chiefs (36:15 ff.; 40 ff.) and kings (36:31 ff.).It is pointedly stated that these men reigned as kings in Edombefore any king reigned in Israel (36:31). Critics leap uponthis verse as proof that Genesis must have been written afterthe beginning of the monarchy, some 300 years after Moses.But in the previous chapter God had prophesied to Jacob thatkings would come forth from him (35:11), a promise whichhad also been made to Abraham (17:6, 16).Clearly, the point of 36:31 is to show that Esau’s sons, whowalked away from God, had the distinction of being kingslong before Jacob’s sons to whom it was promised. Jacob’ssons were a nation of slaves at the same time that Esau’s sonswere kings. Esau’s sons could have looked at Jacob’s sons andscoffed, “Where is your God and His promises?”Isn’t that how it often seems--that the world is winning, whileGod’s people are losing? We’ll reign with Christ someday, butmeanwhile the church is often persecuted and disregarded bypowerful political leaders who laugh at God. But we need toremember that political power and power with God are twodifferent things. The world may boast now in its politicalpower, but He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord scoffsat them (Ps. 2:4). It is the Lord who “removes kings andestablishes kings” (Dan. 2:21). While it is fine for Christianpeople to be involved in politics, we need to keep things inperspective. Political power is always subject to Him who is“ruler over the realm of mankind,” who “bestows it on whomHe wishes” (Dan. 4:17). True power is having power withGod.

Esau’s kingdom, Edom, later caused great trouble to Israel.There were frequent wars between the two nations. Edomcheered those who attacked God’s people (Ps. 137:7;Obadiah). Amalek, Esau’s grandson (36:12), became thefounder of a people who were a perennial enemy of Israel

(Exod. 17:8-16). There is a repeated emphasis in Genesis 36,that Esau is Edom (36:1, 8, 9, 19, and 43; also, the nameEdom and its synonym, Seir, are used frequently). Thesignificance of this otherwise unnecessary repetition seems tobe that God wanted His people to see what results when aman lives apart from Him. From this one man, Esau, anoutwardly good man, a likable man, a successful man fromthe world’s perspective, came the godless nation Edom, whichoften plagued the people of God. So God says, “Remember:Esau is Edom!”There’s a final lesson we can learn about success and failurefrom our stroll through Esau’s cemetery:4. Temporal fame does not equal eternal recognition byGod.In their day, Esau was more famous than Jacob. At the end oftheir lives, Jacob had about 70 descendants living under Pharaoh’sumbrella. Esau had conquered Edom and established adynasty there. By Moses’s day (over 400 years later), Israelwas a fledgling nation of slaves, recently escaped from Egypt,owning no land of their own. Edom was an establishedkingdom which had the power to refuse Israel passage overtheir land.But this tour through the graveyard of Genesis 36 shows usthat God, not man, writes the final chapter of history. Theseonce- famous names don’t mean a thing to our world today,but Israel’s name is in the news almost daily. These men,successful by the world’s measure, passed off the scene andwere soon forgotten as others clamored to take their place.

Today we don’t know anything more about them than iswritten here. Fame is a fleeting thing.The Edomite race endured until the time of Christ, when theywere known as Idumeans. They disappeared from history inA.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed. But before that,some famous Idumeans, descendants of Esau, ruled overIsrael: Herod the Great and his successor, Herod Antipas.They were wealthy, power-hungry, cruel despots. Herod theGreat slaughtered the infants of Bethlehem in his attempt tokill the newborn King of the Jews. Herod Antipas had Johnthe Baptist beheaded and mocked Jesus just prior to thecrucifixion.In a way it was a replay of history, when Esau’s descendant,Herod, who at that time had far more worldly prosperity,power, and fame, and Jacob’s descendant, Jesus, faced eachother. God’s side didn’t seem to be winning. Jacob’sdescendant went to the cross, while Esau’s descendant relaxed

in his luxurious palace. But God would write the final chapteron that part of history as well. The great Herod, like hisancestor Esau, was a successful man who went to hell. JesusChrist, the descendant of Jacob, was raised from the dead andis coming again to reign in power and glory.What really matters is recognition by God, not by this world.We live in a culture that worships fame. If a famous personbecomes a Christian, we rush his life story into print andhustle him onto the TV talk shows. The guy may be a babe inChrist, who doesn’t know anything about the Bible, but welisten to his every word as if he’s a spiritual authority.But the recognition that counts will come soon, when westand before the Lord Jesus Christ and hear Him say, “Welldone, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of yourmaster.” The most awful thing would be to be famous on thisearth--even famous as a Christian--and to stand before theLord and say, “Lord, Lord, I’ve done all these things in Your

name,” but to hear Him say, “Depart from Me; I never knewyou.”CO�CLUSIO�On the Shetland Islands off the northern coast of Scotland, a manspent five years and a lifetime of savings building a 62-foot steelyacht that weighed 126 tons. On the day of its launching, heinvited a local band to play and the whole town turned out to helphim celebrate. He planned a voyage around the world as soon asthe boat was launched. The band played, the bottle of champagnewas smashed across the bow, and the ship was lowered into thewater. But it sank to the bottom of the harbor! What good is abeautiful boat that doesn’t float? That man wasted five years and alot of money building a useless thing--a boat that didn’t float. Whatgood is a successful life that ends, whether in 25 or 85 years, if theperson is not ready for eternity? “What does it profit a man to gainthe whole world, and forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36).Our tour through Esau’s cemetery is over. I hope it’s made youthink about the question, “What am I living for?” While we stilllive, we all have a choice: To join Jacob and his descendants inwaiting patiently for God to fulfill His covenant promises to us, aswe labor for His coming kingdom. Or, to look over at Esau,prospering in the world, and join him in the pursuit of secularsuccess. If we succeed by worldly standards, but fail with God, wehave failed where it really matters. Whether we fail or succeed byworldly standards, if we succeed with God, we will have true andlasting success.

5. HE�RY

Here is a brief register kept of his family for some generations. 1. Because he was the son of Isaac, for whose sake this honour is put upon him. 2. Because the Edomites were neighbours to Israel, and their genealogy would be of use to give light to the following stories of what passed between them. 3. It is to show the performance of the promise to Abraham, that he should be "the father of many nations," and of that answer which Rebekah had from the oracle she consulted, "Two nations are in thy womb," and of the blessing of Isaac, "Thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth."

6. S. Lewis Johnson Jr.There are some interesting and important lessons that may be found inthis chapter that is so full of strange names. Carolyn Custis, one of ourchurch secretaries, has put her finger on one that might occur to manyof the readers of it. In a discussion, over the chapter in the churchoffice, she said, "Perhaps the chapter has been given to test theperseverance of Bible readers.'" It does do that, without question, andthere are some other lessons, too, which I will now try to set forth.In the first place, the devotion of an entire chapter, as well as therepetition of most of the material later in 1 Chronicles, testifies to thegenerous breadth of God's interest in the whole race, even in the non -elect. Esau's line is the line of those outside the pale of the covenant,but God's creatures they are and, thus, they are of concern to Him.In the second place, one is impressed with the certainty and individualityof divine judgment. The careful listing of the names of thefamily members reminds us that God does keep books that they shallbe opened, and that judgment shall surely take place. One is remindedof the solemn words of the Apostle John in Revelation 20:11-12, inconnection with the great White Throne Judgment, "And I saw a greatwhite throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth andheaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the

dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and bookswere opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life;and the dead were judged from the things which were written in thebooks, according to their deeds."In the third place, when recollecting the pictures given of Esau andJacob in the preceding chapters, one is reminded of the importance ofinward reality as over against outward appearance. There is probablyno greater contrast between the men of Scripture than that betweenJacob and Esau. Esau, it seems from the biblical accounts, wasprobably to the natural man an engaging person, attractive andgenerous, a genuine man's man. On the other hand, there are manythings about Jacob that repel. His deceitfulness, or under-handedness,surfaces in the record, in addition to the fact that he seems too tied toRebekah's apron strings.There was a great difference between them, however. In the case of

Jacob there existed a true interest in spiritual things, as shown by hisdesire for the birthright and the blessing. Imperfect though it was,Jacob was a man of faith, given him, no doubt, by God. On the otherhand, the true nature of Esau's character emerges in his response tothe loss of the blessing. He immediately threatens to kill his brother,thus showing that murder existed in his heart alongside the outwardattractiveness. His marriage in unbelief to the Hittite wives, and thenhis later attempt to please his father by marrying within the covenantfamily further reveal the true nature of Esau . The New Testamentpronounces the ultimate evaluation upon his character, calling him"profane" (cf. Heb. 12:16). He was sensual, secular, earthbound; Godwas not in all his thoughts. Thus, as the Lord instructed Samuel, whenthe prophet was of the view that Eliab was surely the son of Jesse thatGod intended to anoint in the stead of Saul, "Do not look at hisappearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejectedhim; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outwardappearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" (cf. 1 Sam. 16:7).

In the fourth place, one sees the issues of irreligion in the degenerationthat existed in the line from Esau. His descendants became bitterenemies of the Lord's people, devil worshipers, and finally came todesolating judgment. What we believe does have its ultimate effect inour lives and actions. One positive thing that might have come fromthe Iranian crisis is the insight that a man's religion does influence allhe thinks and does. The Moslem faith permeates the whole of thecultural and national life of Iran. In American evangelicalism, sad tosay, politics has dominated religion more than religion has dominatedpolitics. We have tended to become bogged down in such issues asprayers in Congress or in the public schools rather than in thechallenging of the secular and humanistic presuppositions of oursociety. The resurgence of Islam should remind every Christian of thefact that our biblical Christianity ought to pervade all areas of our life."Keep religion out of politics," is a clause we often hear, but it is notonly impossible, for our ultimate concerns always emerge in what wesay and do, but it is also bad. We should look at our politics in thelight of the divine principles set forth in the Word of God. By these weshould live and vote. Men cannot and should not ignore their relationto God. He may be worshiped by the believer, or blasphemed or hatedby the unbeliever, but He cannot be ignored. Religion is rooted in allthe is sues of life, and it will ultimately out. In Esau's line we see itemerging in irreligion, for that was Esau's faith.A study of the descendants of Jonathan Edwards reveals the opposite.Many great and impressive figures have come from this man who wassuch a towering figure in the Great Awakening.In the fifth place, one notes the lasting and often crucial importance ofapparently insignificant details. Esau's departure from Jacob is the

touchstone of Near Eastern (and world) politics today! Cf. vv. 6-8. Theseparation of Esau from Jacob corresponds to the struggle betweenEdom and Israel, between the Arab and the Jew, and between humansin and respon sibility and divine electing grace.

In the sixth place, there stands out here the faithfulness of God to Hispromises. He was faithful to Jacob, and the patriarch obtained ameasure of the possession of the land promised to him, when Esaufinally left the land for Seir. He obtained it without scheming andintrigue, but in God's way. But, on the other hand, God was alsofaithful to Esau, for He made promises to him also. These promises arerepresented in both prophecy and promise. It was said that he wouldserve his younger brother, but that in time he would throw off his yoke.This did come to pass. In addition, God in grace gave him wealth, aswell as influence and prominence (cf. Gen. 25:23; 27:39-40; 36:6 -8,15-19).Finally, one learns, or is reminded, again of the necessity of divinegrace. Jacob was in himself no different from Esau. Both were sons ofAdam naturally, but Jacob was the recipient of distinguishing grace.His line becomes like a garden in bloom, while Esau's is like a desertwaste. One leads on to the Lord Jesus Christ, while the other leadsinexorably to the black hole of the Lake of Fire. One person isaccepted, and the other is rejected, but both are responsible. Paul tellsthe story in Romans 9:10 -13, writing,And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceivedtwins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yetborn, and had not done anything good or bad, in order that God'spurpose according to His choice might stand, not because of works, butbecause of Him who calls, it was; said to her, "The older will serve theyounger." Just as it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."May the Lord give us the wisdom to turn from our trust in ourselves totrust in Him who alone can save us by the merits of His atonement inHis blood!

7. Unknown author wrote, "But, clearly, there is a greater theological purpose in this genealogy than simply to demonstrate that God's promises had come true or to explain how the bitter relations between Israel and Edom had come about. For Edom and Israel do not simply represent two families, or even two nations. They represent, as Cain and Seth and Ishmael and Isaac before them, the only two peoples that exist in the world, the only two nations that have ever existed in this world: the kingdom of this world, of the devil, and of unbelief on the one hand, and the kingdom of our God and of his Christ on the other.

From the very beginning of the book, in chapter 4, we have seen this division of mankind into the communities of faith and unbelief. Already at the beginning of

human history, right after the fall, men in rebellion are found seeking to build the city of man and men who have faith in God are found building his city in the world. The story of Genesis, and so the story of the world and all of its history as it unfolds, is, primarily, the story of God calling a people out of rebellious and fallen humanity to be his very own, bearing with that people through all of their ingratitude and disobedience, and using them to bring light and life to the rising generations until finally God's people as a whole will be regathered in the paradise from which they were driven by sin. But alongside of that story is its mirror-opposite, the story of the kingdom of man -- born in rebellion against God, marked by violence, pride, and, at last, futility. They build their towers of Babel, but always in the end, God frustrates their hope to find peace and life apart from him. They trouble the saints, they carry out their rebellion against God by seeking the harm of his kingdom and people and city. But God is seen, through it all, protecting his people and securing them in his salvation. This was, as you remember, the great theme of the toledot of Isaac, the story of Jacob and Esau."

Chapter 36 of Genesis is a powerful reminder to us of what we are always tempted to forget or, at least, to neglect bearing much in mind. There are two peoples occupying this world, two and only two: the people of Edom and the people of the Promised Land, the people who live their lives in rebellion against God and the people who walk with God.

We can divide this chapter as follows.

Esau's three wives and five sons, vv. 1-8

Esau's five sons and 10 grandsons, vv. 9-14

Chiefs (political or military leaders) descended from Esau, vv. 15-19

Chiefs of the Horites (with whom the Edomites intermarried and whom they

dispossessed), vv. 20-30

Kings of Edom, vv. 31-39

A final list of chiefs, vv. 40-43

CA� GOD LOVE THOSE HE HATES?

Ambivalence is the paradoxical experience of loving and hating at the same time. You can love your mate or your children and yet still hate their mood, behavior, or any number of things about them. Love and hate do not exclude each other. God has the ability to love those he hates, for he is love, and no matter how much he hates the evil in people he will in love do all he can to provide a way for them to be saved and blest. Matt. 5:43-48l

Luke 6:27-36. How inconsistent it would be for Jesus to be telling his disciples to be kind, loving and merciful to their enemies if god did not himself practice these principles. Is God kind to his enemies? Does he have blessings in store for those he hates? Just study his enemies and you will see the answer is yes.

Look at the most hated man and hated people of the Bible, which was Esau and the Edomites. He hated them, and yet look at the love he showed to them. Esau had the name of Edom also. Gen. 36:1,8,19. His land was called Seir or Edom-Gen 32:3. The entire chapter of Gen. 36 is devoted to the remembrance of this man. His genealogy takes up a major part of God’s Word. He had a vast family that led to many peoples. He had great wealth. They came to be abhorred-Deut. 23:7. His people held offices of honor in Israel in I Sam. 21:7. God used them to punish Solomon and guided their lives as he did Joseph in I Kings 11:14-22. They fought for independence just as Americans did and won-II Kings 8:20-22. David defeated them in I chron. 18:12-13. but God brought them back to power in II Chron. 28:17. They were allies with Israel against Moab in Iikings 3. His people lasted to the Messiah and they came to him in Mark 3:8, for Idumea was the people of Esau.

The people of Idumea were cursed in judgment in Isa. 34. They represented all the enemies of God’s people. They became enemies by refusing Moses and his people passage through their land in �um. 20:14-21. They shed Jewish blood in Ezek.25. They rejoiced at the fall of Jerusalem in Ps. 137:7 and Obed. 10-14. Lam. 4:21-21, Ezek. 25, Jer. 49:7-22. They are cursed in Mal. 1:1-5 and in the whole book of Obadiah. And yet they will be spared in times when all others are suffering in Dan. 11:36-45.

In Gen. 36:1-5 we see that Esau married Canaanites and so all of his people are a mix of Jew and Canaanite. In Gen. 36:11,34 we see Teman was Esau’s grandson and he developed a tribe called Temanites. One of these was one of the three friends of Job in Job 2:11. 4:1, 42:7-9. He was forgiven by Job in the end.

The bottom line is in Acts 15 where the first Christian Council has to decide if Gentiles can be equal to the Jews as part of the people of God. James speaks up in Acts 15:12-19 and he quotes Amos 9:11-12 where Edom, the remnants of Esau’s people are to be incorporated into God’s blest people. These most hated of all enemies of God’s people are in the seed of Abraham, and they are a part of God’s family in Christ.

Long before their were any Israelite kings there were many Edomite kings. Why this long genealogy of the worst enemies of Israel. Some feel it is a mistake and should not have been in the Bible. It is a big waste. They are here as a powerful testimony as to the love of God for his enemies, and his determination to save them if he possible can.

God hated Esau, and yet we see that he was blest with a large family and great wealth, and a special land and the right to be respected by Israel. Deut. 2:1-6,and Josh. 24:4. the Wise men were from the line of Esau and the shepherds from the line of Jacob.

1 This is the account of Esau (that is, Edom).

Esau's name in Hebrew means "hairy", and, according to Genesis 25:25, it is a reference

to his hairiness at birth. He is also called "Edom", which means red. Genesis relates this

directly to his selling his birthright for some "red stuff" (Gen. 25:30). However, Genesis

also makes a point of mentioning that he was red when he emerged from the womb (Gen

25:25). However, this may be an example of retroactive nomenclature, as the land which

was supposedly inhabited by his descendants, Edom, contains a great abundance of red

rock, and most scholars believe that the name of the land is a topographical reference.

"As we have said before, Genesis is divided into ten "toledots." Toledot is the Hebrew

word and it is variously translated "family record" or "family history" or "generations", or

simply, perhaps too simply, as in the NIV, "account." The first of these toledots begins in

Genesis 2:4, with the account of creation in Genesis 1 serving as a prologue to the entire

book. The last of them begins in 37:2, the toledot of Jacob, which will be, as we have

seen, not the story of Jacob but of his sons, as, for example, the toledot of Terah was

about Abraham and the toledot of Isaac was about Jacob and Esau. A toledot is an

account of one's descendants. The passage before us this morning is the ninth of these ten

toledots. We will have the same word again in v. 9, but in this one instance in the Book of

Genesis, this is a repetition not a new division or toledot.

A family history or a genealogy of Esau is expected here, in any case, because the

genealogy of the rejected line is characteristically given first in Genesis. We have the

genealogy of Cain in Genesis 4 and then of Seth in Genesis 5. Ishmael's toledot comes

before that of Isaac. And, now, we have Esau's before Jacob's. In each case the genealogy

of the rejected line is much shorter, mostly a list of names only."

BARNES, "Gen_36:1-8

This passage is introductory, and records the settlement of Esau with his family in Mount Seir. “Esau, who is Edom.” This is a fact of which we were informed in the previous history Gen_25:25, Gen_25:30. It is mentioned here because the latter name gave origin to the national designation; namely, the Edomites or Idumaeans. The occurrence of this explanatory or definitive clause here and in other parts of this chapter throws light on the manner in which this work was composed. Such parenthetical explanations are sometimes ascribed to the reviser or redactor of the original text. And to this there is no theoretic objection, provided the reviser be allowed to be of equal authority with the original author, and the explanatory addition be necessary for the reader of a later period, and could not have been furnished by the original author. Otherwise, such a mode of accounting for these simple clauses is unnecessary, and therefore, unwarrantable. The present case the writer has already explained, and the latest reader requires the clause no more than the earliest, as he is aware from the

previous notices that Esau is Edom. We are thus led to regard these explanatory clauses as marks of an early or artless simplicity of style, and not as any clear or certain traces of revision.

CLARKE, "These are the generations of Esau -We have here the genealogy of Esau in his sons and grandsons, and also the genealogy of Seir the Horite. The genealogy of the sons of Esau, born in Canaan, is related Gen_36:1-8; those of his grandchildren born in Seir, Gen_36:9-19; those of Seir the Horite, Gen_36:20-30. The generations of Esau are particularly marked, to show how exactly God fulfilled the promises he made to him, Genesis 25 and 27; and those of Seir the Horite are added, because his family became in some measure blended with that of Esau.

GILL, "Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom. Who was surnamed Edom, from the red pottage he sold his birthright for to his brother Jacob, Gen_25:30; an account is given of him, and his posterity, not only because he was a son of Isaac, lately made mention of as concerned in his burial; but because his posterity would be often taken notice of in the sacred Scriptures, and so their genealogy would serve to illustrate such passages; and Maimonides (m) thinks the principal reason is, that whereas Amalek, a branch of Esau's family, were to be destroyed by an express command of God, it was necessary that all the rest should be particularly described, lest they should all perish together; but other ends are answered hereby, as partly to show the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, concerning the multiplication of his seed, and the accomplishment of the oracle to Rebekah, signifying that two nations were in her womb, one of which were those Edomites; as also to observe how the blessing of Isaac his father came upon him with effect, Gen_22:17.

HAWKER, "This Chapter is a digression from the main subject of Jacob’s history, but becomes so far interesting from its connection with it, as it records the fulfillment of the divine promises concerning the posterity of Esau. When Rebekah was pregnant with Jacob and Esau, the LORD informed her that two nations were in her womb; and that two manner of people should be separated from her bowels. In confirmation of this, the distinct race of Esau for several generations is recorded in this Chapter: their decided hatred to the seed of Jacob is thereby more clearly left for discernment, as it occurred in the after ages of the Church.

Gen_22:17

Genesis 36:1-5

Observe, though Esau had three wives, yet but five sons from all. More wives than one, which is contrary to the divine ordination, is not always favourable to the increase of mankind.

BROW, " 36:1 The Jewish people are descended from the twelve sons of Jacob (35:22-26). In this chapter we are given the origins of the Arab tribes descended from Jacob’s brother Esau.

Note : The Arab nation eventually included all the tribes connected with Abraham’s relatives. From his nephew Lot came the Moabites and Ammonites who lived east of the

Dead Sea (19:36-38). After the death of Sarah (23:1-2) Abraham married Keturah. She was called a concubine because her children did not have a right to the family lineage (25:1, 5). Their tribes included the Midianites, and they lived in “the east country” of central Arabia (25:1-5). Abraham’s first-born son Ishmael first lived with his mother in the wilderness of Paran, which is now called the Sinai Peninsula. There he married an Egyptian woman (21:20-21), and they had twelve sons who were the first sheikhs of the Ishmaelite group of tribes (25:12-18).

In the process of time the Ishmaelites included other tribes by war and marriage so that all Arabs are now called bene ishmael (children of Ishmael). Abraham’s Aramean relatives in Haran (10:22; 11:27-31; 24:10, 24, 29; 28:1-2), who were later called Syrians, also became Arabs. All these tribal groupings were forged over two thousand years later into one Arab nation by Muhammad (c.570-632). His armies also subjugated (628 AD) the tribes descended from Joktan (10:25-30; 1 Chronicles 1:19-23)) who had been divided from the family of Eber (10:25). Instead of moving north-east to Haran, these had traveled due south from Ur to settle in what is now called the Yemen.

The original Hebrew and Arabic languages were derived from Canaanite, the Hamitic language which Abraham (probably a Sumerian, see notes on 10:24; 11:10-11), learned in the promised land. According to the Table of Nations Canaanite belonged to the Hamitic group of languages that included Ethiopian, Egyptian, Canaanite, and the languages of North Africa (10:6-20). Nimrod established Ethiopian, the language of Cush (the Horn of Africa) in Assyria and Babylonia (see notes on 10:8-12). As a result all Arabs were able to adopt closely related forms of a single Hamitic language, later called Arabic, which is a very close cousin of Hebrew.

The only records of how Arab origins and their tribal genealogies were connected with Abraham are found in the above chapters of Genesis (see the book on Ishmael the Arab). The beginning of the 3,800 year quarrel between Arabs and Jews is given in Genesis chapters 16 to 21. And a careful reconstruction of all the dates that are given fits into a consistent picture of patriarchal times. This makes nonsense of the Wellhausen hypothesis based on irreconcilable documents (J, E, D, and P), and the usual attitude of many Old Testament scholars who assume that Genesis is made up of ancient myths with very little historical foundation.

HENRY, "Observe here, 1. Concerning Esau himself, Gen_36:1. He is called Edom(and again, Gen_36:8), that name by which was perpetuated the remembrance of the foolish bargain he made, when he sold his birthright for that red, that red pottage. The very mention of that name is enough to intimate the reason why his family is turned off with such a short account. Note, If men do a wrong thing they must thank themselves, when it is, long afterwards, remembered against them to their reproach. 2. Concerning his wives, and the children they bore him in the land of Canaan. He had three wives, and, by them all, but five sons: many a one has more by one wife. God in his providence often

disappoints those who take indirect courses to build up a family; yet here the promise prevailed, and Esau's family was built up. 3. Concerning his removal to mount Seir, which was the country God had given him for a possession, when he reserved Canaan for the seed of Jacob. God owns it, long afterwards: I gave to Esau mount Seir (Deu_2:5; Jos_24:4), which was the reason why the Edomites must not be disturbed in their possession. Those that have not a right by promise, such as Jacob had, to Canaan, may have a very good title by providence to their estates, such as Esau had to mount Seir. Esau had begun to settle among his wives' relations, in Seir, before Jacob came from Padan-aram, Gen_32:3. Isaac, it is likely, had sent him thither (as Abraham in his life-time had sent the sons of the concubines from Isaac his son into the east country, Gen_25:6), that Jacob might have the clearer way made for him to the possession of the promised land. During the life of Isaac, however, Esau had probably still some effects remaining in Canaan; but, after his death, he wholly withdrew to mount Seir, took with him what came to his share of his father's personal estate, and left Canaan to Jacob, not only because he had the promise of it, but because Esau perceived that if they should continue to thrive as they had begun there would not be room for both. Thus dwelt Esau in Mount Seir, Gen_36:8. Note, Whatever opposition may be made, God's word will be accomplished, and even those that have opposed it will see themselves, some time or other, under a necessity of yielding to it, and acquiescing in it. Esau had struggled for Canaan, but now he tamely retires to mount Seir; for God's counsels shall certainly stand, concerning the times before appointed, and the bounds of our habitation.

JAMISON, "Gen_36:1-43. Posterity of Esau.

these are the generations— history of the leading men and events (compare Gen_2:4).

Esau who is Edom— A name applied to him in reference to the peculiar color of his skin at birth [Gen_25:25], rendered more significant by his inordinate craving for the red pottage [Gen_25:30], and also by the fierce sanguinary character of his descendants (compare Eze_25:12; Oba_1:10).

BENSON, "Genesis 36:1. These are the generations of Esau — Esau has the honour of having an account of his posterity recorded, for the sake of his progenitors, Abraham and Isaac, and because the Edomites, his descendants, were neighbours to Israel, and their genealogy would be of use to cast light on the following relations of what passed between them. Hereby also is shown more fully the performance of the promise to Abraham, that he should be the father of many nations, of that declaration made to Rebekah, when she inquired of the Lord, “Two nations are in thy womb,” and of the blessing given to Esau by Isaac, Thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth. Who is Edom — That name perpetuated the remembrance of the foolish bargain he made when he sold his birthright for that red pottage.

CALVIN

Now these are the generations of Esau. Though Esau was an alien from the Church in the sight of God; yet since he also, as a son of Isaac, was favored with a temporal blessing, Moses celebrates his race, and

inscribes a sufficiently lengthened catalogue of the people born from him. This commemoration, however, resembles an honorable sepulture. For although Esau, with his posterity, took the precedence; yet this dignity was like a bubble, which is comprised under the figure of the world, and which quickly perishes. As, therefore, it has been before said of other profane nations, so now Esau is exalted as on a lofty theater. But since there is no permanent condition out of the kingdom of God, the splendor attributed to him is evanescent, and the whole of his pomp departs like the passing scene of the stage. The Holy Spirit designed, indeed, to testify that the prophecy which Isaac uttered concerning Esau was not vain; but he has no sooner shown its effect, than he turns away our eyes, as if he had cast a veil over it, that we may confine our attention to the race of Jacob. Now, though Esau had children by three wives, in whom afterwards the blessing of God shone forth, yet polygamy is not, on that account, approved, nor the impure lust of man excused: but in this the goodness of God is rather to be admired, which, contrary to the order of nature, gave a good issue to evil beginnings.

K&D , "Esau's Wives and Children. His Settlement in the Mountains of Seir. - In the heading (Gen_36:1) the surname Edom is added to the name Esau, which he received at his birth, because the former became the national designation of his descendants. -Gen_36:2, Gen_36:3. The names of Esau's three wives differ from those given in the previous accounts (Gen_26:34 and Gen_28:9), and in one instance the father's name as well. The daughter of Elon the Hittite is called Adah (the ornament), and in Gen_26:34Basmath (the fragrant); the second is called Aholibamah (probably tent-height), the daughter of Anah, daughter, i.e., grand-daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, and in Gen_26:34, Jehudith (the praised or praiseworthy), daughter of Beeri the Hittite; the third, the daughter of Ishmael, is called Basmath here and Mahalath in Gen_28:9. This difference arose from the fact, that Moses availed himself of genealogical documents for Esau's family and tribe, and inserted them without alteration. It presents no irreconcilable discrepancy, therefore, but may be explained from the ancient custom in the East, of giving surnames, as the Arabs frequently do still, founded upon some important or memorable event in a man's life, which gradually superseded the other name (e.g., the name Edom, as explained in Gen_25:30); whilst as a rule the women received new names when they were married (cf. Chardin, Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 223-6). The different names given for the father of Aholibamah or Judith, Hengstenberg explains by referring to the statement in Gen_36:24, that Anah, the son of Zibeon, while watching the asses of his father in the desert, discovered the warm springs (of Calirrhoe), on which he founds the acute conjecture, that from this discovery Anah received the surname Beeri, i.e., spring-man, which so threw his original name into the shade, as to be the only name given in the genealogical table. There is no force in the objection, that according to Gen_36:25 Aholibamah was not a daughter of the discoverer of the springs, but of his uncle of the same name. For where is it stated that

the Aholibamah mentioned in Gen_36:25 was Esau's wife? And is it a thing unheard of that aunt and niece should have the same name? If Zibeon gave his second son the name of his brother Anah (cf. Gen_36:24 and Gen_36:20), why could not his son Anah have named his daughter after his cousin, the daughter of his father's brother? The reception of Aholibamah into the list of the Seirite princes is no proof that she was Esau's wife, but may be much more naturally supposed to have arisen from the same (unknown) circumstance as that which caused one of the seats of the Edomitish Alluphim to be called by her name (Gen_36:41). - Lastly, the remaining diversity, viz., that Anah is called a Hivite in Gen_36:2 and a Hittite in Gen_26:34, is not to be explained by the conjecture, that for Hivite we should read Horite, according to Gen_36:20, but by the simple assumption that Hittite is used in Gen_26:34 sensu latiori for Canaanite, according to the analogy of Jos_1:4; 1Ki_10:29; 2Ki_7:6; just as the two Hittite wives of Esau are called daughters of Canaan in Gen_28:8. For the historical account, the general name Hittite sufficed; but the genealogical list required the special name of the particular branch of the Canaanitish tribes, viz., the Hivites. In just as simple a manner may the introduction of the Hivite Zibeon among the Horites of Seir (Gen_36:20 and Gen_36:24) be explained, viz., on the supposition that the removed to the mountains of Seir, and there became a Horite, i.e., a troglodyte, or dweller in a cave. - The names of Esau's sons occur again in 1Ch_1:35. The statement in Gen_36:6, Gen_36:7, that Esau went with his family and possessions, which he had acquired in Canaan, into the land of Seir, from before his brother Jacob, does not imply (in contradiction to Gen_32:4; Gen_33:14-16) that he did not leave the land of Canaan till after Jacob's return. The words may be understood without difficulty as meaning, that after founding a house of his own, when his family and flocks increased, Esau sought a home in Seir, because he knew that Jacob, as the heir, would enter upon the family possessions, but without waiting till he returned and actually took possession. In the clause “went into the country” (Gen_36:6), the name Seir or Edom (cf. Gen_36:16) must have dropt out, as the words “into the country” convey no sense when standing by themselves.

COFFMAN, "Introduction

Toledoth IX (Genesis 36:1)

Roehrs referred to this chapter as a "list of meaningless names," suggesting that it is an act of penance merely to read it![1] Despite such a view, however, there remains an eternal significance in what is here written.

This chapter shows that God continued to be interested in all people, not merely the covenant family, and that His ultimate purpose was the blessing of "all the families of the earth," even as mentioned to Abraham (Genesis 12:1ff).

It was just as necessary to register the generations of Esau as it was to register those of Jacob, "in order to show that the Messiah did not spring from the former, but from the latter."[2]

Esau's intermarriage with the Canaanites resulted in the amalgamation with them, demonstrating the reason why God refused to the Israelites any foreign marriages.

The adoption on the part of Esau and his posterity of the monarchical system of

government, resulting in anarchy and the degeneration of his whole race, provided for Israel an object lesson which they should have heeded, but did not. The blunt notice in Genesis 36:31 that those kings of Edom came earlier than the rise of the monarchy in Israel emphasizes the fact that Israel had, as a result of Edom's experience, a detailed picture of what would eventually happen to them if they adopted a monarchical system. Those who would like to view the reference to kings arising in Israel (Genesis 36:31) as a proof of a late date for Genesis are frustrated, absolutely, by the fact that, at such a later time, after there had indeed arisen kings in Israel, such an implied warning would have been without any meaning whatever. Previous prophecies had made it clear that "dominion" would belong to Esau (Genesis 27:40), and that, in time, "kings" would be found among Jacob's posterity (Genesis 35:11). It was with respect to those prophecies that the example of what would come of theft "kings" found its place in this chapter.

Another purpose of the chapter was that of showing "fairness to Esau."[3] Here we learn that it was Esau who voluntarily left Canaan and dwelt in Seir in order to avoid conflict with his brother Jacob. Also, it should be remembered that, when Esau had all the force necessary as well as a favorable opportunity to destroy Jacob, he refrained from doing so. This chapter further confirms the fact of the reconciliation of those once-estranged brothers being complete. Thus, as Richardson said, "The chapter has much useful information."[4]

Regarding the familiar pastime of critics cutting up Genesis into multiple "sources," "Even they have failed to find a possible source to which they can ascribe these names"[5] Maybe Moses? The divisions of the chapter are:

Esau's wives and children (Genesis 36:1-8).

Esau's sons and grandsons, as fathers of tribes (Genesis 36:9-14).

Tribe-princes who descended from Esau (Genesis 36:15-19).

Pre-Edomite peoples, descendents of Seir the Horite (Genesis 36:20-30).

The kings of the land of Edom (Genesis 36:31-39).

Seats of the tribe-princes of Esau (Genesis 36:40-43).[6]

Verses 1-8

"Now these are the generations of Esau (the same is Edom). Esau took wives of the daughter of Canaan: Adah, the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, and Basemath Ismael's daughter, sister of Nebaioth. And Adah bare to Esau Eliphaz; and Basemath bare Reuel; and Oholibamah bare Jeush, and Jalam, and Korah: these are the sons of Esau, that were born to him in the land of Canaan. 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 gathered in the land of Canaan; and went into a land away from

his brother Jacob. For their substance was too great for them to dwell together; and the land of their sojournings could not bear them because of their cattle. And Esau dwelt in Mount Seir: Esau is Edom."

"These are the generations of Esau ..." This is the ninth of the ten great toledoths that introduce the respective sections of Genesis.[7] Note that, as in every other use of this word, it is a reference to what FOLLOWS, not to what PRECEDES.

We shall not dwell upon the difference in the names of Esau's wives from the names given in Genesis 26:34, and in Genesis 28:9. It is not certainly known why they do not agree. Many proposed "solutions" have included allegations that: it is due to the Arabian custom of replacing original names with surnames marking some memorable event;[8] it is accounted for by there being two sets of wives, those here being the ones married after the others were deceased;[9] it is explained by the fact that each wife had two names (as did also their parents), a not unusual feature among ancient peoples.[10] One explanation is as good as another, but we still do not know. Despite the impossibility of resolving this difficulty, however, it is gratifying to note that Speiser wrote, "The customary breakdown into documentary sources cannot be attempted with much hope of success;"[11] and that Francisco discounted this problem completely with the declaration that, "These records represent authentic ancient materials and come from a time before the Edomites were regarded with hostility."[12]

"Eliphaz ..." This is a name afterward borne by one of Job's friends (Job 2:11; Job 4:1; and Job 15:1).

"Reuel ..." This was a name afterward borne by Moses' father-in-law (Exodus 2:18).

"Born to him in the land of Canaan ..." (Genesis 36:5). This indicates that Esau continued to make his principal residence in Canaan until the removal mentioned in this paragraph. He also had probably been maintaining his vast herds of livestock in the mountains of Seir during a great portion of the same time.

"His cattle, and all his beasts ..." The Anchor Bible translates this as "his livestock," a term which includes cattle, beasts, flocks, and herds.

"The land of their sojournings could not bear them because of their cattle ..." This was the same situation that existed between Abraham and Lot, resulting in their separation. Both examples show the divisive power of great wealth, this being one of the ways in which wealth is wicked, called by Jesus Christ, "the Mammon of Unrighteousness." This does not mean that wealth is necessarily the fruit of unlawful or wicked deeds, but that money itself is wicked:

because it divides loved ones and friends;

surrounds its possessor with false friends;

tempts him to trust in it;

promises to solve all his problems, but instead becomes a problem,

it deceives the owner into thinking it belongs to him;

(6) it promises much and delivers little; and

it is an unqualified enemy of spirituality.

"And Esau dwelt in Mount Seir: Esau is Edom ..." Yates gave the principal cities of Mount Seir as: Sela, Bozrah, Petra, Teman, and Ezion-Geber.[13] This area lay southward from the Dead Sea in the mountainous region toward the Gulf of Aqaba. Edom lay between Moab to the northward, and Midian to the southward. "Edom," of course, is another name for Esau. The area was also called Idumaea, and its inhabitants Idumaeans. Josephus attributed that change to the Greeks, who, he said, "gave it a more agreeable pronunciation, and named it Idumea."[14]

PETT, "Introduction

The Descendants and Allies of Esau (Genesis 36:2-43)

This chapter now deals with the history of Esau prior to putting him to one side. This fits in with the compiler’s methods all through Genesis where he deals with secondary lines first before concentrating on the main line (e.g. the Cainite line and then the line of Seth - Genesis 4 & Genesis 5).

It is an interesting chapter and raises complex questions for the reader. We can understand why a record should be kept of the family of Esau, for he was closely connected with the family tribe at the time of the death of Isaac and was clearly on good terms with Jacob, but why should a record be kept of the genealogy of Seir the Horite (36:20-30) and of the kings of Edom (36:31-43)? For these records must finally have been in the hands of the family tribe in order to be compiled with the other records and be recorded here. The only time when these would have been of such interest was when Esau was in close contact with them and in the process of amalgamating with them (and was connected with them by marriage), or possibly if some Edomites were included among the slaves in Egypt and in the mixed multitude of Exodus 12:38.

There would appear to be a number of records utilised, all genealogical. These comprise Genesis 36:2-9, the sons of Esau; Genesis 36:10-19 the descendants and chiefs (or dukes) of Esau; Genesis 36:20-30 the sons and chiefs of Seir the Horite; Genesis 36:31-39, the kings who reigned in the land of Edom; Genesis 36:40-43, chiefs that came from Esau.

Verse 1

‘Now this is the family history of Esau, the same is Edom.’

Here again we have evidence of a colophon, a heading or final phrase that indicates content and ownership of a tablet. Esau was still the eldest son and head of the family and the family records would as such be his responsibility after the death of Isaac, Thus it may be that his name is now subscribed to the previous record to indicate ownership, although the actual recording would be made by a tribal member more suited to it. (Even if he did happily hand over the task to a tribal record keeper, or even to Jacob, the colophon would be in his name).

The fact that the later compiler had these covenant records available for putting together his narrative demonstrates how carefully they were preserved, some no doubt being read out at the family festivals as they renewed their covenant with Yahweh. It is significant that the last hint of a colophon and of covenant records occurs in Genesis 37:2. From then on we have a continual story. This is easily explained by the fact that that is basically the record of the life of Joseph, put together in Egypt as befitted such an important personage and written on papyrus. There were no longer then the limitations of clay and stone.

Alternately it may be a heading to define the content of the following genealogical history (compare ‘the same is Edom’ in Genesis 36:19, and ‘this is Edom, the father of the Edomites’ in Genesis 36:43). But Genesis 36:9 probably refers back to verse 8 and is therefore itself the colophon to that section. Thus we may have here the combination of a colophon and a heading, ‘this is the family history of Esau’ as the closing colophon and ‘Esau, the same is Edom’ as a heading. Either way they are evidence that we are dealing with written records.

If this latter be so then Genesis 37:1-2 a may be seen as originally ending the record we have just been looking at with chapter 36 being incorporated by the compiler in order to sum up the life of Esau after his mention in Genesis 35:29. The covenant record from Genesis 35:1 then ends with ‘this is the family history of Jacob’ (Genesis 37:2 a). This may seem more satisfactory from a modern point of view, for we like everything to fit a pattern, but it may not accord with ancient practise.

BI 1-43, "Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom

The history of the generations of Esau

I. WE SEE HOW THE PROMISES OF GOD CONCERNING ESAU WERE FULFILLED. Temporal prosperity.

II. WE LEARN WHAT IS THE PRINCIPLE UPON WHICH OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY IS WRITTEN. This chapter is a kind of leave-taking of Esau and his posterity. The stream of sacred history leads on to the Messiah, the flower and perfection of our human race. Scripture history is written upon this principle—that it was God’s design throughout to bring His only begotten Son into the world, and, therefore, that family alone in which He is to appear shall have a prominent record.

III. WE LEARN THAT THE ENEMIES OF GOD MAY BE DISTINGUISHED BY GREAT WORLDLY GLORY AND PROSPERITY. Three times in this chapter we meet with the phrase, “This is Edom”; and once “He is Esau, the father of the Edomites” (Gen_36:1; Gen_36:9; Gen_36:19; Gen_36:43). They were the bitterest enemies of Israel. Esau is the father of persecutors. Yet Esau was prospered in his lifetime more than his brother.

Thus the believer is taught that he must toil slowly upwards, and must not envy the rapid and joyful prosperity of the children of this world. His record and his reward are with the Most High. His prosperity may be late and remote, but it is permanent.

IV. WE LEARN HOW GOD WORKS IN THE FORMATION OF PEOPLES AND NATIONS. The subjugation of the Horites by the Edomites, and the fusion of both under one kingdom, is an instance of the manner in which peoples and nations are formed and consolidated. This has often occurred in history. We have examples in the rise of the Samaritans, and in the formation of the Roman people. And in modern times, we have a similar instance in the subjugation of the Gauls by the Franks. We see that the footsteps of God are to be traced throughout all human history. These nations which lay outside the covenant people were yet under the care and control of that Divine providence which appointed the bounds of their habitation, and watched over their growth and development (Act_17:26).

V. WE LEARN, ALSO, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE INDIVIDUAL ELEMENT IN HISTORY. The personal or individual element appears in all history, but in a most marked manner in sacred history. We see how nations are stamped with the character of their ancestor. (T. H. Leale)

Lessons

1. The genealogy of the wicked God records for His own ends in His Church.

2. God’s record of the wicked’s line is but to brand them to those who read it (Gen_36:1).

3. Godless hearts take strange wives—Hittites, Hivites, Ishmaelites—whatever God says against it (Gen_36:2; Gen_36:8).

4. Providence doth vouchsafe progeny to wicked and multiplied matches, though He like them not (Gen_36:4-5).

5. In God’s own time He moveth the hearts of wicked enemies, to turn aside from straitening His Church (Gen_36:6).

6. Outward portions to the wicked satisfy them in and for their departing from God’s Church (Gen_36:7).

7. Mount Seir pleaseth Esau better than the land of promise, because he is Edom (Gen_36:8).

8. The reproach of a profane Esau God maketh to rest upon his posterity (Gen_36:9).

9. Multitudes of wives and children and offspring God may grant unto the wicked.

10. God hath recorded the wicked End their progeny to distinguish them from His Church (verse 10-14).

11. Dukedoms and dignities in the world is only the ambition of the wicked. The saint’s is of another kind (2Co_5:1-21; 2Co_6:1-18; 2Co_7:1-16; 2Co_8:1-24; 2Co_9:1-15).

12. Dignities can never blot out the stain of sin from God’s presence. The Dukes are Edomites still (verse 15-19). (G. Hughes, B. D.)

Lessons

The name and line of the wicked are mentioned by God’s Spirit for distinction, not for honour to them.

2. Horites, Hittites, and Hivites are the national titles of the same sort of sinful people.

3. Uncleanness and unnaturalness are recorded in the wicked’s line to make them stink.

4. A numerous progeny with dignity may be the portion of the wicked here below.

5. Affinity with persons that are wicked, usually bring souls to affinity with their sins.

6. God suffers and orders the wicked to join so in affinity, in order to the destroying of each other. So it was with Seir and Edom (verse 20-30.) (G. Hughes, B. D.)

Lessons

1. Worldly men are ambitious of the highest titles of honour. Kings and dukes.

2. Earthly kingdoms God may order to the wicked (a settled government) before His Church (Gen_36:31).

3. Stinted are the numbers of kings and dignities by God in the world.

4. God maketh some notable for exploits above others. Hadad vanquisheth Midian.

5. Kings and queens are sometimes recorded for their shame by God’s Spirit.

6. God overturneth and changeth states and government at His pleasure.

7. Profane fathers and profane children are branded by God’s Spirit together, where mention is made of them. (G. Hughes, B. D.)

Increase of Esau’s house

The text systematically shows the gradual growth and increase of the house of Esau. Through his three wives he became the father of five sons; Adah and Bashemath gave each birth to one son (Eliphaz the firstborn (Gen_36:15), and Reuel). and Aholibamah to three (Jeush, Jaalam, and Korah). These children were born to him in Canaan. But he could no longer stay in the land of his birth. His herds and flocks were too numerous to find room, by the side of those of his brother Jacob; and he emigrated spontaneously. But this took place a very considerable time before the events related in the preceding chapter; for when Jacob returned from Mesopotamia, he sent messengers to Esau into Idumea, and promised to visit him later in Seir. But this circumstance does not imply a contradiction. Our portion records the history of Esau as far as it relates to political power; it, therefore, goes back to the fortieth year of his life when he first married. He had then long sold his birthright; he had, no doubt, heard the prophecy given to his mother, that to his younger brother Jacob, the inheritance of the blessings of Abraham was reserved; when, therefore, his father Isaac advanced in years and became afflicted with infirmity, Jacob was regarded as the future head of the house, and as such obtained

the superintendence over his father’s property; the cattle of Isaac was, therefore, considered as that of Jacob; and it was within the thirty-eight years between his marriage and Jacob’s flight, that Esau, at that time not inimical to his brother, left Canaan, thus willingly acknowledging the superior rights of Jacob, and spontaneously resigning his own claims upon the land. When Isaac, at the age of nearly 140 years, wish to bless his firstborn and favourite son, he sent for him to his new abodes; and Esau answered to the call, just as he came later to Canaan, at his father’s death, to assist at the funeral duties. (M. M. Kalisch, Ph. D.)

CONSTABLE, "D. What became of Esau36:1-37:1

Moses included this relatively short, segmented genealogy (toledot) in the sacred record to show God"s faithfulness in multiplying Abraham"s seed as He had promised. It also provides connections with the descendants of Esau referred to later in the history of Israel. Among his descendants were the Edomites ( Genesis 36:8) and the Amalekites ( Genesis 36:12). Lot, Ishmael, and Esau all walked out of the line of promise. This list also includes earlier inhabitants of the area later known as Edom whom Esau brought under his control. [Note: The NET Bible note on36:1.]

We can divide this chapter as follows.

Esau"s three wives and five sons, Genesis 36:1-8

Esau"s five sons and10 grandsons, Genesis 36:9-14

Chiefs (political or military leaders) descended from Esau, Genesis 36:15-19

Chiefs of the Horites (with whom the Edomites intermarried and whom they dispossessed), Genesis 36:20-30

Kings of Edom, Genesis 36:31-39

A final list of chiefs, Genesis 36:40-43

Different names of Esau"s wives appear here as compared with what Moses recorded earlier ( Genesis 36:2; cf. Genesis 26:34; Genesis 28:9). [Note: For an explanation, see Keil and Delitzsch, 1:321-22.] People added surnames to given names later in life. Women often received new names when they married. Esau married a Hittite ( Genesis 36:2), a Hivite ( Genesis 36:2) who was a descendant of a Horite (Hurrian, Genesis 36:20), and an Ishmaelite ( Genesis 36:3). Some commentators connected the Horites with cave dwellers since the Hebrew word for cave is hor. [Note: E.g, Speiser, p283; and

Sailhamer, " Genesis ," p223.]

Esau"s sons were born in Canaan and then moved out of the Promised Land to Seir. Jacob"s sons, except for Benjamin, were born outside Canaan in Paddan-aram and later moved into the Promised Land.

"That there are two toledot headings for Esau makes his treatment in two consecutive sections exceptional in the book. The first section [ Genesis 36:1-8] focuses on family and homeland, and the second [ Genesis 36:9 to Genesis 37:1] centers on his offspring as a developing nation. These two sections are flanked by the major narrative toledot sections of Isaac ( Genesis 25:19 to Genesis 35:29) and Jacob ( Genesis 37:2 to Genesis 50:26)." [Note: Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26 , p632.]

The Kenizzites ( Genesis 36:11; Genesis 36:15) later affiliated with the tribe of Judah. [Note: J. Milgrom, Numbers , pp391-92.] The Amalekites separated from the other Edomites and became an independent people early in their history ( Genesis 36:12). [Note: See the chart illustrating their family relationship among my comments on25:1-6.] A group of them settled in what later became southern Judah as far as Kadesh Barnea and the border of Egypt ( Genesis 14:7; Numbers 13:29; Numbers 14:43; Numbers 14:45). Another branch of the tribe settled in the hill country of Ephraim that was in central Canaan ( Judges 12:15). The largest group of Amalekites lived in Arabia to the southeast of Canaan and Edom. They united on occasion with their neighbors, the Midianites ( Judges 6:3; Judges 7:12) and the Ammonites ( Judges 3:13). Saul defeated the Amalekites ( 1 Samuel 14:48; 1 Samuel 15:2) as David did ( 1 Samuel 27:8; 1 Samuel 30:1; 2 Samuel 8:12). Some Simeonites finally exterminated them during Hezekiah"s reign ( 1 Chronicles 4:42-43).

"What is most interesting about the king list [ Genesis 36:31-39] is that it reflects an elective kingship rather than a dynastic one....

"These "kings" may have indeed been charismatic individuals who, like the Judges , assumed their office without regard to heredity." [Note: Hamilton, The Book . . . Chapters18-50 , p400.]

This list of Edomite kings demonstrates the partial fulfillment of God"s promise that kings would come from Abraham"s loins ( Genesis 17:16).

"It might seem unusual that such detail concerning the descendants of Esau be included, but the relationship between Esau and Jacob, and then between the nations of Edom and Israel, is a theme of the entire Old Testament." [Note: Davis, p259. For archaeological discoveries relating to the Edomites, see Itzhaq Beit-Arieh, "New Light on the Edomites," Biblical Archaeological Review14:2 (March-April1988):28-41.]

"What Israelites did to Canaanites, Esauites did to Horites. Thus Genesis 36 is moving backward from the conquerors ( Genesis 36:9-19) to the conquered ( Genesis 36:20-30)." [Note: Hamilton, The Book . . . Chapters18-50 , p397.]

Genesis 36:31 is probably a post-Mosaic explanation written after Israel had kings to show that the Edomites were also a powerful people with kings, even before there were kings in Israel. [Note: Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26 , p656.] This is further proof of God"s blessing on Esau, one of Abraham"s descendants.

Jacob was living at Hebron when Joseph"s brothers sold him, and he may have continued living there until he moved to Egypt ( Genesis 37:1; cf. Genesis 35:27).

"Verse1 [of chapter37] belongs structurally to the preceding narrative as a conclusion to the Jacob story. It shows Jacob back in the Land of Promise but still dwelling there as a sojourner like his father before him. The writer"s point is to show that the promises of God had not yet been completely fulfilled and that Jacob, as his fathers before him, was still awaiting the fulfillment." [Note: Sailhamer, " Genesis ," p225. Cf. Hebrews 11:39.]

Perhaps the major lesson of this genealogy is that secular greatness develops faster than spiritual greatness. Consequently the godly must wait patiently for the fulfillment of God"s promises.

LANGE, "PRELIMINARY REMARKS

A. It is in full accordance with the mode of statement used in Genesis, that at this point, at which Esau passes out from connection with the theocratic history, the history of his family, as belonging to the genealogical tree, should be preserved in the memory of the people of God (see p495). B. The toledoth of the Edomites is recorded in a series of special genealogies: 1. The point of departure: Esau’s wives and children, and his settlement upon the mountains of Seir ( Genesis 36:1-8); 2. Esau’s sons and grandsons viewed as tribe-fathers ( Genesis 36:9-14); 3. the tribe-chiefs or princes of the house of Esau ( Genesis 36:15-19); 4. the genealogy of the aborigines of the land, the Horites, with whom the Edomites, as conquerors, are mingled ( Genesis 36:20-30); 5. the kings of the land of Edom ( Genesis 36:31-39); 6. the ruling princes, i. e, the heads of provinces, or rather the seats of chieftains, enduring throughout the reigns of the kings of Edom ( Genesis 36:40-43).—C. It is clear that these tables do not form any one peculiar chronological succession. The tables, number three of the Edomitic princes, and four, of the Horite princes, form a parallel; in point of time, indeed, the line of Horite princes must be regarded as the older line. Song of Solomon, also, table number five of the kings of Edom, is parallel with number six of the provincial princes or councillors of Edom. There are, therefore, but three fundamental divisions: 1. The sons and grandsons of Edom; 2. the old and new princes of Edom; 3. the kingdom of Edom viewed as to its kings and as to its provincial rulers (or dukedoms).—In Deuteronomy 2:12; Deuteronomy 2:22, the Edomites appear to have destroyed the Horites, as the aboriginal dwellers in Seir. But this must be understood in the sense of a warlike subjugation,

which resulted partly in their absorption, partly and mainly in placing the original dwellers in the land in a state of bondage, and that wretched condition in which they are probably described in the book of Job ( Job 16:11; Job 17:6; Job 24:7; Job 30:1; see Knobel, p277). Knobel refers these tables, as generally all the completed genealogical tables in Genesis, to the Elohist. But this only is established, that the genealogical tables are, in their very nature, in great part Elohistic.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Esau’s wives and children, and his settlement upon the mountains of Seir ( [The difference between the catalogue there and here is due to the change in the Hebrew from one weak letter to another.—A. G.]—Into the country, from the face of his brother.—The conjecture that the word Seir has been left out after the word land or country, is superfluous [and hence unjustifiable.—A. G.], if we understand the words “away from his brother” as a qualifying adjective or phrase. He sought a country in which he should not meet with his brother. The final emigration of Esau to Seir after the death of his father does not exclude the preliminary migration thither ( Genesis 32:3); neither does the motive for the earlier removal, the securing of a wide domain for hunting, and over which he might rule, exclude the motive for the later, in the fact that the flocks of the two brothers had grown so large that they could not dwell together. We may well conclude, however, from the last statement, that Esau had at least inherited a large part of the herds of Isaac, although Keil assumes the contrary.

2 Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah daughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite-

L LEWIS JOH�SO� JR.The preceding chapter concluded with the death of Isaac, at whichboth Esau and Jacob were present. "Esau and Jacob," Delitzschcomments, "joined hands once more over the corpse of their father.

Thence their ways separated without ever again meeting."1 And nowchapter thirty -six begins with the listing of Esau's wives (cf. Gen. 36:1 -5; 26:34; 28:9).

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:2-5Esau took his wives. - From the word “his” we conclude that this sentence does not

refer to his marrying these wives, but to his taking them with him when he removed from Kenaan. Hence, the sentence, after being interrupted by the intervening particulars, is resumed and completed in the sixth verse. The date of this event is therefore, some time after Jacob’s flight to Padan-aram, and before his return. The daughter of Ishmael he only married after Jacob’s departure, and by her he had one son who was born in Kenaan. We may therefore, suppose that, about eighteen years after Jacob’s flight, Isaac had assigned to Esau a sufficient stock of cattle and goods for a separate establishment, the extent of Esau’s portion and of that which Isaac had reserved for Jacob had become so great as to demand pasture grounds widely removed from one another, and Esau’s former habits and his last matrimonial alliances had drawn him toward Mount Seir. He married his first wives when he was forty years of age Gen_26:34, and as Jacob was seventy-seven when he left his home, at eighteen years after that date, Esau had been fifty-five years married to his first two wives, and somewhat less than eighteen to Ishmael’s daughter.

Of the daughters of Kenaan. - This refers to the two following wives mentioned in this verse, and distinguishes them from the third, mentioned in the following verse, who is of the family of Ishmael. “Adah, daughter of Elon the Hittite.” On comparing the account of his two wives whom he married at forty with the present, the first, namely, Judith, daughter of Beeri the Hittite, no longer appears either by her own name, that of her father, or that of her tribe. Hence, we presume that in the course of the past forty-seven years she has died without male issue. This presumption is favored by the circumstance that the daughter of Elon the Hittite is now advanced into the first place. If it seems undesirable to anyone to make any presumption of this kind, we have only to say that in the absence of the connecting links in a historical statement like this, we must make some supposition to show the possibility of the events related. The presumption we have made seems easier and therefore, more likely than that the names of the individual, the father and the tribe, should be all different, and the order of the two wives reversed, and yet that the same person should be intended; and hence, we have adopted it as a possible arrangement, leaving to others the preference of any other possibility that may be suggested. For after all it should be remembered that testimony only could determine what were the actual circumstances. She who was formerly called Basemath appears here with the name of Adah. At a time when proper names were still significant, the application of more than one name to the same individual was not unusual.

Oholibamah, daughter of Anah, daughter of Zibon the Hivite. - This may have been the fourth wife of Esau in the order of time, though she is here classed with the daughter of Elon, because she was of the daughters of Kenaan. “Daughter of Zibon” means his granddaughter, by the mother’s side. “The Hivite” Gen_10:17. Zibon is thus distinguished from the Horite of the same name Gen_36:20. The Hivite race we have already met with at Shekem Gen_34:2. They also held four cities a short way north of Jerusalem, of which Gihon was the chief Jos_9:3, Jos_9:7,Jos_9:17. It was easy, therefore, for Anah the Horite to marry the daughter of Zibon the Hivite. “Basemath,” previously called Mahalath.

GILL Of the Canaanites, the posterity of cursed Canaan, most of them were of them, though not all, the two following were, and so those, if different from them in (Genesis 26:34) , one of his wives was of the family of Ishmael, as after related: Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite;according to Jarchi and Aben Ezra, this is the same with Bashemath, (Genesis 26:34) ; and that she had two names: and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon theHivite;the daughter of the one, and the granddaughter of the other, it being usual in Scripture to call grandchildren children, for Zibeon and Anah were father and son, (Genesis 36:24,25) ; and the Samaritan, Septuagint, and Syriac versions read here, "the daughter of Anah the son of Zibeon": there are an Anah and a Zibeon who were brethren, (Genesis 36:20) ; wherefore Aben Ezra supposes that these two brothers, or the father and son, lay with the same woman, and it could not be known whose child it was that was born of her, and therefore this was called the daughter of them both. Jarchi supposes this wife of Esau to be the same with Judith, (Genesis 26:34) ; but not only the names differ, but also the names of their fathers, and of the tribe or nation they were of.

CLARKE It appears that Esau's wives went by very different names. Aholibamah is named Judith, Genesis 26:34; Adah is called Bashemath in the same place; and she who is here called Bashemath is called Mahalath, Genesis 28:9. These are variations which cannot be easily accounted for; and they are not of sufficient importance to engross much time. It is well known that the same persons in Scripture are often called by different names. See the Table of variations, chap. xxv., where there are some slight examples. "Men who have read their Bible with care," says Dr. Kennicott, "must have remarked that the name of the same person is often expressed differently in different places. Indeed the variation is sometimes so great that we can scarcely persuade ourselves that one and the same person is really meant. A uniform expression of proper names is diligently attended to in other books: perhaps in every other book, except the Old Testament. But here we find strange variety in the expression, and consequently great confusion: and indeed there is scarcely any one general source of error which calls for more careful correction than the same proper names now wrongly expressed. I shall add here, from the Pentateuch, some proper names which are strangely varied: first, twenty-three names expressed differently in the Hebrew text itself, and seventeen of them in our English translation; and then thirty-one names expressed uniformly in the Hebrew yet differently in the English.

Ŀ SAME �AMES DIFFERI�G I� THE HEBREW Ĵ 1 Gen. iv. 18. Mehujael Mehijael in the same verse. 2 x. 3. Riphath Diphath 1 Chron. i. 6. 3 x. 4. Tarshish Tarshishah i. 7. 4 x. 4.

Dodanim Rodanim i. 7. 5 x. 23. Mash Meshech i. 17. 6 x. 28. Obal Ebal i. 22. 7 xxxii. 30,31. Peniel Penuel in the next verse. 8 xxxvi. 11. Zepho Zephi 1 Chron. i. 36. 9 xxxvi. 23. Shepho Shephi i. 40. 10 xxxvi. 39. Pau Pai i. 50. 11 xxxvi. 40. Alvah Aliah i. 51. 12 xlvi. 10. Jemuel �emuel �um. xxvi. 12. 13 xlvi. 10. Jachin Jarib 1 Chron. iv. 24. 14 xlvi. 10. Zohar Zerah �un. xxvi. 13, and 1 Chron. iv. 24. 15 xlvi. 11. Gershon Gershom 1 Chron. vi. 1,16. 16 xlvi. 13. Job Jashub �um. xxvi. 24. 17 xlvi. 16. Ezbon Ozni xxvi. 16. 18 xlvi. 21. Huppim Huram 1 Chron. viii. 5. 19 xlvi. 21. Ard Addar viii. 3. 20 xlvi. 23. Hushim Shuham �um. xxvi. 42. 21 Exod. iv. 18. Jether Jethro in the same verse. 22 �um. i. 14. Deuel Reuel �um. ii. 14. 23 Deut. xxxii. 44. Hoshea Joshua Deut. xxxiv. 9. Ŀ �AMES SAME I� HEBREW YET DIFFERE�T I� E�GLISH Ĵ 1 Gen. v. 3. Seth Sheth 1 Chron. i. 1. 2 v. 6. Enos Enosh i. 1. 3 v. 9. Cainan Renan i. 2. 4 v. 15. Jared Jered i. 2. 5 v. 18. Enoch Henoch i. 3. 6 v. 21. Methuselah Mathushelah i. 3. 7 x. 6. Phut Put i. 8. 8 x. 14. Philistim The Philistines i. 12. 9 x. 14. Caphtorim Caphthorim i. 12. 10 x. 16. Emorite Amorites Gen. xv.16,21. 11 x. 16. Girgasite Girgashites xv. 21. 12 x. 19, and Gaza Azzah Deut.ii. 23, and Jer. xlvii. 5. Jer. xxv. 20. 13 Gen. x. 22. Ashur Asshur 1 Chron. i. 17. 14 x. 24. Salah Shelah i. 18. 15 xiv. 2,8. Zeboiim Zeboim Deut. xxix. 23. 16 xiv. 5; xv. 20. Rephairns Giants -ii. 20;iii. 11, 17 xxv. 15. �aphish �ephish 1 Chron. v. 19. 18 xxix. 6. Rachel Rahel Jer. xxxi. 15. 19 xxxvi. 34. Temani The Temanites 1 Chron. i. 45. 20 xxxvi. 37. Saul Shaul i. 48. 21 xxxvii. 25,28. Ishmeelites Ishmaelites Judg. viii. 24. 22 Exod. i. 11. Raamses Rameses Exod. xii. 37. 23 vi. 18. Izhar Izehar �um. iii. 19. 24 vi. 19. Mahali Mahli 1 Chron. vi. 19. 25 Lev. xviii. 21. Molech Molech Amos v. 26. 26 �um. xiii. 8,16. Oshea Hoshea Deut. xxxii. 44. 27 xiii. 16. Jehoshua Joshua �um. xiv. 6. 28 xxi. 12. Zared Zered Deut. ii. 13. 29 xxxii. 3. Jazer Jaazar �um. xxxii. 13. 30 xxxiii. 31. Bene-Jaakan Children of Deut. x. 6. Jaakan 31 Deut. iii. 17. Ashdoth- Springs of iv. 49. pisgah Pisgah

"�othing can be more clear than that these fifty-four proper names (at least the far greater part of them) should be expressed with the very same letters, in the places where they are now different. In the second list, instances 6,10, and 13, have been corrected and expressed uniformly in the English Bible printed at Oxford in 1769. And surely the same justice in the translation should be done to the rest of these proper names, and to all others through the Bible; at least, where the original words are now properly the same. Who would not wonder at seeing the same persons named both Simon and Shimon, Richard and Ricard? And can we then admit here both Seth and Sheth, Rachel and Rahel? Again: whoever could admit (as above) both Gaza and Azzak, with Rameses and Raamses, should not object to London and Ondon, with Amsterdam and Amstradam. In short, in a history far more interesting than any other, the names of persons and places should be distinguished accurately, and defined with exact uniformity. And no true critic will think lightly of this advice of Origen, Contemnenda non est accurata circa �OMI�A diligentia ei, qui volurit probe intelligere sanctas literas? �o person who desires thoroughly to understand

the sacred writings, should undervalue a scrupulous attention to the proper names."-Kennicott's Remarks.

JAMISO�, "Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan— There were three, mentioned under different names; for it is evident that Bashemath is the same as Mahalath (Gen_28:9), since they both stand in the relation of daughter to Ishmael and sister to Nebajoth; and hence it may be inferred that Adah is the same as Judith, Aholibamah as Bathsemath (Gen_26:34). It was not unusual for women, in that early age, to have two names, as Sarai was also Iscah [Gen_11:29]; and this is the more probable in the case of Esau’s wives, who of course would have to take new names when they went from Canaan to settle in mount Seir.

PETT, "Verses 2-9

The Sons of Esau (Genesis 36:2-9)

Genesis 36:2

‘Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, and Basemath, Ishmael’s daughter, sister of Nebaioth.’

In Genesis 26:34 Esau’s Cananite wives are named Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite. Ishmael’s daughter is called Mahalath, sister of Nebaioth (Genesis 28:9). Thus Basemath has become Adah, Judith has become Oholibamah (Beeri the Hittite may well have been married to Anah), and Mahalath becomes Basemath.

One possibility we must consider is that on marriage Canaanite wives often took on another name indicating their change of status. Thus Judith may have become Oholibamah (‘tent of the high place’), a suitable marriage name due to its connection with the holy tent, and a name connected with her mother’s family, and Mahalath may have become Basemath (possibly ‘the fragrant one’). Basemath may have thus changed her name to Adah (meaning unknown).

As Basemath probably means ‘fragrant’ it is also very possible that this was a nickname regularly used by Esau. He may have called Adah this as a love name, and later applied it to Mahalath when his affections varied (compare our use of ‘honey’ or ‘sugar’) causing confusion to the record keepers. Or he may have liked the name and when Basemath relinquished it on marriage have suggested it to Mahalath as a married name.

As mentioned Oholibamah means ‘tent of the high place’ suggesting a tabernacle similar to some extent to that later in use in by the Israelites. It is also the name of one of the ‘dukes of Edom’ (Genesis 36:41) and of one of the daughters of Anah the Horite (Genesis 36:25). The dual name theory would account for why a Canaanite woman bears an Edomite name due to Esau’s early connections with Edom prior to his marriages. Consider also how Beeri the Hittite appears to have been married to an ‘Edomite’ woman, Anah daughter of Zibeon the Hivite (compare Zibeon the Horite in Genesis 36:24 who also had a son called Anah. There seems to be some parallel between Hivites

and Horites).

That Anah was an important person due to her connections comes out in the constant reference to her (Genesis 36:2; Genesis 36:14; Genesis 36:18). She was the daughter of Zibeon the Hivite (Genesis 36:2) who is probably the same as Zibeon, the son of Seir the Horite (Genesis 36:20). We do not know who the Hivites were but they are regularly mentioned as one of the tribes in Canaan, and their connection with the Horites is suggested here. Indeed the name may be an alternative rendering, ‘v’ instead of ‘r’, either as an error in copying or otherwise. The LXX of Genesis 34:2 and Joshua 9:7 renders Hivite as Horite which may suggest an original different reading.

3 also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of �ebaioth.

GILL, "And Bashemath, Ishmael's daughter, sister of Nebaioth,.... The eldest son of Ishmael, see Gen_28:9; called there Mahalath.

4 Adah bore Eliphaz to Esau, Basemath bore Reuel,

GILL "And Adah bare to Esau Eliphaz,.... This son of Esau, according to Jerom (n), is the same with him mentioned in the book of Job, as one of his friends that came to visit him, Job_2:11; and so says the Targum of Jonathan on Gen_36:10; but he rather was the grandson of this man, since he is called the Temanite:

and Bashemath bare Reuel; the name is the same with Reuel or Raguel, the name of Jethro; but cannot be the same person as is said by some, for he was a Midianite and not an Edomite, Exo_2:18.

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:4-5Five sons were born to Esau in Kenaan, of whom Adah and Basemath bare each one.

As Oholibamah bare him three sons before leaving Kenaan, she must have been married to him four or five years before that event, perhaps on the death of his first wife, and in consequence of his connection with the south.

5 and Oholibamah bore Jeush, Jalam and Korah. These were the sons of Esau, who were born to him in Canaan.

GILL, " In this genealogy mention is made of another Korah among the sons of Eliphaz, (Genesis 36:16) ; which Jarchi thinks is the same with this, and takes him to be a bastard, and begotten in incest by Eliphaz, on his father's wife Aholibamah; but Aben Ezra observes, that some are of opinion that there were two Korahs, one the son of Aholibamah, and the other the son of Adah; but he thinks there were but one, which was the son of Aholibamah, and is reckoned among the sons of Eliphaz, because he dwelt among them; or perhaps his mother died when he was little, and Adah brought him up with her sons, and so was reckoned her son; such were the children of Michal, Saul's daughter: these [are] the sons of Esau, which were born to him in the land of Canaan; and we do not read of any born to him elsewhere; so that of all his wives, which some think were four, others five, he had but five sons; what daughters he had is not related, though from (Genesis 36:6) , it appears he had

some."

6 Esau took his wives and sons and daughters and all the members of his household, as well as his livestock and all his other animals and all the goods he had acquired in Canaan, and moved to a land some distance from his brother Jacob.

GILL, " The names of his wives and sons are before given; but what were the names of his daughters, or their number, is not said: and all the persons of his house:his menservants and maidservants that were born in his house, or bought with his money; the word for "persons" signifies "souls" F15, and is sometimes used for slaves that are bought and sold, see (Ezekiel 27:13) (Revelation 18:13) : and his cattle, and all his beasts;his sheep and oxen, camels and asses: and all his substance which he had got in the land of Canaan:before he went to Seir the first time, part of which he might leave behind in Canaan, with servants to improve it; and also that part of his father's personal estate which fell to him at his death, as well as what he might further acquire after his death, during his stay in Canaan: and went into the country from the face of his brother Jacob;not into another part of the same country; but into another country, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan supply it, and so the Arabic version, even unto Seir, as appears by what follows; and whither he had been before, and had obtained large possessions, and now having got all he could at his father's death, and collecting together all his other substance, thought fit to retire from thence to Seir, which he liked better, and for a reason afterwards given; God thus disposing his mind, and making the circumstances of things necessary, that he should remove in order to make way for Jacob, and his posterity, to dwell in a land which was designed for them: and so the Samaritan and Septuagint versions read it, "and he went out of the land of Canaan": and the Syriac version is, "and he went to the land of Seir". Some render the words to this sense, that he went thither "before the coming of Jacob" {p}; and it is true that he did go thither before his brother came again into Canaan; but of this the text speaks not, for what follows will not agree with it; others better, "because of Jacob" F17; not for fear of him, as the Targum of Jonathan, which paraphrases the words,

``for the terror of his brother Jacob was cast upon him;''

but because he knew, by the blessing of his father, and the oracle of God, and his concurring providence in all things, that the land of Canaan belonged to him, and also for a reason that follows."

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:6-8The sentence that was left incomplete in Gen_36:2 is now resumed and completed.

His departure from Kenaan is ascribed to the abounding wealth of himself and his brother. What remained in the hands of Isaac was virtually Jacob’s, though he had not yet entered into formal possession of it. Mount Seir is the range of hills extending from

the Elanitic Gulf to the Salt Sea; the northern part of which is called Jebal Γεβαλήνη

Gebalénē and the southern part esh-Sherah, and parallel to which on the west lies Wady

Arabah. In this range is situated the celebrated rock city, Sela or Petra, adjacent to Mount Hor.

CLARKE So it appears that Esau and Jacob dwelt together in Canaan, whither the former removed from Seir, probably soon after the return of Jacob. That they were on the most friendly footing this sufficiently proves; and Esau shows the same dignified conduct as on other occasions, in leaving Canaan to Jacob, and returning again to Mount Seir; certainly a much less fruitful region than that which he now in behalf of his brother voluntarily abandoned.

JAMISO�, "Esau ... went into the country from the face of his brother Jacob— literally, “a country,” without any certain prospect of a settlement. The design of this historical sketch of Esau and his family is to show how the promise (Gen_27:39, Gen_27:40) was fulfilled. In temporal prosperity he far exceeds his brother; and it is remarkable that, in the overruling providence of God, the vast increase of his worldly substance was the occasion of his leaving Canaan and thus making way for the return of Jacob.

CALVI� And went into the country from the face of his brother Jacob. Moses does not mean that Esau departed purposely to give place to his brother; for he was so proud and ferocious, that he never would have allowed himself to seem his brother’s inferior. But Moses, without regard to Esau’s design, commends the secret providence of God, by which he was driven into exile, that the possession of the land might remain free for Jacob alone. Esau removed to Mount Seir, through the desire of present advantage, as is elsewhere stated. �othing was less in his mind than to provide for his brother’s welfare; but God directed the blind man by his own hand, that he might not occupy that place in the land which he had appointed for his own servant. Thus it often happens that the wicked do good to the elect children of God, contrary to their own intention; and while their hasty cupidity pants for present advantages, they promote the eternal salvation of those whose destruction they have sometimes desired. Let us, then, learn from the passage before us, to see, by the eyes of faith, both in accidental circumstances (as they are called) and in the evil desires of men, that secret providence of God, which directs all events to a result predetermined by himself. For when Esau went forth, that he might live more commodiously apart from his father’s family, he is said to have departed from the face of his brother, because the Lord had so determined it. It is stated indefinitely, that he departed “into the country;” because, being in uncertainty respecting his plan, he sought a home in various places, until Mount Seir presented itself; and as we say, he went out at a venture.

BE�SO�, "Genesis 36:6. Esau took his wives and all his substance, &c. — Although he had begun to settle among his wives’ relations in Seir, before Jacob came from Padan-aram, Genesis 32:3; yet, it is probable, that during the life of Isaac, he had still some effects remaining in Canaan; but after his death, he wholly withdrew to mount Seir, took with him what came to his share of his father’s personal estate,

and left Canaan to Jacob, not only because Jacob had the promise of it, but because he saw, if they should both continue to thrive, as they had begun, there would not be room for both.

PETT, "Genesis 36:6-8

‘And Esau took his wives and his sons and his daughters, and all the folk in 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 from his brother Jacob, for their substance was too great for them to dwell together and the land of their sojournings could not bear them because of their cattle, and Esau dwelt in Mount Seir. Esau is Edom.’This combination of genealogy and snippets of historical events is a feature of early genealogies, compare the Sumerian king lists where the same occurs.

As we have seen Esau had divided his time between his band of warriors in Mount Seir and helping his father in Canaan. But now that his father is dead, and we cannot doubt that he left a generous legacy to Esau, he removes to Mount Seir permanently. This was necessary anyway because their joint possessions were so great that there was not room for both Jacob and Esau. Once again we have brought home to us the wealth of the patriarchs and their sizeable ‘households’.

“Esau is Edom.” A constant refrain in this chapter. See Genesis 36:1, Genesis 36:19. Compare Genesis 36:9 and Genesis 36:43 where ‘Esau is the father of Edom’ that is of the Edomites. Esau was nicknamed Edom because of his red colouring, and this name passes on to those who are connected with him.

7 Their possessions were too great for them to remain together; the land where they were staying could not support them both because of their livestock.

GILL, "And therefore it was proper to part, as Abraham and Lot had done before, (Genesis 13:6) ; and the land wherein they were strangers could not bear them, because of their cattle; their cattle were so numerous that they could not get pasturage for them, there not being enough left them by the inhabitants of it for them to occupy; nor could they hire land of them sufficient for them both; they

being not possessors but sojourners in it, and therefore could have no more of it than the inhabitants thought fit to let unto them."

GUZIK Esau's cry to Isaac Have you only one blessing, my father? (Genesis 27:38) proved unfounded. Because he was a descendant of Abraham, God blessed Esau, and blessed him in the only way he really cared about: materially.

8 So Esau (that is, Edom) settled in the hill country of Seir.

GILL, "Before he is said to be in the land of Seir, (Genesis 32:3) ; now to dwell in a mount of that name; from which driving the Horites, he seized upon and dwelt in it; it had not its name from his own rough, shaggy hair, as Josephus says F18, much less from the satyrs, and hairy demons that frequented it, as R. Abraham Seba F19, but rather from Seir the Horite who inhabited the land, (Genesis 36:20) ; unless he had his name from the mountain which might be so called, from its being rough and rugged like shaggy hair, and being covered with bushes and brambles which carried such a resemblance; and so it stands opposed to Mount Halak near it, (Joshua 11:17) , which signifies the bald or smooth mountain, being destitute of shrubs… The Targum of Jonathan calls this mountain Mount Gabla, and one part of the land of Edom, or Idumea, was called Gobolites, as Josephus F20 relates, perhaps the same with Gebal, (Psalms 83:7) ; hither Esau went and took up his residence, after things were amicably adjusted between him and his brother Jacob; the Jews say {u}, that Isaac left, all he had to his two sons, and that after they had buried him, Esau said to Jacob, let us divide what our father has left us into two parts, and I will choose because I am the firstborn; so Jacob divided it into two parts; all that his father had left he made one part, and the land of Israel the other part, and Esau took what his father left, see (Genesis 36:6) ; and the land of Israel and the cave of Machpelah he delivered to Jacob, and they drew up everlasting writings between them. �ow this or something like it being the case, and those the circumstances of

fixings, thus, and by that means, so it came to pass, that Esau dwelt in Seir; and Jacob remained secure and quiet in the land of Canaan; Esau [is] Edom,so called from the red pottage he had of Jacob, which is repeated to fix the odium of that transaction upon him, as well as for the sake of what follows, showing the reason why his posterity were called Edomites.

JAMISO�, "Thus dwelt Esau in mount Seir— This was divinely assigned as his possession (Jos_24:4; Deu_2:5).

A Brief History of EdomClick on the references for detail Descendants of Esau, Jacob's brother

Genesis 36:1, 9Denied passage to Israel on the east side of the Jordan River �umbers 20:14-21; Judges 11:17-18Balaam prophesied their conquest by Israel �umbers 24:18King Saul fought against Edom I Samuel 14:47King David conquered it II Samuel 8:13-14After a rebellion, David's General Joab killed all the males in Edom I Kings 11:14-16Edom's King who fled into Egypt under David returns during Solomon's reign

I Kings 11:17-22Edom and allies attempted and unsuccessful raid of Judah during King Jehoshaphat's reign II Chronicles 20:1-2They rebelled against King Jehoram (Joram) II Kings 8:20-22; II Chronicles 21:8-10King Amaziah of Judah recaptured Edom II Kings 14:7; II Chronicles 25:11-12Edom raided Judah when Ahaz was king II Chronicles 28:17Edom was controlled by the Assyrians and later, the Babylonians Jeremiah 27The Edomites were displaced by other people and a remnant migrated into Southern Judah where we find them in �ew Testament times. This region of Judea was known as Idumaea

9 This is the account of Esau the father of the Edomites in the hill country of Seir.

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:9-14After the removal to Mount Seir the race of Esau is traced further. It is remarkable

that the phrase, “And these are the generations of Esau,” is now repeated. This is sufficient to show us that it does not necessarily indicate diversity of authorship, or is a very distinct piece of composition. Here it merely distinguishes the history of Esau’s descent in Mount Seir from that in Kenaan. “Father of Edom.” Edom here denotes the nation sprung from him. Eliphaz has five sons by his wife, and by a concubine a sixth, named Amalek, most probably the father of the Amalekites Gen_14:7. “Timna” was probably a very young sister of Lotan Gen_36:22, perhaps not older than her niece Oholibamah Gen_36:25. Eliphaz was at least forty-one years younger than Esau. Yet it is curious that the father takes the niece to wife, and the son the aunt. “Teman” is the father of the Temanites, among whom we find Eliphaz the Temanite mentioned in Job Job_2:11. The name Kenaz may indicate some affinity of Edom with the Kenizzites Gen_25:19, though these were an older tribe. The other tribes are not of any note in history. Zepho is Zephi in Chronicles, by the change of a feeble letter. Such variations are not unusual in Hebrew speech, and so make their appearance in writing. Thus, in Genesis itself we have met with Mehujael and Mehijael, Peniel and Penuel Gen_4:18; Gen_32:30-31. The sons of Esau by Oholibamah are younger than the other two, and hence, these sons are not enumerated along with those of the latter.

GILL, "And these are the generations of Esau,.... Or the posterity of Esau, his children and grandchildren, as before and hereafter related:

the father of the Edomites in Mount Seir; from whom they of that mountain and in the adjacent country had the name of Edomites or Idumeans.

HAWKER, "How short the account! how trifling the record of this man’s race! Here is no further mention of them than by name: and their very posterity enumerated only to three or four generations. Reader! look at that scripture, Psa_37:35-36.

HENRY 9-19, "Observe here, 1. That only the names of Esau's sons and grandsons are recorded, only their names, not their history; for it is the church that Moses preserves the records of, not the record of those that are without. Those elders that lived by faith alone obtained a good report. It is Sion that produces men of renown, not Seir, Psa_87:5. Nor does the genealogy go any further than the third and fourth generation; the very names of all after are buried in oblivion. It is only the pedigree of the Israelites, who were to be the heirs of Canaan, and of whom were to come the promised seed, and the holy seed, that is drawn out to any length, as far as there was occasion for it, even of all the tribes till Canaan was divided among them, and of the royal line till Christ came. 2. That these sons and grandsons of Esau are called dukes, Gen_36:15-19. Probably they were military commanders, dukes, or captains, that had soldiers under them; for Esau and his family lived by the sword, Gen_27:40. Note, Titles of honour have been more ancient out of the church than in it. Esau's sons were dukes when Jacob's sons were but plain shepherds, Gen_47:3. This is not a reason why such titles should not be used among Christians; but it is a reason why men should not overvalue themselves, or others, for the sake of them. There is an honour that comes from God, and a name in his house that is infinitely more valuable. Edomites may be dukes with men, but Israelites

indeed are made to our God kings and priests. 3. We may suppose those dukes had numerous families of children and servants that were their dukedoms. God promised to multiply Jacob, and to enrich him; yet Esau increases, and is enriched first. Note, It is no new thing for the men of this world to be full of children, and to have their bellies too filled with hidden treasures, Psa_17:14. God's promise to Jacob began to work late, but the effect of it remained longer, and it had its complete accomplishment in the spiritual Israel.

K&D 9-14, "(cf. 1Ch_1:36-37). Esau's Sons and Grandsons as Fathers of Tribes. -Through them he became the father of Edom, i.e., the founder of the Edomitish nation on the mountains of Seir. Mouth Seir is the mountainous region between the Dead Sea

and the Elanitic Gulf, the northern half of which is called Jebâl (Γεβαλήνη) by the Arabs, the southern half, Sherah (Rob. Pal. ii. 552). - In the case of two of the wives of Esau, who bore only one son each, the tribes were founded not by the sons, but by the grandsons; but in that of Aholibamah the three sons were the founders. Among the sons of Eliphaz we find Amalek, whose mother was Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz. He was the ancestor of the Amalekites, who attacked the Israelites at Horeb as they came out of Egypt under Moses (Exo_17:8.), and not merely of a mixed tribe of Amalekites and Edomites, belonging to the supposed aboriginal Amalekite nation. For the Arabic legend of Amlik as an aboriginal tribe of Arabia is far too recent, confused, and contradictory to counterbalance the clear testimony of the record before us. The allusion to the fields of the Amalekites in Gen_14:7 does not imply that the tribe was in existence in Abraham's time, nor does the expression “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 mention a double Amalek (cf. Hengstenberg, Dissertations 2, 247ff., and Kurtz, History i. 122, 3, ii. 240ff.).

(Note: The occurrence of “Timna and Amalek” in 1Ch_1:36, as coordinate with the sons of Eliphaz, is simply a more concise form of saying “and from Timna, Amalek.”)

If there had been an Amalek previous to 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 headquarters in the southern part of the mountains of Judah, as far as Kadesh (Gen_14:7; Num_13:29; Num_14:43, Num_14:45), but, like the Bedouins, spreading themselves as a nomad tribe over the whole of the northern portion of Arabia Petraea, from Havilah to Shur on the border of Egypt (1Sa_15:3, 1Sa_15:7; 1Sa_27:8); whilst one branch penetrated into the heart of Canaan, so that a range of hills, in what was afterwards the inheritance of Ephraim, bore the name of mountains of the Amalekites (Jdg_12:15, cf. Gen_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, Jdg_6:3; Jdg_7:12), and at other times with the Ammonites (Jdg_3:13). After they had been defeated by Saul (1Sa_14:48; 1Sa_15:2.), and frequently chastised by David (1Sa_27:8; 1Sa_30:1.; 2Sa_8:12), the remnant of them was exterminated under Hezekiah by the Simeonites on the mountains of Seir (1Ch_4:42-43).

CALVI� Though Esau had two names, yet in this place the second name refers to

his posterity, who are called Idumeans. For, to make it appear what God had bestowed upon him for the sake of his father Isaac, Moses expressly calls him the father of a celebrated and famous people. And certainly, it served this purpose not a little, to trace the effect and fulfillment of the prophecy in the progeny of Esau. For if the promise of God so mightily flourished towards a stranger, how much more powerfully would it put itself forth towards the children, to whom pertaineth the adoption, and consequently the inheritance of grace? Esau was an obscure man, and a sojourner in that country: whence therefore is it, that suddenly rulers should spring from him, and a great body of people should flourish, unless because the benediction which proceeded from the mouth of Isaac, was confirmed by the result? For Esau did not reign in this desert without opposition; since a people of no ignoble name previously inhabited Mount Seir. On this account Moses relates that the men who had before inhabited that land were mighty: so that it would not have been easy for a stranger to acquire such power as Esau possessed, if he had not been divinely assisted.

COFFMA�, "Verses 9-14"And these are the generations of Esau, the father of the Edomites in Mount Seir: these are the names of Esau's sons: Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Esau by Basemath the wife of Esau. And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau's son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these are the sons of Adah, Esau's wife. And these are the sons of Reuel: �ahath, and Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah: these were the sons of Basemath, Esau's wife. And these were the sons of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon, Esau's wife: and she bare to Esau Jeush, Jalam, and Korah."

This list reveals the sons (grandsons) of Esau: TEMA�; OMAR; ZEPHO; GATAM; KE�AZ; AMALEK (by Adah's son Eliphaz, except Amalek whose mother was Timna, a concubine), �AHATH; ZERAH; SHAMMAH; MIZZAH (through Reuel the son of Basemath), JEUSH; JALAM, and KORAH (sons of Esau by Oholibamah). With minor variations, these are all called "Chiefs" or "Dukes" of Edom in the next paragraph:

LA�GE, "Second Section. Esau’s sons and grandsons as the ancestors of tribes ( Genesis 36:9-14; comp. 1 Chronicles 1:36-37).—To Mount Seir.—The mountain-range between the Dead Sea and the Ailanitic Gulf. The northern part was called Gebalene, and the southern Es Sherah (see Keil, p233; Winer’sReal Würterbuch [Kitto, new edition, Smith, Murphy.—A. G.], and the Geographies of the Bible). “While the sons of Aholibamah became directly heads of tribes, it was only the grandsons of the other two wives, each of whom bare only one Song of Solomon, who attained this distinction. There were thus thirteen heads of tribes, or, if we exclude Amalek, who was born of the concubine Timnah, twelve, as with the �ahorites, Ishmaelites, and Israelites.” Knobel. [It is probable, as Hengstenberg has shown, that this Amalek was the ancestor of the Amalekites who opposed the Israelites in their march through the desert; and that this is what Balaam alludes to

when he says that Amalek was the first of the nations, not the oldest, but the first who made war with the Israelites after they became the covenant people of God. The reference to the field of the Amalekites, Genesis 14:7, is not in opposition to this, since it is not said in that passage that the Amalekites were slain, but that they were slain who occupied the country which afterwards belonged to this tribe. It is not probable that a people who played so important a part in the history of Israel (see �umbers 13:29; �umbers 14:43; Judges 6:3; Judges 7:12; Judges 12:15; 1 Samuel 14:48; 1 Samuel 15:2 ff; 1 Samuel 27:8; 2 Samuel 8:12) should have been without their genealogy in the book of Genesis. Amalek probably separated himself early from his brethren, perhaps from the fact of his birth not being strictly legitimate, and grew into an independent people, who seem to have had their main position at Kadesh, in the mountains south of Judah, but spread themselves throughout the desert and even into Canaan. See Hengstenberg: Beiträge, vol. iii. p 302 ff.—A. G.] There were three divisions from the three wives.—The sons of Eliphaz.—For the ethnographic importance of these names, compare Knobel and the Bible Dictionaries. Amalek, see above.—These are the sons of Adah.—Since Timnah was a concubine, it is assumed that Adah had adopted her.

10 These are the names of Esau's sons: Eliphaz, the son of Esau's wife Adah, and Reuel, the son of Esau's wife Basemath.

GILL, "These are the names of Esau's sons,.... In this and some following verses, an account is given of the sons of Esau, which agrees with what is before observed, and of his sons' sons:

Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau: who seems to be his first wife, and this his first son:

Reuel the son of Bashemath and wife of Esau; his second son by another wife, a daughter of Ishmael, Gen_36:3.

BE�SO�, "Verse 10Genesis 36:10. These are the names — Observe here, 1st, That only the names of Esau’s sons and grandsons are recorded: not their history, for it is the Church that Moses preserves the records of, not of those that were without. The elders only, that lived by faith, obtained a good report. 2d, That the sons and grandsons of Esau are

called dukes. Probably they were military commanders, that had soldiers under them; for Esau and his family lived by the sword, Genesis 27:40. 3d, We may suppose those dukes had numerous families of children and servants. God promised to multiply Jacob and to enrich him; yet Esau increases and is enriched first. God’s promise to Jacob began to work late, but the effect of it remained longer, and it had its complete accomplishment in the spiritual Israel.

11 The sons of Eliphaz: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam and Kenaz.

GILL This was his firstborn, and from him the city of Teman in Edom or Idumea had its name, see (Jeremiah 49:7) (Amos 1:12) ; and Eliphaz is called the Temanite from hence, (Job 2:11) ; four more sons are mentioned, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz;but I do not find that any towns or cities, or any part of the land of Edom, were denominated from any of them; only it may be observed that Zepho is called Zephi in (1 Chronicles 1:36) ; the account seems fabulous and not to be depended on, which Josephus Ben Gorion F23 gives of him, of opposing the burial of Jacob, being taken by Joseph and carried into Egypt, and at his death fleeing to Carthage, and from thence to the Romans, and was king of them

12 Esau's son Eliphaz also had a concubine named Timna, who bore him Amalek. These were grandsons of Esau's wife Adah.

GILL, She is said to be the sister of Lotan, the eldest son of Seir the Horite, (Genesis 36:22) ; in (1 Chronicles 1:36) mention is made of Timna among the sons of Eliphaz, and of Duke Timnah here, (Genesis 36:40) ; and Gerundinsis F25 is of opinion, that Timnah the concubine of Eliphaz, after she had bore Amalek, conceived and bore another son, and she dying in childbirth, he called it by her name to perpetuate her memory: but Jarchi says, that Eliphaz lay with Lotan's mother, the wife of Seir the Horite, of whom was born Timna, and when she grew up she became his concubine, and so was both his daughter and his concubine: and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek;from whence the Amalekites sprung, often mentioned in Scripture, whom the Israelites were commanded utterly to destroy, (1 Samuel 15:18) : these [were] the sons of Adah, Esau's wife;that is, her grandsons.

CLARKE As Timna was sister to Lotan the Horite, Genesis 36:22, we see how the family of Esau and the Horites got intermixed. This might give the sons of Esau a pretext to seize the land, and expel the ancient inhabitants, as we find they did, Deuteronomy 2:12.

AmalekThe father of the Amalekites, afterwards bitter enemies to the Jews, and whom God commanded to be entirely exterminated, Deuteronomy 25:17,19.

Constable, "The Amalekites

separated from the other Edomites and became an independent people early in their

history (v. 12).850 A group of them settled in what later became southern Judah as far as

Kadesh Barnea and the border of Egypt (14:7; Num. 13:29; 14:43, 45). Another branch of

the tribe settled in the hill country of Ephraim that was in central Canaan (Judg. 12:15).

The largest group of Amalekites lived in Arabia to the southeast of Canaan and Edom.

They united on occasion with their neighbors, the Midianites (Judg. 6:3; 7:12) and the

Ammonites (Judg. 3:13). Saul defeated the Amalekites (1 Sam. 14:48; 15:2) as David did

(1 Sam. 27:8; 30:1; 2 Sam 8:12). Some Simeonites finally exterminated them during

Hezekiah's reign (1 Chron. 4:42-43).

13 The sons of Reuel:

�ahath, Zerah, Shammah and Mizzah. These were grandsons of Esau's wife Basemath.

GILL, "And these are the sons of Reuel,.... Another son of Esau's; this man had four sons, as follow:

Nahath, and Zerah, Shammah and Mizzah: of whom we know no more than their names, unless Maps or Massa, which Ptolemy (z) places in Idumea, should have its name from Mizzah:

these were the sons of Bashemath, Esau's wife; her grandsons, as before.

14 The sons of Esau's wife Oholibamah daughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon, whom she bore to Esau: Jeush, Jalam and Korah.

GILL, "And these were the sons of Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah,

the daughter of Zibeon, Esau's wife,.... See Gill on Gen_36:2; here also the Samaritan and Septuagint versions read, "the daughter of Anah, the son of Zibeon":

and she bare to Esau, Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah; this is repeated from Gen_36:5; no mention is made of her grandchildren, as of his other wives.

15 These were the chiefs among Esau's

descendants: The sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau: Chiefs Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz,

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:15-19The first dukes of Edom. The Alluph or duke is the head of the tribe among the

Edomites, like the Nasi or prince among the Israelites. The ten grandsons of Esau by Adah and Basemath take rank with his three sons by Oholibamah. This favors the presumption that she was his fourth and latest wife. “Duke Corah.” This appears to be inserted by a slip of the pen, though it occurs in the Septuagint and Onkelos. It is missing, however, in the Samaritan Pentateuch. It would make twelve dukes, whereas it appears from the closing verses of the chapter that there were only eleven. It is possible, however, that there may have been a Corah descended from Eliphaz who attained to a dukedom; and that Amalek separated himself from the rest of the Edomites and asserted his independence. In the absence of explanatory testimony we must leave this point undecided as we find it.

CLARKE The word duke comes from the Latin dux, a captain or leader. The Hebrew alluph has the same signification; and as it is also the term for a thousand, which is a grand capital or leading number, probably the alluphey or dukes had this name from being leaders of or captains over a company of one thousand men; just as those among the Greeks called chiliarchs, which signifies the same; and as the Romans called those centurions who were captains over one hundred men, from the Latin word centum, which signifies a hundred The ducal government was that which prevailed first among the Idumeans, or descendants of Esau. Here fourteen dukes are reckoned to Esau, seven that came of his wife, Adah, four of Bashemath, and three of Aholibamah.

GILL Ben Melech says, the difference between a duke and a king was, that a king is crowned and a duke is not crowned; but Jarchi interprets the word of heads of families, which seems probable; so that as Esau's sons and grandsons are before related, here it is suggested that they had large and numerous families, of which they were the heads and governors; and in this and the following verses, (Genesis 36:16-19) ; the sons and grandsons of Esau by his several wives are rehearsed as in the preceding verses, with the title of "duke" given to each of them.

v. 15 In vv. 15-19 the list of chiefs is almost identical to the list of sons already given.

HAWKER, "Respecting the title here; see Gen_27:40. Reader! observe, that while Jacob’s children were husbandmen, Esau’s race were nobles. And yet what said GOD? See Mal_1:2. But how sure that promise, Isa_56:5?

JAMISO�, "dukes— The Edomites, like the Israelites, were divided into tribes, which took their names from his sons. The head of each tribe was called by a term which in our version is rendered “duke” - not of the high rank and wealth of a British peer, but like the sheiks or emirs of the modern East, or the chieftains of highland clans. Fourteen are mentioned who flourished contemporaneously.

COFFMAN, "Verses 15-19

"These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau: the sons of Eliphaz the first-born of Esau: chief Teman, chief Omar, chief Zepho, chief Kenaz, chief Gatam, chief Amalek: these are the chiefs that came of Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Adah. And these are the sons of Reuel, Esau's son: chief Nahath, chief Zerah, chief Shammah, chief Mizzah: these are the chiefs that came of Reuel in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Basemath, Esau's wife. And these are the sons of Oholibamah, Esau's wife: chief Jeush, chief Jalam, chief Korah: these are the chiefs that came of Oholibamah the daughter of Anah, Esau's wife. These are the sons of Esau, and these are their chiefs: the same is Edom."

The apparent misplacement of the name "Korah" in the two lists is another variation that remains unexplained. It is of no great importance.

It is significant that these "chiefs" were, except for the three sons of Oholibamah, "grandsons," not "sons" of Esau. This usage of these terms is prevalent throughout the Bible.

"Chiefs ..." is substituted in the ASV and later versions for "Dukes" as in the KJV. Scholars tell us that the Hebrew word here "is [~'aluph], a term related to [~'eleph], (thousand, or tribe),"[15] hence, the ruler or commander of a thousand men. Similarly, the Greeks had [@chiliarch] for the same authority.

The mention of Timna the concubine of Eliphaz was probably due to the importance of her son Amalek whose tribe later became the inveterate enemies of Israel, although some deny this identification with the Amalekites in the days of Saul.

One of the most important of these chiefs was Teman, the oldest son of Eliphaz, who later developed into a powerful tribe, becoming so important that the whole land of Edom was sometimes called Teman (Amos 1:12; Obadiah 1:1:9).

PETT, "Genesis 36:15

‘These are the chieftains of the sons of Esau, the sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau.

Chief Teman, Chief Omar, Chief Zepho, Chief Kenaz, Chief Korah, Chief Gatam, Chief Amalek. These are the chieftainss that came of Eliphaz in the land of Edom. These are the male descendants of Adah.’

For this list of chieftains compare Genesis 36:11-12. We note that Chief Korah is not mentioned there. He is thus related in some way to Adah but not one of her grandsons (although he may have slipped in somehow due to careless copying, from Genesis 36:5 or Genesis 36:18). In 1 Chronicles 1:36 a Timna is mentioned as a son of Adah additionally to the six, but he may have died in childbirth. So Esau’s sons and grandsons achieve chieftainship in Edom.

16 Korah, [a] Gatam and Amalek. These were the chiefs descended from Eliphaz in Edom; they were grandsons of Adah.

CLARKE This Dr. Kennicott pronounces to be an interpolation. "It is certain, from Genesis 36:4, that Eliphaz was Esau's son by Adah; and from Genesis 36:11,12, that Eliphaz had but six sons, Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz, and Amalek. It is also certain, from Genesis 36:5,14, that Korah was the son of Esau (not of Eliphaz) by Aholibamah; and as such he is properly mentioned in Genesis 36:18: These are the sons of Aholibamah, Esau's wife: duke Jeush, duke Jaalam, DUKE KORAH. It is clear, therefore, that some transcriber has improperly inserted duke Korah in Genesis 36:16; from which interpolation both the Samaritan text and the Samaritan version are free."-KE��ICOTT'S Remarks. Everything considered, I incline to the opinion that these words were not originally in the text.

GILL Only among the sons of Eliphaz is reckoned Duke Korah, not before mentioned among his sons, and is left out in the Samaritan version; (See Gill on 36:7); to which it may be added, that according to Gerundinsis F1, this is the same with Timna, related among the sons of Eliphaz, (1 Chronicles 1:36) ; who was called by his father Korah: or this might be a grandson of Eliphaz.

JOH�SO� In looking over thenames in the light of the history that follows in the Word, it is plainthat Amalek, the son of Eliphaz, is an important figure. He and hisfamily became one of Israel's bitterest enemies, attacking them as theycame out of Egypt (cf. Exod. 17:8 -13). The Amalekite hordes invadedIsrael from time to time, occasionally with the Midianites and the sonsof the East, and at other times with the Ammonites. They weredefeated by Saul, fre quently chastised by David, and finally theremnant of them was exterminated under Hezekiah by the Simeonites.5

HAWKER, "On these verses I only remark, that the Hittites which also sprung from Esau, are here incorporated in the history. Gen_26:34.

17 The sons of Esau's son Reuel: Chiefs �ahath, Zerah, Shammah and Mizzah. These were the chiefs descended from Reuel in Edom; they were grandsons of Esau's wife Basemath.

18 The sons of Esau's wife Oholibamah: Chiefs Jeush, Jalam and Korah. These were the chiefs descended from Esau's wife Oholibamah daughter of Anah.

19 These were the sons of Esau (that is, Edom), and these were their chiefs.

HE�RY Observe here, 1. That only the names of Esau's sons and grandsons are recorded, only their names, not their history; for it is the church that Moses preserves the records of, not the record of those that are without. Those elders that lived by faith alone obtained a good report. It is Sion that produces the men of renown, not Seir, Psalms 87:5. �or does the genealogy go any further than the third and fourth generation; the very names of all after are buried in oblivion. It is only the pedigree of the Israelites, who were to be the heirs of Canaan, and of whom were to come the promised seed, and the holy seed, that is drawn out to any length, as far as there was occasion for it, even of all the tribes till Canaan was divided among them, and of the royal line till Christ came. 2. That these sons and grandsons of Esau are called dukes, Genesis 36:15-19. Probably they were military commanders, dukes, or captains, that had soldiers under them; for Esau and his family lived by the sword, Genesis 27:40. �ote, Titles of honour have been more ancient out of the church than in it. Esau's sons were dukes when Jacob's sons were but plain shepherds, Genesis 47:3. This is not a reason why such titles should not be used among Christians; but it is a reason why men should not overvalue themselves, or others, for the sake of them. There is an honour that comes from God, and a name in his house that is infinitely more valuable. Edomites may be dukes with men, but Israelites indeed are made to our God kings and priests. 3. We may suppose those dukes had numerous families of children and servants that were their dukedoms. God promised to multiply Jacob, and to enrich him; yet Esau increases, and is enriched first. �ote, It is no new thing for the men of this world to be full of children, and to have their bellies too filled with hidden treasures, Psalms 17:14. God's promise to Jacob began to work late, but the effect of it remained longer, and it had its complete accomplishment in the spiritual Israel.

20 These were the sons of Seir the Horite, who were living in the region:

Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah,

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:20-30This notice of the Horites is in matter more distinct from what precedes, than the

second is from the first paragraph in the chapter. “Seir the Horite.” The Horite Gen_14:6, was the cave-dweller, and probably got his name from the cave hewn out of the solid rock in which he was accustomed to dwell. Sela was a city of such excavated dwellings. If Seir here mentioned be the original Seir, then he is the remote father of the seven Horite dukes who belonged to the time of Esau. If he be their immediate parent, then he is named after that earlier Seir who gave name to the mountain range. “Who dwelt in the land.” The sons of Seir dwelt in this land before the coming of the Edomites. Here follow the descendants of the then living dukes of the Horim. Hori, Lotan’s son, bears the name of the nation. “Hemam,” in Chronicles Homam, by a change of letter. “Timna,” the concubine of Eliphaz Gen_36:12. “Alvan” and “Shepho”, in Chronicles Aljan and Shephi, by a reverse change of the same letters (see Gen_36:11).

“Zibon.” This we suppose to be different from Zibon the Hivite Gen_36:2, Gen_36:14. “Anah” is of course different from his uncle Anah the brother of Zibon the Horite. “The hot springs in the wilderness.” There were various hot springs in the vicinity, as Kallirrhoe in Wady Zurka Main, those in Wady Hemad between Kerak and the Salt Sea, and those in Wady el-Ahsy. “Sons of Anah.” The plural, sons, here is used according to the general formula, though only one son is mentioned. Oholibamah, being the daughter of Anah, and wife of Esau, while Eliphaz is married to her aunt Timna, is not likely to be the granddaughter by the mother’s side of her uncle Zibon. This is in favor of Zibon the Hivite and Zibon the Horite being different individuals Gen_36:2. “Anah” is here the brother of Zibon. The nephew Anah Gen_36:24, bears the name of his uncle Gen_36:20. “Dishon” is an example of the same community of name Gen_36:21. All Dishon’s and

Ezer’s sons have names ending in “-an.” “Acan” יעקן ya‛ăqân (Jaacan) in 1Ch_1:41 is a

graphic error for ועקן va‛ăqân (and Acan). Uz; see Gen_10:23; Gen_22:21. In Gen_36:29-30, the dukes are formally enumerated. “According to their dukes;” the seven officials of pre-eminent authority among the Horites. The official is here distinguished from the personal. This is a distinction familiar to Scripture.

CLARKE These Horites were the original inhabitants of the country of Seir, called the land of the Horites, and afterwards the land of the Idumeans, when the descendants of Esau had driven them out. These people are first mentioned Genesis 14:6.

Constable, ""What Israelites did to Canaanites, Esauites did to Horites. Thus Gen. 36

is moving backward from the conquerors (vv. 9-19) to the conquered (vv.

20-30)."

v. 20 "Once again you have a similar repetition. The sons are mentioned first. That they were also chiefs is mentioned in v. 21 and confirmed again in vv. 29-30. These Horite sons or chiefs were inhabitants of Seir that were not dispossessed by the sons of Esau but who remained in the land and eventually intermarried with Esau's descendants. In other words, vv. 9-19 give us the predominantly Edomite clans and 20-30 the predominantly Horite clans. Together they comprised the principle families of the nation of Edom."

GILL "Before", as the Targum of Jonathan adds, that is, before it was inhabited by Esau and his posterity, and called Edom, and had from him the name of Seir; but the Horites dwelt here before him, even in Abraham's time, (Genesis 14:6) ; and who were so called from their dwelling under ground in holes and caves, with which the further part of the land of Edom abounded, and are the same the Greeks call Trogloditae: Jarchi says, from their Rabbins, these were very expert in the nature of the land, and knew what was fit for olives and what for vines. �ow the genealogy of this man is here given, partly to show who were the ancient inhabitants of this land before they were drove out, and succeeded by Esau and his sons, (Deuteronomy 1:12,22) ; and partly because of the intermarriages of Esau and his posterity with them, whereby they more easily came into the possession of the country; for Esau married the daughter of Anah, the son of Zibeon, a son of Seir, (Genesis 36:11,24,25) ; and Eliphaz took Timna, a sister of Lotan the son of Seir, to be his concubine, (Genesis 36:12,22) ; the names of the sons of Seir follow,

Lotan, and Shobal, and Zibeon, and Anah:the first of these is said F2 to be the same with Latinus, a king that reigned in Italy, which seems to be taken from the fancied resemblance of names. Zibeon and Anah are here spoken of as brethren, the sons of Seir; whereas in (Genesis 36:24) ; they are made mention of as father and son, (See Gill on 36:2); Zibeon, according to the Jewish writers F3, committed incest with his mother, whence came Anah, and is called his brother, because of the same mother, and his son, as being begotten by him. They seem to seek for such kind of copulations to reproach the Edomites.

K&D 20-29, "(parallel, 1Ch_1:38-42). Descendants of Seir the Horite; - the inhabitants of the land, or pre-Edomitish population of the country. - “The Horite:” ��

Τρωγλοδύτης, the dweller in caves, which abound in the mountains of Edom (vid., Rob.

Pal. ii. p. 424). The Horites, who had previously been an independent people (Gen_14:6), were partly exterminated and partly subjugated by the descendants of Esau (Deu_2:12, Deu_2:22). Seven sons of Seir are given as tribe-princes of the Horites, who are afterwards mentioned as Alluphim (Gen_36:29, Gen_36:30), also their sons, as well as two daughters, Timna (Gen_36:22) and Aholibamah (Gen_36:25), who obtained notoriety from the face that two of the headquarters of Edomitish tribe-princes bore their names (Gen_36:40 and Gen_36:41). Timna was probably the same as the concubine of Eliphaz (Gen_36:12); but Aholibamah was not the wife of Esau (cf. Gen_36:2). - There are a few instances in which the names in this list differ from those in the Chronicles. But they are differences which either consist of variation in form, or have

arisen from mistakes in copying.

(Note: Knobel also undertakes to explain these names geographically, and to point them out in tribes and places of Arabia, assuming, quite arbitrarily and in opposition to the text, that the names refer to tribes, not to persons, although an incident is related of Zibeon's son, which proves at once that the list relates to persons and not to tribes; and expecting his readers to believe that not only are the descendants of these troglodytes, who were exterminated before the time of Moses, still to be found, but even their names may be traced in certain Bedouin tribes, though more than 3000 years have passed away! The utter groundlessness of such explanations, which rest upon nothing more than similarity of names, may be seen in the association of Shobal with Syria Sobal (Judith 3:1), the name used by the Crusaders for Arabia tertia, i.e., the southernmost district below the Dead Sea, which was conquered by them. For notwithstanding the resemblance of the name Shobal to Sobal, no one could seriously think of connecting Syria Sobal with the Horite prince Shobal, unless he was altogether ignorant of the apocryphal origin of the former name, which first of all arose from the Greek or Latin version of the Old Testament, and in fact from a

misunderstanding of Psa_60:2, where, instead צובה �,ארםAram Zobah,�we�find�in�the�lxx�

Συριά�Σοβάλ,�and�in�the�Vulg.�Syria et Sobal.)

Of Anah, the son of Zibeon, it is related (Gen_36:24), that as he fed the asses of his

father in the desert, he “found ִמםFֵַה” - not “he invented mules,” as the Talmud, Luther,

etc., render it, for mules are ָרִדיםKְ, and ָמָצא does not mean to invent; but he discovered

aquae calidae (Vulg.), either the hot sulphur spring of Calirrhoe in the Wady Zerka Maein (vid., Gen_10:19), or those in the Wady el Ahsa to the S.E. of the Dead Sea, or those in the Wady Hamad between Kerek and the Dead Sea.

(Note: It is possible that there may be something significant in the fact that it was “as he was feeding his father's asses,” and that the asses may have contributed to the discovery; just as the whirlpool of Karlsbad is said to have been discovered through a hound of Charles IV, which pursued a stag into a hot spring, and attracted the huntsmen to the spot by its howling.)

BE�SO�, "Verse 20Genesis 36:20. These are the sons of Seir — In the midst of the genealogy of the Edomites is inserted the genealogy of the Horites, that were the natives of mount Seir before the Edomites took possession of it, Deuteronomy 2:12; Deuteronomy 2:22. This comes in here, not only to give light to the story, but to be a standing reflection upon the Edomites for intermarrying with them, by which it is likely they learned their ways, and corrupted themselves.

COFFMA�, "Verses 20-30"These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shebal and Zibeon and Anah, and Dishon and Ezer and Dishan: these are the chiefs that came of the Horites, the children of Seir in the land of Edom. And the children of Lotan were Hori and Heman; and Lotan's sister was Timna. And these are the children of Shebal: Alvan and Manahath and Ebal, Shepo and Onam. And these are

the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah; this is Anah who found the hot springs in the wilderness, as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father. And these are the children of Anah: Dishon and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah. And these are the children of Dishon: Hemdan and Eshban, and Ithran and Cheran. These are the children of Ezer: Bilhan and Zavaran and Akan. These are the children of Dishan: Uz and Aran. These are the chiefs that came of the Horites: chief Lotan, chief Shobal, chief Zibeon, chief Anah, chief Dishon, chief Ezer, chief Dishan: these are the chiefs that came of the Horites, according to their chiefs in the land of Seir."

This list of the pre-Edomite inhabitants of Seir is of the greatest significance, for it reveals the manner of Edom's eventual amalgamation with the people through intermarriages with them, and finally coming to dominate the whole area. Esau's wives included Anah a daughter of Zibeon, and Oholibamah was the daughter of Anah, another of the Horite, or Hivite chiefs. Also, Timna, the concubine of Esau's first-born son Eliphaz, who was the mother of chief Amalek, was a sister of Lotan, one of the chiefs of Seir. What Esau did here through intermarriage with the pagans of Seir, Jacob likewise could have done at Shechem; but the result would have been just as disastrous as it was for the posterity of Esau. Sure, Esau took over the country, but the pagan culture of Seir took over the Edomites. Thus, the wisdom of God's providential interference with Jacob's continued residence in Shechem is demonstrated in this chapter.

�ote that Zibeon is called a Hivite is Genesis 36:2, and a Horite in Genesis 36:20. "Hivite is a synonym for Horite, and both are applied where `Hurrians' are involved."[16]

"Anah who found the hot springs in the wilderness ..." The words here given as "hot springs" are rendered "the mules" in the KJV. There has been much dispute about this expression. "There is no warrant for the traditional `hot springs',"[17] which began with Jerome. The word is "hymn" and is used only here in the whole Bible. Jewish scholars generally favor the KJV rendition of "mules," which we also favor. A feeding lot for asses is a far more likely place to find a mule than a hot spring. The Tarrgum of Jonathan paraphrases this place as follows:

"This is the Anah who united the `onager' with the tame ass; and in the process of time, he found mules produced by them."[18] (Onager here should be understood as a wild horse.)

PETT, "Genesis 36:20-21

‘These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan and Shobal and Zibeon and Anah, and Dishon and Ezar and Dishan. These are the chieftains that came of the Horites, the children of Seir in the land of Edom’

We are now given the genealogy and status of the family of Seir the Horite. One of them is Zibeon, father of Anah whose daughter married Esau (Genesis 36:2). It is a very interesting fact that this genealogy is recorded in 1 Chronicles 1:38-42 even though they were not directly related to the patriarchs. They were somehow looked on as ‘family’.

LA�GE, "Fourth Section. Genealogy of the Horites ( Genesis 36:20-30; comp. 1 Chronicles 1:38-42).—Of Seir.—The name of the ancestor of the early inhabitants of Seir is identical with the name of the land, as is true also with the names Asshur, Aram, Mizraim, Canaan, in the genealogical table.—The Horites.—חִֹרי, from חֹור, hole, cave, cave- Prayer of Manasseh, troglodyte.—Who inhabited the land—i. e, the earlier inhabitants in contrast with the Edomites. The land of the Edomites is full of caves (Robinson, “Researches,” vol. ii. p 551 ff.). “The inhabitants of Idumæa use them for dwellings. Jerome, upon Obadiah, says they had dwellings and sheepfolds in caves. This was peculiarly true of the aboriginal Horites, who ( Job 30:6) are described by this peculiarity. It is remarkable that the description of the wretched manner of living and evil courses of the Horites, given in the book of Job, are still accurately true to-day of the dwellers in the old Edomitic land.” Knobel. The Horite table first enumerates seven princes, then their sons, among whom the name Anah occupies a prominent place ( Genesis 36:24), who is said in Luther’s version [also in the English.—A. G.], following the error of the Talmud, “to have found the mules in the wilderness.” He discovered rather in the desert ַהּיִֵמים, warm springs (Vulgate), which may refer to the warm sulphur springs of Calirrhoe, in Wady Zerka Maein, or to those in Wady El Ahsa, southeast of the Dead Sea, or to those in Wady Hamad between Kerek and the Dead Sea. For further details see Knobel and Keil, the latter of whom remarks that the notice of his feeding the asses may indicate that these animals led to the discovery of the springs, p225, note. Besides the sons, there are two daughters named in this genealogical table, Thimnah and Aholibamah. “Thimnah may perhaps be the same person with the concubine of Eliphaz, Genesis 36:12. Aholibamah Isaiah, however, not the same with the wife of Esau.” Keil. There may have been, also, more than one person of the name of Thimnah. For the differences between this catalogue and that in 1 Chron, comp. Keil, p234. [These diversities are mainly those which arise from the substituting one weak letter for another.—A. G.] The princes are still named once more, as they gave their names to tribes or districts. Knobel attempts to explain these names as if they were geographical and not personal, which Keil should not so strongly have opposed. [Keil shows, however, how vain and groundless this attempt Isaiah, by the fact that the son of Zibeon discovered the warm springs, which proves of course that this is a table of the names of persons, and not of tribes or their localities.—A. G.]

21 Dishon, Ezer and Dishan. These sons of Seir in Edom were Horite chiefs.

CLARKE It appears pretty evident that the Horites and the descendants of Esau were mixed together in the same land, as before observed; and Calmet has very properly remarked, that if we compare this verse with Genesis 36:30, there were princes of Seir in the country of Seir, and in that of Edom; and in comparing the generations of Seir and Esau, we are obliged to consider these princes as contemporary.

GILL These were three others of the sons of Seir, which with the other four before mentioned made seven:

these [are] the dukes of the Horites, the children of Seir in the landof Edom;these were in the land of Edom before it was so called and possessed by the Edomites, and whose posterity afterwards became tributary to them.

22 The sons of Lotan: Hori and Homam. [b] Timna was Lotan's sister.

GILL The first of these seems to have his name from the general name of the tribe or nation, and the other is called Homam, (1 Chronicles 1:39) ;

and Lotan's sister [was] Timna:whom Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau took for his concubine, (Genesis 36:12) ; for the sake of which her relation to Lotan is here mentioned; and she is said to be the sister of this man particularly, though there were seven brethren of them, because she might be his sister both by father and mother's side, when she was not of the other only by the father's side.

23 The sons of Shobal: Alvan, Manahath, Ebal, Shepho and Onam.

GILL Who was the second son of Seir, and whose sons were the five following:

Alvan, and Manahath, and Ebal, Shepho, and Onam;in (1 Chronicles 1:40) Alvan is called Alian, and Shepho is Shephi.

24 The sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah. This is the Anah who discovered the hot springs [c] in the desert while he was grazing the donkeys of his father Zibeon.

CLARKE The words eth kaiyemim, here translated mules, has given rise to a great variety of conjectures and discordant opinions. St. Jerome, who renders it aquas calidas, warm springs, or hot baths, says there are as many opinions concerning it as there are commentators.

The Septuagint has τονιαµειν, which seems to be the name of a man; but this is expressed in a great variety of ways in different MSS. of that version.

The Syriac renders it {Syriac} may , waters; the author of this version having read in the Hebrew copy from which he translated. mayim, waters, for yemim, the two first letters being transposed.

Onkelos translates the word gibbaraiya, giants, or strong or powerful men.

The Samaritan text has {Samaritan} haaimim, and the Samaritan version {Samaritan} am aimai, the Emim, a warlike people, bordering upon the Horites.

The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel paraphrases the place thus: "This is the Anah who united the onager with the tame ass, and in process of time he found mules produced by them." R. D. Kimchi says, that "Zibeon was both the father and brother of Anah; and this Anah, intent on heterogeneous mixtures, caused asses and horses to copulate, and so produced mules." R. S. Jarchi is of the same opinion. See his comment on this place.

Bochart believes the Emim are meant; and argues forcibly, 1. That matsa, he found, never signifies to invent, but rather the meeting with or happening on a thing which already exists. 2. That mules are never called yemim in the Scriptures, but peradim. 3. That Anah fed ASSES only, not horses. And, 4. That there is no mention of mules in Palestine till the days of David. From the whole he concludes that the Emim are meant, with whom Anah fought; and he brings many places of Scripture where the same form of expression, he or they found, signifies the onset to battle, Judges 1:5;; 1 Samuel 31:3;; 1 Kings 13:24;; 2 Chronicles 22:8; �umbers 35:27;; Genesis 4:14; with many others. See the Hierozoicon, vol. i., cap. 21, p. 23S., edit. 1692.

Gusset, in Comment. Heb. Ling., examines what Bochart has asserted, and supposes that mules, not the Emim, were found by Anah.

Wagenseil would credit what Bochart has asserted, did not stronger reasons lead him to believe that the word means a sort of plant!

From the above opinions and versions the reader may choose which he likes best, or invent one for himself. My own opinion is, that mules were not known before the time of Anah; and that he was probably the first who coupled the mare and ass together to produce this mongrel, or the first who met with creatures of this race in some very secluded part of the wilderness. Is it not probable that from this Anah, or enah, the Enetae derived at least their fabulous origin, whom Homer mentions as famous for their race of wild mules?

παφλαγονωνδηγειτοπυλαιµενεοςλασιονκηρ, εξενετωνδθενηµιονωνγενοςαγροτεραων. IL., lib. ii., v. 852.

The Paphlagonians Pylaemenes rules, Where rich HE�ETIA breeds her SAVAGE MULES. POPE.

The Enetae or Henetae, who were a people contiguous to Paphlagonia, Cappadocia, and Galatia, might have derived their origin from this Anah, or Henah, out of which the ενετοι of the ancient Greek writers might have been formed; and according to Theophrastus, Strabo, and Plutarch, the first mules were seen among these people.

See Ludov, De Dieu and Scheuchzer.

CALVI� Mules are the adulterous offspring of the horse and the ass. Moses says that Anal was the author of this connection.131131 The word ימים, rendered mules by our translators, and by Calvin, is of doubtful signification; it occurs in this place only. It is by many commentators translated “waters,” or “warm springs;” and probably this interpretation is to be preferred. The reader may see the question discussed in Professor Bush’s note on this verse. — Ed But I do not consider this as said in praise of his industry; for the Lord has not in vain distinguished the different kinds of animals from the beginning. But since the vanity of the flesh often solicits the children of this world, so that they apply their minds to superfluous matters, Moses marks this unnatural pursuit in Anah, who did not think it sufficient to have a great number of animals; but he must add to them a degenerate race produced by unnatural intercourse. Moreover, we learn hence, that there is more moderation among brute animals in following the law of nature, than in men, who invent vicious admixtures.

GILL The third son of Self, and who had two sons;

both Ajah and Anah;of the latter it is observed:

this [was that] Anah that found the mules in the wilderness, as he fedthe asses of Zibeon his father;who observed, while he was feeding his father's asses in the wilderness, that the he asses coupled with mares, or horses with the she asses, and produced another sort of creatures called mules; and by this means found out the way how such creatures might be produced, and practised it: so Aelianus says F4, that mules are not the produce of nature, but you may call it an adulterous invention of human contrivance and boldness, and a theft: this is the common interpretation, and to which our version leads: but against it it may be observed, that the word for "mules" is different from this here used, nor is this word ever used of mules, nor does it appear that there were any creatures of this sort before the days of David; nor is the word translated "found" ever used of that which before was not in being, but of what already existed; nor is there any mention of horses or mares in this account also; had it referred to a mixture of these creatures with asses, it would not have been omitted. Some think therefore the words are to be rendered, "he found waters in the wilderness"; sources and collections of waters which were not usual in a wilderness, and of great worth and use in desert lands, as Edom was, and in those hot countries, and the Vulgate Latin version renders it, "hot waters"; but then to the fixing of either of these versions, the word must be altered either in its points or letters, for which there is no authority. The Targum of Onkelos renders it mighty ones or giants, and may signify the "Emim", the "aleph" being changed for "yod", as Aben Ezra observes; and then the sense is, that these gigantic people, who were so called from the terror they taught upon their neighbours, and, who dwelt near the

Horim in Seir, (Deuteronomy 2:10-12) , as they used to steal from their flocks, Anah lighted on them in the wilderness, and fell upon them, and took them; and with this agrees the Samaritan version, "he found giants, in the wilderness"; and so Abendana interprets the words: Aben Ezra observes that many interpret the word of plants or herbs; and a very learned F5 man is of opinion that the word used is the name of an useful herb or plant, first discovered by Anah. This Anah, though a keeper of his father's asses, is afterwards called Duke Anah; it being the custom of the sons of great personages to be the keepers of flocks and herds; (See Gill on 29:9).

JAMISO�, "This was that Anah that found the mules in the wilderness—The word “mules” is, in several ancient versions, rendered “water springs”; and this discovery of some remarkable fountain was sufficient, among a wandering or pastoral people, to entitle him to such a distinguishing notice.

BE�SO�, "Verse 24Genesis 36:24. Found mules — As the Hebrew word, here rendered mules, occurs nowhere else in Scripture, it is difficult to ascertain the meaning of this passage. Various have been the conjectures concerning what it was that Anah found. Some render the word waters, or hot waters, and understand the meaning to be, that he found some springs of water which in those hot countries were both rare and valuable, or some hot and medicinal springs. But the Chaldee renders it giants, and the Samaritan version Emims, a sort of giants mentioned Deuteronomy 2:10-11, who were neighbours to the Horites, here spoken of, (Genesis 14:5-6,) and therefore, according to the manner of those times, might make inroads upon them. It has been generally supposed, however, that our translators are right, and that, in keeping asses, he discovered the method of breeding mules; probably by accident.

COKE, "Genesis 36:24. Found the mules, &c.— It is difficult to come at the true meaning of this piece of ancient history. The rabbins, whom our version follows, render the word in the original ימים iemim, mules: the Vulgate renders it, aquas calidas, hot waters: but the interpretation of Bochart seems far the best, namely, that imim is the name of a people, probably the same as the gigantic Emim, mentioned Deuteronomy 2:11. Accordingly the Targum renders it here by a word signifying giants, and Aquila and Symmachus retain the Hebrew name τους Ιαµειµ, the Emim; so that the passage should be rendered, who found, lighted upon, the Emims in the desert, who possibly attacked him there, when feeding, with his servants, his father's asses; these Emims, it is not unlikely, being a kind of free-booters, and used to make such excursions. The word מצא, matsa, rendered found, when applied to enemies, is used, for lighting upon, or even attacking them suddenly. See Parkhurst's Lexicon, or Bochart, vol. 2: p. 238. Houbigant renders the passage, qui dimicavit in deserto contra Emaeos,—who fought against the Emims in the wilderness, in agreement with the above interpretation.

PETT, "Genesis 36:24

‘And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah. This is the Anah who found the hot springs in the wilderness as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father.’The historical reference to the finding of an important water source is again typical of ancient genealogies.

But there is here a slight puzzle. Anah has the same name as Anah the daughter of Zibeon (Genesis 36:1). We note that the word ‘children’ is now being used and not ‘sons’ and had it not been for the masculine verbs in this verse we might have thought that this was Anah the daughter. Indeed we must ask whether this is not the case in spite of the verbal use. Perhaps in Seir among the Horites certain women were treated as men and spoken of accordingly.

In the Hebrew of Genesis 36:2 Anah is the daughter of Zibeon. However the Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX and the Syriac all read ‘son’ (thus RSV). But that is the easier reading and the reason for the change is obvious. It is to remove a problem. This would equate him with Beeri the Hittite and ‘beer’ does mean ‘well’ so that Beeri may have been a name given to him on the discovery of these important springs. The idea is attractive but fails to take into account how the then very difficult rendering ‘daughter’ ever got into the text. Thus it would seem to us that a better solution lies in seeing the Horites as giving women a special prominence not accorded elsewhere.

Alternately it may be a coincidence of names. If Anah the daughter was given the same name as Anah the son, and Anah the uncle (Genesis 36:20) it is not inconceivable that Anah’s daughter might take the same name on marriage as Anah the uncle originally gave to his daughter. Its strangeness or its religious meaning may have appealed to her.

25 The children of Anah: Dishon and Oholibamah daughter of Anah.

GILL the name of one of his uncles. (Genesis 36:21) ;

and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah;Aben Ezra thinks this is not the same Anah that was mentioned in the beginning of this verse; since, if he was the same, there was no need to mention him again, but that he is the same that is mentioned in (Genesis 36:2) ; but if he is not the same that is spoken of in this verse and (Genesis 36:24) , it is difficult to account for the mention of him at all in this place: that he is the same as in (Genesis 36:2) seems to be right, though it is attended with this difficulty, that the Anah and Aholibamah there are represented as of the Hivites, whereas here they are reckoned among the Horites; but it may be, as Ainsworth observes on (Genesis 36:20) , that the Horites were of the race of the Hivites originally; and indeed this Aholibamah being the wife of Esau seems to be the reason of this particular notice taken of her here. She is omitted in (1 Chronicles 1:41) .

26 The sons of Dishon [d] : Hemdan, Eshban, Ithran and Keran.

GILL �ot of Dishon the son of Anah, but of Dishon the son of Seir, (Genesis 36:21) ; and they are the four following: Hemdan, and Eshban, and Ithran, and Cheran;the first of these is called Amram, or rather Chamram, (1 Chronicles 1:41) .

27 The sons of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan and Akan.

GILL Another son of Seir, who had the following sons: Bilhan, and Zaavan, and Achan;the two last are called Zavan and Jakan, in (1 Chronicles 1:42) .

28 The sons of Dishan: Uz and Aran.

GILL The last of the seven sons of Seir, and who had two sons, Uz and Aran;from the former of these the land of Uz, inhabited by the Edomites, had its name, (Lamentations 4:21) ; some have taken this to be the country of Job, (Job 1:1) .

29 These were the Horite chiefs: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah,

GILL �ot that succeeded one after another, as the kings next mentioned did, but were together, at the same time, heads of respective families, and governors of them; and then the seven sons of Seir are rehearsed in this verse and (Genesis 36:30) in their order, with the title of "duke" annexed to each of them, "Duke Lotan"…

30 Dishon, Ezer and Dishan. These were the Horite chiefs, according to their divisions, in the land of Seir.

GILL The ancestor of Seir, whence he is called the Horite, unless the singular is

put for the plural, used in (Genesis 36:29) : among their dukes in the land of Seir;not that there were other dukes besides them in the land of Seir until Esau got among them, but these were they whose habitations were before in the land of Gabla (or Seir); as the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it; or "in", or "according to their dukedoms", as the Septuagint version; in their respective families where they had the government, and which became very numerous.

HE�RY In the midst of this genealogy of the Edomites here is inserted the genealogy of the Horites, those Canaanites, or Hittites (compare Genesis 26:34), that were the natives of Mount Seir. Mention is made of them, Genesis 14:6, and of their interest in Mount Seir, before the Edomites took possession of it, Deuteronomy 2:12,22. This comes in here, not only to give light to the story, but to be a standing reflection upon the Edomites for intermarrying with them, by which, it is probable, they learned their way, and corrupted themselves. Esau having sold his birthright, and lost his blessing, and entered into alliance with the Hittites, his posterity and the sons of Seir are here reckoned together. �ote, Those that treacherously desert God's church are justly numbered with those that were never in it; apostate Edomites stand on the same ground with accursed Horites. Particular notice is taken of one Anah who fed the asses of Zibeon his father (Genesis 36:24), and yet is called duke Anah, Genesis 36:29. �ote, Those that expect to rise high should begin low. An honourable descent should not keep men from an honest employment, nor a mean employment hinder any man's preferment. This Anah was not only industrious in his business, but ingenious too, and successful; for he found mules, or (as some read it) waters, hot-baths, in the wilderness. Those that are diligent in their business sometimes find more advantages than they expected.

K&D, "“These are the princes of the Horites according to their princes,” i.e., as their

princes were individually named in the land of Seir. � in enumerations indicates the ְל

relation of the individual to the whole, and of the whole to the individual.

The Rulers of Edom

31 These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned [e] :

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:31-39The series of eight kings here enumerated are plainly elective, as not one succeeds his

father. The king co-exists with the dukes, who are again enumerated at the close of the list, and are mentioned in the song of Moses Exo_15:15. These dukes are no doubt the electors of the common sovereign, who is designed to give unity and strength to the nation. It is natural to suppose that no sovereign was elected until after the death of Esau, and, therefore, if he lived as long as Jacob, after the children of Israel had been seventeen years in Egypt. As we calculate that they were two hundred and ten years in that country, and forty years afterward in the wilderness, this would allow two hundred and thirty-three (250–17) years for seven reigns, and a part of the eighth, during which Moses and his host marched along the borders of Edom. Allowing some interval before the first election, we have an average of thirty-three years for each reign. “Before a king reigned over the children of Israel.” This simply means before there was a monarchy established in Israel. It does not imply that monarchy began in Israel immediately after these kings; as Lot’s beholding the vale of Jordan to be well-watered before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Amorah, does not imply that the cities were destroyed immediately after Lot beheld this sight Gen_13:10.

Nor does it imply that monarchy in Israel had begun in the time of the writer; as Isaac’s saying, “That my soul may bless thee before I die” Gen_27:4 does not imply that he was dead at the time of his saying so. It merely implies that Israel was expected to have kings Gen_35:11, as Isaac was expected to die. Of the several sovereigns here mentioned we have no other historical notice. “Beor” is also the name of Balaam’s father Num_22:5. This indicates affinity of language between their respective tribes. The site of “Dinhabah,” the capital of Bela, though the name is applied to many towns, has not been ascertained. “Bozrah” is el-Busaireh, about twenty-one miles nearly south of the Salt Sea. “The land of the Temanite” has its name from Teman, son of Eliphaz. His town was, according to Jerome, five miles from Petra. “Hadad” is a name of frequent recurrence among the Aramaeans. “Who smote Midian in the field of Moab.” This records an event not otherwise known, and indicates external conquest on the part of the Idumaean state. “Avith” or Ajuth (1Ch_1:46, probably a graphic error) is not otherwise known.

“Masrecah” is likewise unknown. “Rehoboth by the river.” If the river be the Phrat (Onkelos), Rehoboth may be er-Rahabah, not far from the mouth of the Khabur. Otherwise it may be er-Ruhaibeh on a wady joining the Sihor or el-Arish Gen_26:22, or the Robotha of Eusebius and Jerome, the site of which is not known. “Hadar” is probably a colloquial variation of Hadad Gen_36:35 which is found in Chronicles. Pau or Pai is unknown. Matred is the father of his wife. Mezahab her mother’s father. The death of all these sovereigns is recorded except the last, who is therefore, supposed to have been contemporary with Moses.

CLARKE I suppose all the verses, from Genesis 36:31-39inclusive, have been transferred to this place from 1 Chronicles 1:43-50, as it is not likely they could have been written by Moses; and it is quite possible they might have been, at a very early period, written in the margin of an authentic copy, to make out the regal succession in Edom, prior to the consecration of Saul; which words being afterwards found in the

margin of a valuable copy, from which others were transcribed, were supposed by the copyist to be a part of the text, which having been omitted by the mistake of the original writer, had been since added to make up the deficiency; on this conviction he would not hesitate to transcribe them consecutively in his copy. In most MSS. sentences and paragraphs have been left out by the copyists, which, when perceived, have been added in the margin, either by the original writer, or by some later hand. �ow, as the margin was the ordinary place where glosses or explanatory notes were written, it is easy to conceive how the notes, as well as the parts of the original text found in the margin, might be all incorporated with the text by a future transcriber; and his MSS., being often copied, would of course multiply the copies with such additions, as we have much reason to believe has been the case. This appears very frequently in the Vulgate and Septuagint; and an English Bible now before me written some time in the fourteenth century, exhibits several proofs of this principle. See the preface to this work.

I know there is another way of accounting for those words on the ground of their being written originally by Moses; but to me it is not satisfactory. It is simply this: the word king should be considered as implying any kind of regular government, whether by chiefs, dukes, judges, ., and therefore when Moses says these are the kings which reigned in Edom, before there was any king in Israel, he may be only understood as saying that these kings reigned among the Edomites before the family of Jacob had acquired any considerable power, or before the time in which his twelve sons had become the fathers of those numerous tribes, at the head of which, as king himself in Jeshurun, he now stood.

Esau, after his dukes, had eight kings, who reigned successively over their people, while Israel were in affliction in Egypt.

CALVI� We must keep in memory what we have said a little before, that reprobates are suddenly exalted, that they may immediately fall, like the herb upon the roofs, which is destitute of root, and has a hasty growth, but withers the more quickly. To the two sons of Isaac had been promised the honor that kings should spring from them. The Idumeans first began to reign, and thus the condition of Israel seemed to be inferior. But at length, lapse of time taught how much better it is, by creeping on the ground, to strike the roots deep, than to acquire an extravagant pre-eminence for a moment, which speedily vanishes away. There is, therefore, no reason why the faithful, who slowly pursue their way, should envy the quick children of this world, their rapid succession of delights; since the felicity which the Lord promises them is far more stable, as it is expressed in the psalm,

“The children’s children shall dwell there, and their inheritance shall be perpetual.” (Psalm 102:28.)

GILL &c.] In the land that was afterwards called the land of Edom; for this laud was not so called when these kings began to reign: for, according to Bishop Cumberland F6,

and those that follow him F7, these were Horite kings, who, after their defeat by Chedorlaomer, (Genesis 14:5,6) ; in order to secure themselves the better from such a calamity for the future, set up a kingdom, and which appears, by the following account, to be elective; and so Maimonides F8 observes, that not one of these kings were of Edom: and these were, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel;and there being no kings over Israel until many years after the times of Moses, hence some have thought these words are inserted by some other writer after him; but there is no need to suppose that; for Moses knew, from foregoing prophecies and promises, that kings would arise out of them and reign over them, (Genesis 17:6) (35:11) ; and this he was so certain of, that he himself, by divine direction, gave laws and rules to the children of Israel respecting their future kings, (Deuteronomy 17:14-20) ; besides Moses himself was king in Jeshurun or Israel, (Deuteronomy 33:5) , so that it is the same as if he had said, these are the kings that reigned in Edom, before this time.

HE�RY By degrees, it seems, the Edomites wormed out the Horites, obtained full possession of the country, and had a government of their own. 1. They were ruled by kings, who governed the whole country, and seem to have come to the throne by election, and not by lineal descent; so bishop Patrick observes. These kings reigned in Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel, that is, before Moses's time, for he was king in Jeshurun, Deuteronomy 33:5. God had lately promised Jacob that kings should come out of his loins (Genesis 35:11), yet Esau's blood becomes royal long before any of Jacob's did. �ote, In external prosperity and honour, the children of the covenant are often cast behind, and those that are out of covenant get the start. The triumphing of the wicked may be quick, but it is short; soon ripe, and as soon rotten: but the products of the promise, though they are slow, are sure and lasting; at the end it shall speak, and not lie. We may suppose it was a great trial to the faith of God's Israel to hear of the pomp and power of the kings of Edom, while they were bond-slaves in Egypt; but those that look for great things from God must be content to wait for them; God's time is the best time. 2. They were afterwards governed by dukes, again here named, who, I suppose, ruled all at the same time in several places in the country. Either they set up this form of government in conformity to the Horites, who had used it (Genesis 36:29), or God's providence reduced them to it, as some conjecture, to correct them for their unkindness to Israel, in refusing them a passage though their country, �umbers 20:18. �ote, When power is abused, it is just with God to weaken it, by turning it into divers channels. For the transgression of a land, many are the princes thereof. Sin brought Edom from kings to dukes, from crowns to coronets. We read of the dukes of Edom (Exodus 15:15), yet, long afterwards, of their kings again. 3. Mount Seir is called the land of their possession, Genesis 36:43. While the Israelites dwelt in the house of bondage, and their Canaan was only the land of promise, the Edomites dwelt in their own habitations, and Seir was in their possession. �ote, The children of this world have their all in hand, and nothing in hope (Luke 16:25); while the children of God have their all in hope, and next to nothing in hand. But,

all things considered, it is better to have Canaan in promise than mount Seir in possession.

JOH�SO�An interesting list of the kings of Edom is the next item in Moses1generations of Esau (Gen. 36:31-39). The opening statement has beentaken by some as an indication that Moses did not write it, for howcould he know that kings would ultimately reign over the sons of Israel.Other orthodox commentators, however, have pointed out that Moseswas quite well acquainted with the promises that kings would come toIsrael. The promise was made to both Abraham and Jacob that kingswould come from them and, furthermore, other specific words on thesubject were given to Moses (cf. Gen. 17:6; 35:11; Deut. 17:14 -20).The heading, then, was written with the promise in mind, and itexpresses the thought simply that Edom became a kingdom at a muchearlier period than Israel.

"The fact is, the genealogy takes us far beyond the time of Genesis itself. As verse 31 explicitly indicates, the genealogy stretches over a time that takes us up to the time of the Israelite kings, centuries after the time covered in Genesis itself. The developed structure of vv. 9-43 has suggested to many scholars that all of that material was a secondary insertion into an original narrative that ended at v. 8. Anyone can easily see that 36:8 would have naturally led directly to 37:1. Esau settling in Seir would have led immediately to the statement that Jacob remained in the Promised Land. What is more, 36:1-8 as the genealogy of Esau would be roughly parallel in size and scope to the genealogies already given of Cain and of Ishmael. Finally, the fact that the heading "This is the account or toledot of Esau" is repeated at v. 9 and that the material in 36:1-5 about Esau's wives and sons is also repeated in vv. 10-14 further suggests that 36:9-43 was a separate account, inserted as a whole, later, perhaps, the very last part of the Book of Genesis to be added to it.

Genesis, you may remember, is formally anonymous. No author is identified. No author of the first five books of the Bible is ever mentioned in those books themselves. We know that it is generally the work of Moses, for we are told that elsewhere in the Bible. But we know that there were later additions made after the time of Moses. The account of Moses' death and burial, for example, was not by Moses. And no one disputes this. The final form of the book may not have been reached until some time later, as v. 31 indicates, during the time of the Israelite kings.

By that time, of course, Israel and Edom had a long history of bitter rivalry and antagonism. They were not only two nations, they were two nations often at war with one another. Indeed, if vv. 9-43 were written during the days of David or Solomon, when Edom had been incorporated into the Israelite empire, it would be a further demonstration of the fact that, as God had promised, the older of Rebekah's two sons did, in fact, serve the younger. Remember, the original readers of the Book of Genesis, the readers for which the Book was first written were the citizens of the nation of Israel, who were being taught the origin and the meaning of their national history. They knew the nation of Edom as an ancient enemy."

K&D, "(Parallel, 1Ch_1:43-50). The Kings in the Land of Edom: before the children of Israel had a king. It is to be observed 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 predecessor 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 phylarchs; and, as Isa_34:12 also shows, that they lived or reigned contemporaneously with these. The contemporaneous existence of the Alluphimand the kings may also be inferred from Exo_15:15 as compared with Num_20:14. Whilst it was with the king of Edom that Moses treated respecting the passage through the land, in the song of Moses it is the princes who tremble with fear on account of the miraculous passage through the Red Sea (cf. Eze_32:29). Lastly, this is also supported by the fact, that the account of the seats of the phylarchs (Gen_36:40-43) follows the list of the kings. This arrangement would have been thoroughly unsuitable if the monarchy had been founded upon the ruins of the phylarchs (vid., Hengstenberg, ut sup. pp. 238ff.). Of all the kings of Edom, not one is named elsewhere. It is true, the attempt has been made to identify the fourth, Hadad (Gen_36:35), with the Edomite Hadad who rose up against Solomon (1Ki_11:14); but without foundation. The contemporary of Solomon was of royal blood, but neither a king nor a pretender; our Hadad, on the contrary, was a king, but he was the son of an unknown Hadad of the town of Avith, and no relation to his predecessor Husham of the country of the Temanites. It is related of him that he smote Midian in the fields of Moab (Gen_36:35); from which Hengstenberg (pp. 235-6) justly infers that this event cannot have been very remote from the Mosaic age, since we find the Midianites allied to the Moabites in Num 22; whereas afterwards, viz., in the time of Gideon, the Midianites vanished from history, and in Solomon's days the fields of Moab, being Israelitish territory, cannot have served as a field of battle for the Midianites and Moabites. - Of the tribe-cities of these kings only a few can be identified now. Bozrah, a noted city of the Edomites (Isa_34:6; Isa_43:1, etc.), is still to be traced in el Buseireh, a village with ruins in Jebal (Rob. Pal. ii. 571). - The land of the Temanite (Gen_36:34) is a province in northern Idumaea, with a city, Teman, which has not yet been discovered; according to Jerome, quinque millibus from Petra. - Rehobothof the river (Gen_36:37) can neither be the Idumaean Robotha, nor er Ruheibeh in the wady running towards el Arish, but must be sought for on the Euphrates, say in Errachabi or Rachabeh, near the mouth of the Chaboras. Consequently Saul, who sprang from Rehoboth, was a foreigner. - Of the last king, Hadar (Gen_36:39; not Hadad, as it is written in 1Ch_1:50), the wife, the mother-in-law, and the mother are mentioned: his death is not mentioned here, but is added by the later chronicler (1Ch_1:51). 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 permission to pass through the land (Num_20:14.).

(Note: If this be admitted; then, on the supposition that this list of kings contains all the previous kings of Edom, the introduction of monarchy among the Edomites can hardly have taken place more than 200 years before the exodus; and, in that case, none of the phylarchs named in Gen_36:15-18 can have lived to see its establishment. For the list only reaches to the grandsons of Esau, none of whom are likely to have lived more than 100 or 150 years after Esau's death. It is true we do not know when Esau died; but 413 years elapsed between the death of Jacob and the exodus, and Joseph, who was born in the 91st years of Jacob's life, died 54 years afterwards, i.e., 359 years before the exodus. But Esau was married in his 40th year, 37 years before Jacob (Gen_26:34), and had sons and daughters before his removal to Seir (Gen_36:6). Unless, therefore, his sons and grandsons attained a most unusual age, or were married remarkably late in life, his grandsons can hardly have

outlived Joseph more than 100 years. Now, if we fix their death at about 250 years before the exodus of Israel from Egypt, there remains from that point to the arrival of the Israelites at the land of Edom (Num_20:14) a period of 290 years; amply sufficient for the reigns of eight kings, even if the monarchy was not introduced till after the death of the last of the phylarchs mentioned in Gen_36:15-18.)

At any rate the list is evidently a record relating to the Edomitish kings of a pre-Mosaic age. But if this is the case, the heading, “These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel,” 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 (Gen_35:11, cf. Gen_17:4.), and merely expresses the thought, that Edom became a kingdom at 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” (Del.).

BENSON, "Verse 31

Genesis 36:31. By degrees the Edomites worked out the Horites, and got full possession of the country. They were ruled by kings who governed the whole country, and seem to have come to the throne by election, and not by lineal descent: these kings reigned in Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel — That is, before Moses’s time, for he was king in Jeshurun. God had lately promised Jacob that kings should come out of his loins: yet Esau’s blood becomes royal long before any of Jacob’s did. Probably it was a trial to the faith of Israel, to hear of the power of the kings of Edom, while they were bond-slaves in Egypt: but those that look for great things from God must be content to wait for them. God’s time is the best time.

COFFMAN, "Verses 31-39

"And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel. And Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom; and the name of his city was Dimhabah. And Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead. And Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his stead. And Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who smote Midian in the land of Moab, reigned in his stead; and the name of his city was Avith. And Hadad died, and Shamlah of Masrekah reigned in his stead. And Shamlah died, and Shaul of Rehoboth by the River reigned in his stead. and Shaul died, and Baalhanan the son of Achbor reigned in his stead. And Baal-hanan 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 Mehetabel, the daughter of Matted, the daughter of Mezahab."

"Before there reigned any king over the children of Israel ..." As noted in the chapter introduction, there would have been no point whatever to such a remark as this except as a warning derived from the disastrous experience of the Edomites in their adoption of government by monarchy. The usual, knee-jerk comment by critics, of course, makes this "proof" of a late date for Genesis after the rise of the monarchy in Israel. Willis asserted that this expression, "shows that this verse was written after Saul had taken the throne."[19] Such a deduction is absolutely unnecessary, as many able scholars have pointed out:

"This does not refer to the time after the monarchy was introduced into Israel under Saul, but was written with the promise in mind, that kings should come from Jacob (Genesis 35:11), and merely expresses the thought that Edom became a kingdom before Israel."[20]

This reference to the kings to which their sister nation had submitted (was) a warning against the desires of the children of Israel to have kings.[21] (Kline and Francisco also both follow this same line of thought).

And what a warning this monarchy was for Israel! Every single one of the kings was succeeded by another one who was not his son. The inference that they were overthrown violently is irresistible. That this was some kind of benign "elective" or "democratic" monarchy is actually ridiculous. No such monarchy ever existed anywhere. The very word, "king" forbids such a view. Of course, exactly this same pattern developed during the reigns of the last series of kings in Northern Israel. Israel had their warning quite early in their history, but they heeded it not.

The fourth king on the list was distinguished by his fighting the Midianites on the field of Moab. The Midianites were south of Edom, and the Moabites were north of Edom, Edom being squarely between them; and some have suggested that this presents a problem. The only problem is the total disappearance from history of any reference to such a war, except for this brief note in Genesis. Most Americans would have no problem with a statement that, "Andrew Jackson fought the British in New Orleans." How did the British happen to be in New Orleans? They went there; and that is exactly how the Midianites came to be in Moab.

Before leaving this paragraph, it should be noted that the capital of the monarchy was moved with the accession of each new king. What a scramble that was!

PETT, "Genesis 36:31

‘And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.’

This phrase does not necessarily require that at the time of writing there was now kingship in Israel. The promise to Jacob (Genesis 35:11), and the promise to Abraham before him (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16), which Esau would know well, was that their descendants would be kings. Thus this boast could well have been made by Esau in the light of that fact to point out that while there were, and had been, kings in Edom, and thus settled statehood, none such had yet arisen among the children of Israel, thus demonstrating his own status. Indeed the very unusual phrase ‘king over the children of Israel’ (only here and 1 Chronicles 1:43 where it is copied from this verse) is a sign of the age of the narrative. We could argue that later generations would have used the regular stereotyped phrase ‘king over Israel’.

But who were these kings? We neither know that nor when they reigned. Their lives may well have been fairly brief for they were war leaders in rugged territory, and the fact that they came from so many backgrounds and reigned in different ‘cities’ suggests the nature

of the people they ruled. It may well be that as Esau integrated with the tribes in Edom, eventually to become their leader, ‘the father of the Edomites’, he came across a record of these kings or heard their lineage recited at the installation of a new king, and boastfully included it here to demonstrate that his new people were more civilised than those of his family tribe.

COKE, "Genesis 36:31. Before there reigned, &c.— Some remark, that this could not have been said till after there had been a king in Israel, and therefore (say they) these cannot be the words of Moses, but must have been afterwards interpolated. Others understand Moses to speak prophetically, since it appears from chap. Genesis 17:6, and Deuteronomy 17:14, that he foresaw there were to be kings in Israel. But the truth is, that the words rendered king, and reigned, may, and ought to be understood only of dominion, or rule in the general, not of royal dominion. The preceding verse shews this: for thence it is plain, that the kings spoken of here, are no other than the dukes, or leaders, spoken of there: and therefore the verse might, with much propriety, be rendered, "these are the governors who governed in the land of Edom, before there was any governor over the children of Israel." And in this view all is clear. Dr. Wall remarks on this verse, that it was the custom of those times to call any one king of a people, who had in any way the rule, government, or superiority over them. And thus Moses was king in Jeshurun, or Israel; so that this is no more than to say, all these kings or governors in Edom were before Moses's time.

LANGE, "Fifth Section. The kings of the land of Edom ( Genesis 36:31-39; comp. 1 Chronicles 1:43-50). Out of the original discordant or opposing Edomite and Horite princes there sprang one united kingdom, the Edomitic element being undoubtedly the predominant. From the statement here made, it is plain that the kings were not hereditary kings; in no case does the son succeed to the father’s throne. Still less are we to suppose, with Keil, Hengstenberg [also Murphy, Jacobus, and others.—A. G.], that it was a well-ordered elective monarchy, with chosen kings, since in that case, at least, some of the sons would have succeeded their fathers. (Knobel wavers between the assumption of elections and usurpations.) It is rather in accordance with the Edomitic character (see the blessing of Isaac), that a circle of usurpations should arise out of the turbulent transition state; dark counterparts of the way and manner in which the judges in Israel wrought together or followed one another at the calling of God. Thus Bela, of Dinhaba, city of plunder, as devourer (as despotic Balaam), might well begin the series. And the name of Jobab, one who with the howling of the desert breaks forth from his fastness, confirms the mode of the kingdom as already intimated. Husham seems to have gained his power and position by surprise, Hadad by violence, and Samlah by political arts and fraud. With Saul, therefore, we first meet with one who was desired and chosen, and the remark that he was succeeded by Baal-hanan, gracious lord, and he by Hadar, rich in power, whose wife bears a truly pious name, justifies the conjecture that the savage, uncultivated forms of violence and cunning gradually gave place to the more noble forms. Of this eighth king of the Edomites, it is not said here that he died. The table closes, therefore, with the time of Hadar. Keil justly assumes that the tribe-princes or phylarchs (who, indeed, as persons, did not follow each other, but were cotemporary, and as hereditary dignities located and fixed themselves geographically) existed as cotemporaries with the kings (with regard to Exodus 15:15, comp. Numbers 20:14 ff.). “While Moses treats with the king of Edom with reference to a passage through his land, in the song of Moses it is the tribe-princes who are filled with fear at the miraculous passage of the Israelites through the Red Sea (comp. Exek. Genesis

32:29). We may urge further that the account of the seats of these phylarchs, Genesis 36:40-43, follows after the catalogue of the kings.” Keil.—Before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.—It has been inferred from this statement, that Genesis, or the part of Genesis lying before us here, was not composed until the time of the kings in Israel. Delitzsch replies to this, that the narrator might have inserted this clause from the stand-point of the promise spoken, e. g. Genesis 17:1 and Genesis 35:11. Then, indeed, we should have expected another mode of expression. But how obvious it is to suppose that this phrase is an interpolation by a later writer! [“The phrase does not imply that monarchy began in Israel immediately after those kings; nor does it imply that monarchy had begun in Israel at the time of the writer; as Isaac’s saying ‘that my soul may bless thee before I die,’ does not imply that he was dead at the time of his saying so. It simply implies that Israel was expected to have kings, as Isaac was expected to die.” Murphy. The sentence is in its place, and the supposition of any interpolation is needless and therefore unwarrantable.—A. G.] But, carefully considered, this table points back to a very remote time of the Edomitic kingdom. Leaving out of view the fact, that usurpations follow each other far more rapidly than hereditary sovereigns, we must observe that no one of these kings ever appears elsewhere, or is in any way involved in the Israelitish history. Some have, indeed, supposed that Hadad, the son of Bedad, Genesis 36:35, is identical with the Edomite king who rebelled against Solomon ( 1 Kings 11:14), yet the various distinctions of the two differ altogether (see Keil, p236). Hengstenberg, with much stronger force, concludes, from the fact that he is said to have smitten Midian in the field of Moab, that he must have been nearly a contemporary with Moses, since at the time of Gideon the Midianites disappear from the history.—Bela the son of Beor.—It is merely an accidental coincidence, that Balaam also, whose name is related to Bela, is a son of Beor, although even Jewish expositors have here thought of Balaam (see Knobel, p286).—Of Bozrah.—An important city of the Edomites ( Isaiah 34:6 and other passages). Knobel thinks that the name has been preserved in the village Busaireh [see Robinson: “Researches,” vol. ii. p 511 ff.—A. G.]. For Masrekah and Rehoboth, see Knobel. [Keil holds that the allusion to the river determines the locality to be on the Euphrates; probably it is the Errachabi or Rachabeh on the Euphrates near the mouth of the Chaboras.—A. G.] We prefer, however, to seek it at some small nahar, river, in Edom.—Hadar, 1 Chronicles 1:50, erroneously Hadad.—Mezahab.—Regarded by Knobel as masculine, by Keil as feminine, but the former is more probable. [Keil makes Matred the mother of his wife, and Mezahab her mother. Murphy regards both as masculine nouns. There is no general rule, other than usage, to determine the gender of many Hebrew names, and the usage is not uniform. See Green’s “Grammar,” § 197.—A. G.] Keil supposes that the last-named king, Hadar, is the same one with whom Moses treated for a passage through his land. The theory that the Pentateuch must be entirely referred to Moses, probably lies at the basis of this supposition. The critical history of the Bible, however, cannot depend upon such conjectures. If we take into account the strong desire in the Edomitic race for dominion, we may well conjecture that the first usurpation began soon after the death of Esau’s grandsons. “If now,” Keil remarks, “we place their death about two hundred and fifty years before the exodus of Israel from Egypt, there would be a period of two hundred and ninety years before the arrival of Israel at the borders of Edom ( Numbers 20:14); a period long enough for the reigns of the eight kings, even if the kingdom arose first after the death of the phylarchs mentioned in Genesis 36:15-18.” We may add, further, that the tables may possibly close with the beginning of Hadar’s reign, and hence, perhaps, we have a more detailed account of his family. We should thus only have to divide the two hundred and ninety years between the seven kings. An average of forty years is certainly, however, a very long period to assign to a circle of such despotic sovereigns. [If, however, the kings co-

existed with the dukes, and were elective, chosen probably by these dukes or phylarchs, and began soon after the death of Esau, we should have a longer average. The length of human life at that period would justify the assumption of these longer reigns; if there is good reason to believe, as there seems to be, that their reigns were peaceful, and not violent usurpations. All these calculations, however, depend upon the length of the period of the bondage.—A. G.]

32 Bela son of Beor became king of Edom. His city was named Dinhabah.

GILL His name was not Balac, as the Septuagint version, which may lead to think of Balak king of Moab; nor is this the same with Balaam, the son of Beor, who lived ages after, as some in Aben Ezra: who he was we know no more of than what is here said; he was the first Horite king, and is placed by Mr. Bedford F9 in A. M. 2002: and the name of his city [was] Dinhabah,the place either where he was born, or where he had been governor before, but of it we read nowhere else.

PETT, "Genesis 36:32-34

‘And Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom, and the name of his city was Dinhabah. And Bela died and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his place. And Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites reigned in his place.’The ‘city’ of Dinhabah need only have been a group of dwellings or even a tent encampment. Bozrah similarly, although a long time later it was an established city. Whether the Temanites were named after Teman (Genesis 36:11), or Teman was named after the Temanites, we do not know. Eliphaz the Temanite was one of Job’s comforters (Job 2:11). Much later on Teman was an established city (Jeremiah 49:20).

33 When Bela died, Jobab son of Zerah from Bozrah succeeded him as king.

CLARKE Many have supposed that Jobab is the same as Job, so remarkable for his afflictions and patience; and that Eliphaz, mentioned Genesis 36:10, who in the book of Job is called one of his friends: but there is no proper proof of this, and there are many reasons against it.

GILL How long he reigned is not known with any certainty, nor whether he left any sons behind him; if he did, they did not succeed him in the throne; for Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead:this king some have thought to be the same with Job, and from whom one of the books of Scripture has its name; but neither their names, nor age, nor country agree: who this Jobab and his father Zerah were cannot be said: they seem to be of the same country in which Jobab reigned, since he is said to be of Bozrah, a famous city of Idumea, after spoken of in the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah and others, (Isaiah 34:6) (63:1) (Jeremiah 48:24) (Jeremiah 49:13,22) (Amos 1:12) (Micah 2:12) ; Jarchi takes it to be a city of Moab, and indeed it is sometimes placed in Moab, and sometimes in Edom, it being on the borders of both, and sometimes belonged to the one and sometimes to the other. According to Mr. Bedford F11, this king began his reign, A. M. 2135, so that the former king must have reigned about forty two years; which is a space of time he allows to each successor, taking them one with another, the particular and exact time of each reign he not being able to fix.

34 When Jobab died, Husham from the land of the Temanites succeeded him as king.

GILL According to Mr. Bedford, A. M. 2177: and Husham of the land of Temani reigned in his stead;or of the land of the south, as the Targum of Jonathan, of the southern part of the land of Idumea, as it was afterwards called; the metropolis of which was the city of Teman, after spoken of in Scripture, which had its name from Teman the son of Eliphaz; (See Gill on 36:11).

35 When Husham died, Hadad son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the country of Moab, succeeded him as king. His city was named Avith.

CLARKE Bishop Cumberland supposes that this was Midian, the son of Abraham by Keturah, and that he was killed by Hadad some time before he was one hundred and nine years of age; and that Moses recorded this, probably, because it was a calamity to the ancestor of Jethro, his father-in-law.-Orig. of �at., p. 14.

GILL As is thought, about A. M. 2219, above forty years after the death of Abraham, as computed by the above writer: and Hadad the son of Bedad (who smote Midian in the field of Moab)reigned in his stead:who he or his father were we have no other account, nor of this warlike action of his; probably the Midianites came out to invade him, hearing of which, he went out against them, and met with him in the fields of Moab, which were near to Midian, and fought them and conquered them: Jarchi says, the Midianites came out to make war against the Moabites, and the king of Edom went out to help the Moabites, and hence, he says, we learn, that Midian and Moab were near each other; and in the days of Balaam they made peace, that they might combine against Israel: this battle is supposed to be fought in the twelfth year of his reign; and it is thought to be in his reign that Esau came with his family and dwelt in Seir F12; though some place it later, either in the following reign, or in that of his successors {m}: and the name of his city [was] Avith:

where it was is not certain.

PETT, "Genesis 36:35

‘And Husham died and Hadad, the son of Bedad, who smote Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his place, and the name of his city was Avith. And Hadad died and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place.’The fact that Hadad smote Midian in the countryside of Moab dates him after the time when Midian and Moab were established as tribes. Midian was a son of Abraham by Keturah and Moab was the son of Lot, but there were tribes in Moab in settled villages before that and they probably gave their names to the tribes they eventually took leadership over. How easily a capable leader from any background could take over a tribe in the right circumstances here in Edom is demonstrated by this king list.

36 When Hadad died, Samlah from Masrekah succeeded him as king.

GILL, "And Hadad died,.... As is supposed, about A. M. 2241.

and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his stead; but who he was, or the place he was of, cannot be said.

PETT, "Genesis 36:36-39

‘And Hadad died and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his place. And Samlah died and Shaul of Rehoboth by the River reigned in his place. And Shaul died and Baalhanan, the son of Achbor reigned in his place. And Baalhanan the son of Achbor died and Hadar reigned in his place, and the name of his city was Pau, and his wife’s name was Mehetabel the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Me-zahab.If The River means the Euphrates as it usually does in Scripture then Shaul has come some distance, but it is quite possible that people would enter this warring, raiding tribe from many sources. Alternately it may refer to a local river known as The River. We note again that daughters are important in this area and may well have been influential.

37 When Samlah died, Shaul from Rehoboth on

the river [f] succeeded him as king.

GILL As is supposed, about A. M. 2283. and Saul of Rehoboth [by] the river reigned in his stead;Rehoboth was one of the cities built by Ashur, (Genesis 10:11) ; and was situated near the river Euphrates; and so the Targum of Jonathan calls it Rehoboth which is by Euphrates; but Jerom F14, from Eusebius, takes it to be another city by a river in Edom, and says, that there was in his days a garrison in the country of Gabalena (a part of Idumea), a large village called by that name.

38 When Shaul died, Baal-Hanan son of Acbor succeeded him as king.

GILL whose name, inverted, is observed by Grotius to be the same with Hannibal; it signifies a gracious lord or king.

39 When Baal-Hanan son of Acbor died, Hadad [g] succeeded him as king. His city was named Pau, and his wife's name was Mehetabel daughter of Matred, the daughter of Me-Zahab.

GILL About A. M. 2367.

and Hadar reigned in his stead;the last of the Horite kings, when an end was put to this monarchy by the united families of Seir and Esau, and changed into dukedoms; of which there were seven of the race of Seir, and fourteen of the race of Esau, of whom an account is given in the preceding part of this chapter: as for this last king it is further said of him:

and the name of his city [was] Pau;but where it was cannot be said:

and his wife's name [was] Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, thedaughter of Mezahab;this woman seems to be a person of note, by the particular mention made of her; but whether the names of her ancestors are the names of men or women it is not certain: some take Matred to be the name of her father, and Mezahab the name of her grandfather; but according to Aben Ezra, Marred was the name of her mother, who was the daughter of Mezahab her grandfather; whom the Targum of Jonathan interprets melter of gold, as does Saadiah Gaon.

40 These were the chiefs descended from Esau, by name, according to their clans and regions: Timna, Alvah, Jetheth,

BAR�ES, "Gen_36:40-43The hereditary dukes who were contemporaneous with this sovereign, and formed no

doubt his council, are now enumerated. Timna, once the name of a female, now appears as a male, unless we allow a duchess in her own right to have occurred among them. The same applies to Oholibamah. Alva or Aljah is near akin to Alvan or Allan Gen_36:23. Jetheth, Elah, Pinon, Mibzar, Magdiel, Iram, are new names. Four of the old names reappear. One is only slightly different. The number of dukes is eleven. It is probable that Amalek separated from the family confederacy; and the number of tribes may have been originally twelve. The seven Horite dukedoms probably merged into the Idumaean eleven.

CLARKE hese dukes did not govern the whole nation of the Idumeans, but they were chiefs in their respective families, in their places-the districts they governed, and to which they gave their names. Calmet thinks that those mentioned above were dukes in Edom or Idumea at the time of the exodus of Israel from Egypt.

GILLAfter the regal monarchy ceased, the government in Edom was by dukes, and of these there were two sons, one of which an account has been given of already, who were partly of the race of Seir, and partly of the race of Esau; and who were dukes not by succession, but together, in and over their respective families: and it may be observed, that neither Esau, nor his sons by his two first wives, Eliphaz and Reuel, are called dukes, only his three sons by his last wife; all the rest are his grandsons and sons of the two former, which seems to give some light as to the time when those dukedoms took place; and very probably it was by the joint influence of Seir and Esau, whose families had intermarried, that an end was put to the regal power, and who, for a course of years, governed in the above manner: and they of Esau's race in those times are said to be "dukes in the land of Edom", as a learned man F15 has observed; whereas those that follow, which are a second race of them, are called "dukes of Edom", (Genesis 36:43) ; who took possession of the country and ruled in it, driving out the Horites and succeeding in their stead: these are described

according to their families;they were the heads of:

after their places, by their names;the places where they lived, which were called after their names, and are as follow:

Duke Timnah, Duke Alvah, Duke Jetheth;these were both the names of the dukes, and of the places where they governed, called after their names; so Timnah or Themna, as Jerom calls it, is by him said to be a city of the princes of Edom, the same he says of Jetheth F16, so the like may be concluded of Alvah.

K&D, "(Parallel, 1Ch_1:51-54). Seats of the Tribe-Princes of Esau According to Their Families. - That the names which follow are not a second list of Edomitish tribe-princes (viz., of those who continued the ancient constitution, with its hereditary aristocracy, after Hadar's death), but merely relate to the capital cities of the old phylarchs, is evident from the expression in the heading, “After their places, by their names,” as compared with Gen_36:43, “According to their habitations in the land of their possession.” This being the substance and intention of the list, there is nothing surprising in the fact, that out of the eleven names only two correspond to those given in Gen_36:15-19. This proves nothing more than that only two of the capitals received their names from the princes who captured or founded them, viz., Timnah and Kenaz. Neither of these has been discovered yet. The name Aholibamah is derived from the Horite princess (Gen_36:25); its site is unknown. Elah is the port Aila (vid., Gen_14:6). Pinon is the same as Phunon, an encampment of the Israelites (Num_33:42-43), celebrated for its mines, in which many Christians were condemned to labour under Diocletian, between Petra and

Zoar, to the northeast of Wady Musa. Teman is the capital of the land of the Temanites (Gen_36:34). Mibzar is supposed by Knobel to be Petra; but this is called Selahelsewhere (2Ki_14:7). Magdiel and Iram cannot be identified. The concluding sentence, “This is Esau, the father (founder) of Edom” (i.e., from his sprang the great nation of the Edomites, with its princes and kings, upon the mountains of Seir), not only terminates this section, but prepared the way for the history of Jacob, which commences with the following chapter.

COFFMAN, "Verses 40-43

"And these are the names of the chiefs that came of Esau, according to their families, after their places, by their names: chief Timna, chief Alvah, chief Jetheh, chief Oholibamah, chief Elath, chief Pinon, chief Kenaz, chief Teman, chief Mibzar, chief Magdiel, chief Iram; these are the chiefs of Edom, according to their habitations in the land of their possession. This is Esau, the father of the Edomites."

The apparent inclusion of women's names, Timna and Oholibamah, as titles of certain chiefs shows that the chief took his title from the tribal mother in some cases. That this list does not exactly correspond with that given above presents no problem, for it probably represents the chiefs at a later time than that of the earlier list. The unifying of the tribes under the names of Timna and Oholibamah indicates this.

LANGE, "Sixth Section. The permanent tribe-princes, or the seats of their power, in Edom ( Genesis 36:40-43; comp. 1 Chronicles 1:51-54). It is plain that we have here the geographical position of the original personal tribe-princes, recorded under the political provincial tribe-names, i. e, we have the ethnographic and geographical divisions of the kingdom of Edom; and Keil justly rejects the assertion of Bertheau, that there follows here a second catalogue of the Edomitic princes, who perhaps, after the death of Hadar, “restored the old tribal institution and the hereditary aristocracy.”—After their places, according to their families, by their names.—After the names, i. e, which their families and places had formed for themselves. Hence many, perhaps the most, of the old names of princes have passed over into new names of tribes and localities.—1. Thimnah=Amalek (see Genesis 36:12; Genesis 36:16; Genesis 36:22).—2. Alwah.—Here the Horitic name Alwan, Genesis 36:23, appears to have forced its way through the Edomite dominion.—3. Jetheth.—4. Aholibamah.—Perhaps the district of the sons of Aholibamah, Genesis 36:2. Keil is inclined to refer it to the Horite Aholibamah, Genesis 36:25—5. Elah.—Reminds us of Elon, Genesis 36:2, and of Eliphaz his grandson and Esau’s Song of Solomon, whose sons, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam ( Genesis 36:11), may perhaps have gone up into the district of Kenaz.—6. Pinon.—7. Kenaz.—Points back to Kenaz, the son of Eliphaz, Genesis 36:11—8. Theman.—This was the name of the first son of Eliphaz, Genesis 36:11.—9. Mibzar.—Goes back, perhaps through Bozra, to a tribe-prince. The signification of Zepho, Genesis 36:11, is analogous.—10. Magdiel.—Is perhaps connected with Manahath, Genesis 36:23.—11. Iram.—“ֵאָלה is the sea-point Aila. ִ�ינֹן is the same with Phunon, a camping place of the Israelites ( Numbers 33:43 f.), celebrated for its mines, to which many Christians were sent by Diocletian, situated between Petra and Zoar, northeasterly from Wady Musa (Ritter, xiv. p125 ff.). 9ֵיָמן, the capital,ֶאֶרץ ַה9ֵיָמנִי, Genesis 36:34.” Keil. Mibzar might be referred to Petra, Knobel thinks, since it is a stronghold, but that place is usually called Selah.—He is Esau.—The conclusion of the narrative is entirely in accordance with the Hebrew conception of the personal character and relations of history. Esau is actually “the father” and not merely

the founder of Edom, as he lives on in his toledoth. This close of the toledoth of Esau points forward to the toledoth of Jacob.

PETT, "Verses 40-43

The Chieftains Descended From Esau (Genesis 36:40-43).

Genesis 36:40-43 a

‘And these are the names of the chieftains who came of Esau, according to their families, after their places, by their names. Chief Timna, Chief Alva, Chief Jetheh, Chief Oholibamah, Chief Elah, Chief Pinon, Chief Kenaz, Chief Teman, Chief Mibzar, Chief Magdiel, Chief Iram. These are the chieftains of Edom according to their habitations in the land of their possession.’

The introduction may suggest that once there were place names present in the lists as with some of the kings previously. But it may simply be pointing out that they ruled in different places, descended from one or other of the sons, not one after the other. The placing of the names may suggest that these chieftains followed and replaced the kings. Both Timna (Genesis 36:12) and Oholibamah (Genesis 36:25) have previously been females. This may well confirm the idea that women were influential in this society. Apart from these only Kenaz is elsewhere mentioned (Genesis 36:11; Genesis 36:15) and he may not have been the same one. We may therefore assume that these are later descendants of Esau, possibly great-grandsons.

Genesis 36:43 b

‘This is Edom the father of the Edomites.’

This may well be a concluding colophon showing that the tablet belongs to Esau, possibly with Genesis 36:1 as the opening heading. ‘The father of the Edomites’ simply indicates that he became their patriarch (but see Genesis 37:1). Alternately note the unusual phrases that occur in the chapter which appear abruptly, ‘the same is Edom’ (Genesis 36:1 a), ‘Esau is Edom’ (Genesis 36:8), ‘the same is Edom’ (Genesis 36:19), ‘this is Edom the father of the Edomites’ (Genesis 36:43 b). These may well be remnants of headings and colophons.

41 Oholibamah, Elah, Pinon,

GILL ] The former is the name of a woman, (Genesis 36:2,25) ; here the name of a man, and also of the place of which he was duke; for Jerom observes F17, that

Oolibama is a city of the princes of Edom, and who also makes mention of Elath, a country of the princes of Edom, and a city of Esau, ten miles from Petra to the east F18, and the seat of Duke Pinon was very probably Phinon, which lay between Petra and Zoar F19.

42 Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar,

GILL There was a Kenaz the son of Eliphaz, and so a Teman a son of his, who were both dukes; but these seem to be different from them, though the latter might be duke of the place called Teman from him: which, in Jerom's time F20, was a village five miles distant from Petra, and where was a Roman garrison, and so Mabsar in his times F21, was a large village in the country of Gabalena (a part of Idumea), and called Mabsara, and belonged to the city Petra.

43 Magdiel and Iram. These were the chiefs of Edom, according to their settlements in the land they occupied. This was Esau the father of the Edomites.

GILL Magdiel also, Jerom F23 says, was in the country of Gabalena, formerly possessed by the dukes of Edom; and the Targum of Jonathan says, this duke was called Magdiel from the name of his city, which was a strong "migdal" or tower: and Jarchi's note upon this word is, this is Rome; so the Jewish writers elsewhere say

F24, that Esau had an hundred provinces from Seir to Magdiel; as it is said, "Duke Magdiel, Duke Iram", this is Rome:

these [be] the dukes of Edom, according to their habitations, in theland of their possession;the former race of dukes, as has been observed, were dukes in the land of Edom, were sojourners in the land, at least had not sovereign dominion, or were not the only dukes in it; there were dukes of the race of Seir at the same time; but now these having driven out the Horites, were sole possessors and sovereign lords; and thus while Israel and his posterity were sojourners in a strange land, Esau and his family were possessors and lords of a country they could call their own:

he [is] Esau the father of the Edomites;that is, Edom, the dukes of whose race are before reckoned up; the same is Esau, who had the name of Edom from selling his birthright for a mess of red pottage: and this is the man from whom the Edomites or Idumeans sprung, often hereafter spoken of in the Scripture, though no more in this history. He is said

CLARKE That is, The preceding list contains an account of the posterity of Esau, who was the father of Edom. Thus ends Esau's history; for after this there is no farther account of his life, actions, or death, in the Pentateuch.

1. As Esau is so considerable a person in polemic divinity, it may be necessary, in this place especially, to say something farther of his conduct and character. I have already, in several places, endeavoured, and I hope successfully, to wipe off the odium that has been thrown upon this man, (see the notes on chap. xxvii. and chap. xxxiii.,) without attempting to lessen his faults; and the unprejudiced reader must see that, previously to this last account we have of him, his character stands without a blot, except in the case of selling his birthright, and his purpose to destroy his brother. To the first he was led by his famishing situation and the unkindness of his brother, who refused to save his life but on this condition; and the latter, made in the heat of vexation and passion, he never attempted to execute, even when he had the most ample means and the fairest opportunity to do it.

Dr. Shuckford has drawn an impartial character of Esau, from which I extract the following particulars: "Esau was a plain, generous, and honest man, for we have no reason, from any thing that appears in his life or actions, to think him wicked beyond other men of his age or times; and his generous and good temper appears from all his behaviour towards his brother. When they first met he was all humanity and affection, and he had no uneasiness when he found that Jacob followed him not to Seir, but went to live near his father. And at Isaac's death we do not find that he made any difficulty of quitting Canaan, which was the very point which, if he had harboured any latent (evil) intentions, would have revived all his resentments. He is indeed called in Scripture the profane Esau; and it is written, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated; but there is, I think, no reason to infer, from any of those expressions, that Esau was a very wicked man, or that God hated or punished him

for an immoral life. For, 1. The sentence here against him is said expressly to be founded, not upon his actions, for it was determined before the children had done good or evil. 2. God's hatred of Esau was not a hatred which induced him to punish him with any evil, for he was as happy in all the blessings of this life as either Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob; and his posterity had a land designed by God to be their possession, as well as the children of Jacob, and they were put in possession of it much sooner than the Israelites; and God was pleased to protect them in the enjoyment of it, and to caution the Israelites against invading them with a remarkable strictness, Deuteronomy 2:4,5. And as God was pleased thus to bless Esau and his children in the blessings of this life, even as much as he blessed Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, if not more, why may we not hope to find him with them at the last day, as well as Lot or Job or any other good and virtuous man, who was not designed to be a partaker of the blessing given to Abraham? 3. All the punishment inflicted on Esau was an exclusion from being heir to the blessing promised to Abraham and to his seed, which was a favour not granted to Lot, to Job, to several other very virtuous and good men. 4. St. Paul, in the passage before cited, only intends to show the Jews that God had all along given the favours that led to the Messiah where he pleased; to Abraham, not to Lot; to Jacob, not to Esau; as at the time St. Paul wrote the Gentiles were made the people of God, not the Jews. 5. Esau is indeed called profane, (βεβηλος,) but I think that word does not mean wicked or immoral, ασεβης or αµαρτωλος. he was called profane for not having that due value for the priest's office which he should have had; and therefore, though I think it does not appear that he was cut off from being the heir of the promises by any particular action in his life, yet his turn of mind and thoughts do appear to have been such as to evidence that God's purpose towards Jacob was founded on the truest wisdom."-SHUCKFORD'S Connections, vol.ii., p.174,

The truth is, the Messiah must spring from some O�E family, and God chose Abraham's through Isaac, Jacob, ., rather than the same through Ishmael, Esau, and the others in that line; but from this choice it does not follow that the first were all necessarily saved, and the others necessarily lost.

2. To some the genealogical lists in this chapter will doubtless appear uninteresting, especially those which concern Esau and his descendants; but it was as necessary to register the generations of Esau as to register those of Jacob, in order to show that the Messiah did not spring from the former, but that he did spring from the latter. The genealogical tables, so frequently met with in the sacred writings, and so little regarded by Christians in general, are extremely useful. 1. As they are standing proofs of the truth of the prophecies, which stated that the Messiah should come from a particular family, which prophecies were clearly fulfilled in the birth of Christ. 2. As they testify, to the conviction of the Jews, that the Messiah thus promised is found in the person of Jesus of �azareth, who incontestably sprang from the last, the only remaining branch of the family of David. These registers were religiously preserved among the Jews till the destruction of Jerusalem, after which they were all destroyed, insomuch that there is not a Jew in the universe who can trace himself to the family of David; consequently, all expectation of a Messiah to come is, even on their own principles, nugatory and absurd, as nothing remains to

legitimate his birth. When Christ came all these registers were in existence. When St. Matthew and St. Luke wrote, all these registers were still in existence; and had they pretended what could not have been supported, an appeal to the registers would have convicted them of a falsehood. But no Jew attempted to do this, notwithstanding the excess of their malice against Christ and his followers; and because they did not do it, we may safely assert no Jew could do it. Thus the foundation standeth sure.

HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS

There is much spiritual improvement to be drawn from the perusal of this Chapter by every gracious soul, when GOD the HOLY GHOST awakens the heart to the observation. Jacob’s seed, no doubt, while they were bond-slaves in Egypt felt their misery the more, while calling to mind the splendour of Esau’s race in Edom. But how mistaken are our views of things, and what false calculations do we make in our estimation of happiness. Esau’s children were great indeed among men. But the seed of Jacob were beloved in the sight of GOD. JESUS hath made them kings and priests to GOD and the FATHER, and they shall reign with him forever. Dear LORD! give me that sweet promise and I ask no more. To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me on my throne. Rev_3:21.

BENSON, "Verse 43

Genesis 36:43. In the land of their possession — While the Israelites dwelt in the house of bondage, and their Canaan was only the land of promise, the Edomites dwelt in their own habitations, and Seir was in their possession. The children of this world have their all in hand, and nothing in hope, while the children of God have often their all in hope, and next to nothing in hand. But, all things considered, it is better to have Canaan in promise than mount Seir in possession.

COKE, "Verse 43

Genesis 36:43. He is Esau, &c.— This would read better, if rendered, as it ought to be, THIS is Esau, the father of Edom, i.e.. This is his family, and the account of his posterity. After this we meet with no farther mention of Esau in the Mosaic history.

REFLECTIONS.—We have here an account of Esau and his posterity, and see therein the promise to Abraham fulfilled in part, that he should be the father of many nations. He is called Edom, or red, in memory of the profane sale of his birthright for the red pottage. Note; If men by ill doings get an ill name, they must thank themselves for it. His wives and family are mentioned, and his place of abode Mount Seir: there he fixes, and leaves Jacob in peaceable possession of Canaan. Probably God had now convinced him of the unchangeableness of the decree concerning the promised Seed and the possession of the land of Canaan, and he submitted to it. Though God hated him in this sense, by excluding him from the succession, it does not follow either from Scripture or reason that he was on this account eternally lost.

The genealogy of the Horites also, who inhabited Seir, is mentioned in this chapter. By

Esau's intermarriage they soon became one people, and, it is to be feared, had one religion. Bad connections by marriage usually end in our following our wives' gods.

In external prosperity, Jacob is far behind his brother. A numerous race of dukes and governors reign in Edom, while Jacob's posterity are servants in AEgypt. Note; We must wait with patience for the fulfilment of the promises. Esau has a present possession, Jacob only a land in prospect. Let us not envy the children of the world; they have their all in hand, while we have ours in hope: and death, which must cast them out of their possessions, shall bring us to our inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and which fadeth not away, reserved for us in heaven.

APPENDIX

LAMPERT DOLPHIN PUT THIS TOGETHER

A further historical note is found in I Chronicles:

These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king

reigned over the Israelites: Bela the son of Beor, the name of whose city

was Dinhabah. When Bela died, Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned

in his stead. When Jobab died, Husham of the land of the Temanites

reigned in his stead. When Husham died, Hadad the son of Bedad, who

defeated Midian in the country of Moab, reigned in his stead; and the

name of his city was Avith. When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah

reigned in his stead. When Samlah died, Shaul of Rehoboth on the

Euphrates reigned in his stead. When Shaul died, Baal-hanan, the son of

Achbor, reigned in his stead. When Baal-hanan died, Hadad reigned in his

stead; and the name of his city was Pai, and his wife's name Mehetabel the

daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab. And Hadad died. The chiefs

of Edom were: chiefs Timna, Aliah, Jetheth, Oholibamah, Elah, Pinon,

Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar, Magdiel, and Iram; these are the chiefs of Edom.

(1 Chronicles 1:43-54)

Edom Denies Israel Passage Through Their Land During the ExodusEdom Denies Israel Passage Through Their Land During the ExodusEdom Denies Israel Passage Through Their Land During the ExodusEdom Denies Israel Passage Through Their Land During the Exodus

Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom, "Thus says your

brother Israel: You know all the adversity that has befallen us: how our

fathers went down to Egypt, and we dwelt in Egypt a long time; and the

Egyptians dealt harshly with us and our fathers; and when we cried to the

LORD, he heard our voice, and sent an angel and brought us forth out of

Egypt; and here we are in Kadesh, a city on the edge of your territory. Now

let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or vineyard,

neither will we drink water from a well; we will go along the King's

Highway, we will not turn aside to the right hand or to the left, until we

have passed through your territory." But Edom said to him, "You shall not

pass through, lest I come out with the sword against you." And the people

of Israel said to him, "We will go up by the highway; and if we drink of

your water, I and my cattle, then I will pay for it; let me only pass through

on foot, nothing more." But he said, "You shall not pass through." And

Edom came out against them with many men, and with a strong force.

Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory; so Israel

turned away from him.

And they journeyed from Kadesh, and the people of Israel, the whole

congregation, came to Mount Hor. And the LORD said to Moses and

Aaron at Mount Hor, on the border of the land of Edom, "Aaron shall be

gathered to his people; for he shall not enter the land which I have given to

the people of Israel, because you rebelled against my command at the

waters of Meribah. Take Aaron and Eleazar his son, and bring them up to

Mount Hor; and strip Aaron of his garments, and put them upon Eleazar

his son; and Aaron shall be gathered to his people, and shall die there."

Moses did as the LORD commanded; and they went up Mount Hor in the

sight of all the congregation. And Moses stripped Aaron of his garments,

and put them upon Eleazar his son; and Aaron died there on the top of the

mountain. Then Moses and Eleazar came down from the mountain. And

when all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead, all the house of Israel

wept for Aaron thirty days. (Numbers 20:14-29)

God's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a Perpetual God's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a Perpetual God's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a Perpetual God's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a Perpetual WastelandWastelandWastelandWasteland

"Draw near, O nations, to hear, and hearken, O peoples! Let the earth

listen, and all that fills it; the world, and all that comes from it. For the

LORD is enraged against all the nations, and furious against all their host,

he has doomed them, has given them over for slaughter. Their slain shall

be cast out, and the stench of their corpses shall rise; the mountains shall

flow with their blood. All the host of heaven shall rot away, and the skies

roll up like a scroll. All their host shall fall, as leaves fall from the vine,

like leaves falling from the fig tree.

"For my sword has drunk its fill in the heavens; behold, it descends for

judgment upon Edom, upon the people I have doomed. The LORD has a

sword; it is sated with blood, it is gorged with fat, with the blood of lambs

and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams. For the LORD has a

sacrifice in Bozrah, a great slaughter in the land of Edom. Wild oxen shall

fall with them, and young steers with the mighty bulls. Their land shall be

soaked with blood, and their soil made rich with fat. For the LORD has a

day of vengeance, a year of recompense for the cause of Zion. And the

streams of Edom shall be turned into pitch, and her soil into brimstone; her

land shall become burning pitch. Night and day it shall not be quenched;

its smoke shall go up for ever. From generation to generation it shall lie

waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever. But the hawk and the

porcupine shall possess it, the owl and the raven shall dwell in it. He shall

stretch the line of confusion over it, and the plummet of chaos over its

nobles. They shall name it �o Kingdom There, and all its princes shall be

nothing. Thorns shall grow over its strongholds, nettles and thistles in its

fortresses. It shall be the haunt of jackals, an abode for ostriches. And wild

beasts shall meet with hyenas, the satyr shall cry to his fellow; yea, there

shall the night hag alight, and find for herself a resting place. There shall

the owl nest and lay and hatch and gather her young in her shadow; yea,

there shall the kites be gathered, each one with her mate. Seek and read

from the book of the LORD: Not one of these shall be missing; none shall

be without her mate. For the mouth of the LORD has commanded, and his

Spirit has gathered them. He has cast the lot for them, his hand has

portioned it out to them with the line; they shall possess it for ever, from

generation to generation they shall dwell in it." (Isaiah 34:1-17)

Jeremiah Prophesies: Edom to Become a WastelandJeremiah Prophesies: Edom to Become a WastelandJeremiah Prophesies: Edom to Become a WastelandJeremiah Prophesies: Edom to Become a Wasteland

Concerning Edom. Thus says the LORD of hosts: "Is wisdom no more in

Teman? Has counsel perished from the prudent? Has their wisdom

vanished? Flee, turn back, dwell in the depths, O inhabitants of Dedan!

For I will bring the calamity of Esau upon him, the time when I punish

him. If grape-gatherers came to you, would they not leave gleanings? If

thieves came by night, would they not destroy only enough for

themselves? But I have stripped Esau bare, I have uncovered his hiding

places, and he is not able to conceal himself. His children are destroyed,

and his brothers, and his neighbors; and he is no more. Leave your

fatherless children, I will keep them alive; and let your widows trust in

me." For thus says the LORD: "If those who did not deserve to drink the

cup must drink it, will you go unpunished? You shall not go unpunished,

but you must drink. For I have sworn by myself, says the LORD, that

Bozrah shall become a horror, a taunt, a waste, and a curse; and all her

cities shall be perpetual wastes." I have heard tidings from the LORD, and

a messenger has been sent among the nations: "Gather yourselves together

and come against her, and rise up for battle!" For behold, I will make you

small among the nations, despised among men. The horror you inspire has

deceived you, and the pride of your heart, you who live in the clefts of the

rock, who hold the height of the hill.

Though you make your nest as high as the eagle's, I will bring you down

from there, says the LORD. "Edom shall become a horror; every one who

passes by it will be horrified and will hiss because of all its disasters. As

when Sodom and Gomorrah and their neighbor cities were overthrown,

says the LORD, no man shall dwell there, no man shall sojourn in her.

Behold, like a lion coming up from the jungle of the Jordan against a

strong sheepfold, I will suddenly make them run away from her; and I will

appoint over her whomever I choose. For who is like me? Who will

summon me? What shepherd can stand before me? Therefore hear the plan

which the LORD has made against Edom and the purposes which he has

formed against the inhabitants of Teman: Even the little ones of the flock

shall be dragged away; surely their fold shall be appalled at their fate. At

the sound of their fall the earth shall tremble; the sound of their cry shall

be heard at the Red Sea. Behold, one shall mount up and fly swiftly like an

eagle, and spread his wings against Bozrah, and the heart of the warriors of

Edom shall be in that day like the heart of a woman in her pangs."

(Jeremiah 49:7-22)

Some Reasons for Divine Judgment on Edom According to EzekielSome Reasons for Divine Judgment on Edom According to EzekielSome Reasons for Divine Judgment on Edom According to EzekielSome Reasons for Divine Judgment on Edom According to Ezekiel

"Thus says the Lord GOD: Because Edom acted revengefully against the

house of Judah and has grievously offended in taking vengeance upon

them, therefore thus says the Lord GOD, I will stretch out my hand against

Edom, and cut off from it man and beast; and I will make it desolate; from

Teman even to Dedan they shall fall by the sword. And I will lay my

vengeance upon Edom by the hand of my people Israel; and they shall do

in Edom according to my anger and according to my wrath; and they shall

know my vengeance, says the Lord GOD." (Ezekiel 24:12-14)

The word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, set your face against

Mount Seir, and prophesy against it, and say to it, Thus says the Lord

GOD: Behold, I am against you, Mount Seir, and I will stretch out my

hand against you, and I will make you a desolation and a waste. I will lay

your cities waste, and you shall become a desolation; and you shall know

that I am the LORD. Because you cherished perpetual enmity, and gave

over the people of Israel to the power of the sword at the time of their

calamity, at the time of their final punishment; therefore, as I live, says the

Lord GOD, I will prepare you for blood, and blood shall pursue you;

because you are guilty of blood, therefore blood shall pursue you. I will

make Mount Seir a waste and a desolation; and I will cut off from it all

who come and go. And I will fill your mountains with the slain; on your

hills and in your valleys and in all your ravines those slain with the sword

shall fall. I will make you a perpetual desolation, and your cities shall not

be inhabited. Then you will know that I am the LORD. "Because you said,

`These two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will take

possession of them ,'---although the LORD was there---therefore, as I live,

says the Lord GOD, I will deal with you according to the anger and envy

which you showed because of your hatred against them; and I will make

myself known among you, when I judge you. And you shall know that I,

the LORD, have heard all the revilings which you uttered against the

mountains of Israel, saying, `They are laid desolate, they are given us to

devour.' And you magnified yourselves against me with your mouth, and

multiplied your words against me; I heard it. Thus says the Lord GOD: For

the rejoicing of the whole earth I will make you desolate. As you rejoiced

over the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was desolate, so I

will deal with you; you shall be desolate, Mount Seir, and all Edom, all of

it. Then they will know that I am the LORD." (Ezekiel 35:1-15)

Obadiah's Prophecy Against EdomObadiah's Prophecy Against EdomObadiah's Prophecy Against EdomObadiah's Prophecy Against Edom

The vision of Obadiah. Thus says the Lord GOD concerning Edom: We

have heard tidings from the LORD, and a messenger has been sent among

the nations: "Rise up! let us rise against her for battle!" Behold, I will

make you small among the nations, you shall be utterly despised. The

pride of your heart has deceived you, you who live in the clefts of the rock,

whose dwelling is high, who say in your heart, "Who will bring me down

to the ground?" Though you soar aloft like the eagle, though your nest is

set among the stars, thence I will bring you down, says the LORD. If

thieves came to you, if plunderers by night---how you have been

destroyed!---would they not steal only enough for themselves? If grape

gatherers came to you, would they not leave gleanings? How Esau has

been pillaged, his treasures sought out! All your allies have deceived you,

they have driven you to the border; your confederates have prevailed

against you; your trusted friends have set a trap under you--- there is no

understanding of it. Will I not on that day, says the LORD, destroy the

wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of Mount Esau? And your

mighty men shall be dismayed, O Teman, so that every man from Mount

Esau will be cut off by slaughter.

For the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you, and

you shall be cut off for ever. On the day that you stood aloof, on the day

that strangers carried off his wealth, and foreigners entered his gates and

cast lots for Jerusalem, you were like one of them. But you should not

have gloated over the day of your brother in the day of his misfortune; you

should not have rejoiced over the people of Judah in the day of their ruin;

you should not have boasted in the day of distress. You should not have

entered the gate of my people in the day of his calamity; you should not

have gloated over his disaster in the day of his calamity; you should not

have looted his goods in the day of his calamity. You should not have

stood at the parting of the ways to cut off his fugitives; you should not

have delivered up his survivors in the day of distress. For the day of the

LORD is near upon all the nations. As you have done, it shall be done to

you, your deeds shall return on your own head. For as you have drunk

upon my holy mountain, all the nations round about shall drink; they shall

drink, and stagger, and shall be as though they had not been.

But in Mount Zion there shall be those that escape, and it shall be holy;

and the house of Jacob shall possess their own possessions. The house of

Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of

Esau stubble; they shall burn them and consume them, and there shall be

no survivor to the house of Esau; for the LORD has spoken. Those of the

Negeb shall possess Mount Esau, and those of the Shephelah the land of

the Philistines; they shall possess the land of Ephraim and the land of

Samaria and Benjamin shall possess Gilead. The exiles in Halah who are

of the people of Israel shall possess Phoenicia as far as Zarephath; and the

exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad shall possess the cities of the

Negeb. Saviors shall go up to Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau; and the

kingdom shall be the LORD's."

(For Ray Stedman's commentary see Obadiah: Death to Edom)

Malachi on God's Perpetual Enmity Against EdomMalachi on God's Perpetual Enmity Against EdomMalachi on God's Perpetual Enmity Against EdomMalachi on God's Perpetual Enmity Against Edom

The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. "I have loved

you," says the LORD. But you say, "How hast thou loved us?" "Is not Esau

Jacob's brother?" says the LORD. "Yet I have loved Jacob but I have hated

Esau; I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of

the desert." If Edom says, "We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins,"

the LORD of hosts says, "They may build, but I will tear down, till they

are called the wicked country, the people with whom the LORD is angry

for ever." (Malachi 1:1-4)

Esau: A Type of the FleshEsau: A Type of the FleshEsau: A Type of the FleshEsau: A Type of the FleshOne of the most valuable lessons to be learned from the family history of the descendants

of the brothers Jacob and Esau concerns the New Testament application. The New

Testament views the conflict between the flesh and the spirit as typified by the conflict

between Jacob and Esau:

For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your freedom as

an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another.

For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, "You shall love your neighbor

as yourself." But if you bite and devour one another take heed that you are

not consumed by one another. But I say, walk by the Spirit, and do not

gratify the desires of the flesh.

For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would.

But if you are led by the Spirit you are not under the law. Now the works

of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry,

sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit,

envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you

before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness,

faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law. And

those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions

and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit. Let us

have no self-conceit, no provoking of one another, no envy of one another.

(Galatians 5:13-26)

Jacob in many ways typifies the average believer. He was deceitful, manipulative, clever

and bent on advancing his own causes for many years. After wrestling all night with The

Angel of the Lord at the Brook Jabbok near Peniel, his name was finally changed to Israel

(Genesis 32). Though he may have been somewhat slow to fully believe and trust God,

Jacob's heart was inclined from his birth towards the things of the Lord.

Esau's heart and motives, on the other hand, were perpetually set on the goals and rewards

of the world. He cared not at all about the things that were important to God.

"See to it that no one fail to obtain the grace of God; that no 'root of

bitterness' spring up and cause trouble, and by it the many become defiled;

that no one be immoral or irreligious like Esau, who sold his birthright for

a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the

blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he

sought it with tears." (Hebrews 12:15-17)

As noted above, the entire book of Obadiah tells us why God hated Esau but loved Jacob,

and why it is that perpetual enmity exists within the Christian, between the spirit and the

flesh:

The pride of your heart has deceived you, you who live in the clefts of the

rock, whose dwelling is high, who say in your heart, "Who will bring me

down to the ground?" Though you soar aloft like the eagle, though your

nest is set among the stars, thence I will bring you down, says the LORD.

When the people of Israel left Egypt under the leadership of Moses the first opposition

they encountered was from a people known as the Amalekites. Genesis 36 tells us that

Amalek was the grandson of Esau!

Then came Amalek and fought with Israel at Rephidim. And Moses said to

Joshua, "Choose for us men, and go out, fight with Amalek; tomorrow I

will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in my hand." So

Joshua did as Moses told him, and fought with Amalek; and Moses,

Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. Whenever Moses held up his

hand, Israel prevailed; and whenever he lowered his hand, Amalek

prevailed. But Moses' hands grew weary; so they took a stone and put it

under him, and he sat upon it, and Aaron and Hur held up his hands, one

on one side, and the other on the other side; so his hands were steady until

the going down of the sun. And Joshua mowed down Amalek and his

people with the edge of the sword.

And the LORD said to Moses, "Write this as a memorial in a book and

recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembrance

of Amalek from under heaven." And Moses built an altar and called the

name of it, The LORD is my banner, saying, "A hand upon the banner of

the LORD! The LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to

generation." (Exodus 17:8-16)

Later King Saul was told by the prophet Samuel to completely eradicate the Amalekites,

(1 Samuel 15ff). Saul's incomplete obedience not only cost him his throne and his life,

but reveals clearly how easy it is for us as believers to compromise with our own flesh---

which God has said is utterly worthless. (See Ray Stedman's "First Samuel: The Death of

the Flesh.").

In the book of Esther, the arche-fiend and enemy of the Jews is the infamous Haman, an

Agagite. Sure enough, Agag's name is to be found listed as the king of the people of

Amalek! (See Ray Stedman's commentary, "The Struggle for Power.")

Herod Antipas, before whom Jesus remained silent, (Luke 23:9) was an Idumean, that is

one of the last of the Edomites. God has nothing further to say to the flesh, nor to the

descendants of Edom. Their fate was sealed long ago.

King David's successful military dealings with Edom are recorded in 2 Samuel 8.

Solomon's compromises with his "many foreign wives" caused the Lord to raise up

against him an adversary, Hadad, from the royal line of Edom, (2 Kings 11). Thus there is

a long history of antagonism between the descendants of Jacob and of Esau throughout

Old Testament history.

King Amaziah's famous (but ill-fated) raid into Edom is recorded in 2 Chronicles 25,

Amaziah was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned

twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Jehoaddan of

Jerusalem. And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, yet not

with a blameless heart. And as soon as the royal power was firmly in his

hand he killed his servants who had slain the king his father. But he did

not put their children to death, according to what is written in the law, in

the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, "The fathers shall not

be put to death for the children, or the children be put to death for the

fathers; but every man shall die for his own sin.

Then Amaziah assembled the men of Judah, and set them by fathers'

houses under commanders of thousands and of hundreds for all Judah and

Benjamin. He mustered those twenty years old and upward, and found that

they were three hundred thousand picked men, fit for war, able to handle

spear and shield. He hired also a hundred thousand mighty men of valor

from Israel for a hundred talents of silver. But a man of God came to him

and said, "O king, do not let the army of Israel go with you, for the LORD

is not with Israel, with all these Ephraimites. But if you suppose that in

this way you will be strong for war, God will cast you down before the

enemy; for God has power to help or to cast down." And Amaziah said to

the man of God, "But what shall we do about the hundred talents which I

have given to the army of Israel?" The man of God answered, "The LORD

is able to give you much more than this." Then Amaziah discharged the

army that had come to him from Ephraim, to go home again. And they

became very angry with Judah, and returned home in fierce anger.

But Amaziah took courage, and led out his people, and went to the Valley

of Salt and smote ten thousand men of Seir. [Edom] The men of Judah

captured another ten thousand alive, and took them to the top of a rock and

threw them down from the top of the rock; and they were all dashed to

pieces.

But the men of the army whom Amaziah sent back, not letting them go

with him to battle, fell upon the cities of Judah, from Samaria to Beth-

horon, and killed three thousand people in them, and took much spoil.

After Amaziah came from the slaughter of the Edomites, he brought the

gods of the men of Seir, and set them up as his gods, and worshiped them,

making offerings to them. Therefore the LORD was angry with Amaziah

and sent to him a prophet, who said to him, "Why have you resorted to the

gods of a people, which did not deliver their own people from your hand?"

But as he was speaking the king said to him, "Have we made you a royal

counselor? Stop! Why should you be put to death?" So the prophet

stopped, but said, "I know that God has determined to destroy you,

because you have done this and have not listened to my counsel." Then

Amaziah king of Judah took counsel and sent to Joash the son of

Jehoahaz, son of Jehu, king of Israel, saying, "Come, let us look one

another in the face." And Joash the king of Israel sent word to Amaziah

king of Judah, "A thistle on Lebanon sent to a cedar on Lebanon, saying,

`Give your daughter to my son for a wife'; and a wild beast of Lebanon

passed by and trampled down the thistle. You say, `See, I have smitten

Edom,' and your heart has lifted you up in boastfulness. But now stay at

home; why should you provoke trouble so that you fall, you and Judah

with you?"

But Amaziah would not listen; for it was of God, in order that he might

give them into the hand of their enemies, because they had sought the gods

of Edom. So Joash king of Israel went up; and he and Amaziah king of

Judah faced one another in battle at Beth-shemesh, which belongs to

Judah. And Judah was defeated by Israel, and every man fled to his home.

And Joash king of Israel captured Amaziah king of Judah, the son of

Joash, son of Ahaziah, at Beth-shemesh, and brought him to Jerusalem,

and broke down the wall of Jerusalem for four hundred cubits, from the

Ephraim Gate to the Corner Gate. And he seized all the gold and silver,

and all the vessels that were found in the house of God, and Obed-edom

with them; he seized also the treasuries of the king's house, and hostages,

and he returned to Samaria. Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah lived

fifteen years after the death of Joash the son of Jehoahaz, king of Israel.

Now the rest of the deeds of Amaziah, from first to last, are they not

written in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel? From the time when

he turned away from the LORD they made a conspiracy against him in

Jerusalem, and he fled to Lachish. But they sent after him to Lachish, and

slew him there. And they brought him upon horses; and he was buried

with his fathers in the city of David.

All of this history serves to illustrate for us that no good ever comes from our best efforts,

our self effort in the Christian life, which is the root source of what the Bible calls "the

flesh." Only the works of God, the works of the Holy Spirit done through us when we are

obedient and submissive to God---have any lasting worth. All else will, in the end, be

destroyed.

Additional References

1. Hutchings, Noah W., Petra in History and Prophecy, Hearthstone Publishing, PO Box

815, Oklahoma City, OK 73101. (Southwest Radio Church, 1991).

2. Franciscan Fathers, Guide to Jordan, 1978. Franciscan Fathers Press, PO Box 14066,

91-140 Jerusalem, Israel.

3. Iain Browning, Petra, Chatto and Windus Ltd., 20 Vauxhall Bridge Rd., London

SW1V 2SA, Third Edition, 1995.

4. G. Lankester Harding, The Antiquities of Jordan, The Lutterworth Press, London,

1990, (Jordan Distrubution Agency, Amman).

5. Jane Taylor, Petra, Aurum Press Ltd., 25 Bedford Avenue, London, WC1B 3AT. 1993.

6. Burton MacDonald, Ammon, Moab and Edom, Al Kutba Publishers, PO Box 9446,

Amman, Jordan, 1994.

7. Graeme Donnan, The King's Highway, Al Kutba Publishers, PO Box 9446, Amman,

Jordan, 1994.

Lambert Dolphin

JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

is Vicious Character.is Vicious Character.is Vicious Character.is Vicious Character.

————In Rabbinical Literature:In Rabbinical Literature:In Rabbinical Literature:In Rabbinical Literature:

Even while in his mother's womb Esau manifested his evil disposition, maltreating and injuring his twin brother (Gen. R. lxiii.). During the early years of their boyhood he and Jacob looked so much alike that they could not be distinguished. It was not till they were thirteen years of age that their radically different temperaments began to appear (Tan., Toledot, 2). Jacob was a student in the bet ha-midrash of Eber (Targ. Pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xxv. 27), while Esau was a ne'er-do-well (ib.; "a true progeny of the serpent," Zohar), who insulted women and committed murder, and whose shameful conduct brought on the death of his grandfather, Abraham (Pesiḳ. R. 12). On the very day that Abraham died Esau went forth to hunt in the field, when he fell in with Nimrod, who for a long time previously had been jealous of him. Esau, lying in wait, pounced on the king, who was unaware of his proximity, and, drawing his sword, cut off the king's head. The same fate befell two attendants of Nimrod, who had, however, by their cries for help, brought the royal suite to the spot. Esau took to his heels, but carried off the garments of Nimrod—which were those of Adam (Targ. Pseudo-Jon. to Gen. xxvii. 15)—and concealed them in his father's house. It was when exhausted from running that he chanced upon Jacob, who cunningly took up a casual remark of his about the uselessness of the birthright, and trapped him into selling the latter as well as his share in the field of Machpelah, making and keeping a properly witnessed and sealed record of the transaction

("Sefer ha-Yashar," vi.).

According to Targ. Pseudo-Jon. to Gen. xxv. 29 and Pirḳe R. El. xxxv., the sale of the birthright took place while Jacob was preparing for his father the dish of lentils which was the usual meal offered to mourners, and over which words of comfort used to be said (comp. N. Brll in Kobak's "Jeschurun,"viii. 30; B. B. 16b). Esau requested to eat thereof, and then sold his birthright; indulging in blasphemous speeches (Gen. R. lxiii.; Pes. 22b) and in denials of immortality (Targ. Pseudo-Jon. l.c.) and of God and the resurrection; so that he figures in tradition as one of the three great atheists (Tan., Toledot, 24; Sanh. 101b). Jacob's conduct toward his brother is accounted for by the fact that Esau had always refused to share his sumptuous repasts with him (Pirḳe R. El. l.c.).

Is the Cause of Isaac's Blindness.Is the Cause of Isaac's Blindness.Is the Cause of Isaac's Blindness.Is the Cause of Isaac's Blindness.

Esau had won the affection of his father by lying words (Targ. Pseudo-Jon. to Gen. xxv. 28). Hypocrite that he was, he played the good son; never ministering to his father unless tricked out in Nimrod's garments, and asking questions concerning the duty of tithing straw (Pesiḳ. 199). Crafty at home, he was equally so abroad (Gen. R. lxiii.). Outrageous vices are charged against him (Gen. R. xxxvii., lxiii.). Rebekah, reading his character aright, and knowing by mysterious foresight what degraded peoples were to descend from him (Midr. Teh. to Ps. ix. 16), resorted to justifiable strategy in order to circumvent his receiving the blessing. The detection of the true character of Esau reconciled Isaac to the fact that he had bestowed the blessing on Jacob (Gen. R. lxvii.). It was on the eve of Pesaḥ that Isaac asked his son to prepare for him a meal of his favorite venison (Pirḳe R. El. xxxii.; Targ. Pseudo-Jon. to Gen. xxvii. 1). Esau was not successful in the chase that day; he had left behind him his Nimrod cloak, wearing which a man could at will capture wild animals (Targ. Yer. to Gen. xxvii. 31). Further, whenever Esau had taken an animal, God Himself had intervened, and an angel had surreptitiously unbound it (Gen. R. lxvii.), so as to give Rebekah time to carry out her scheme. As Esau threatened to avenge the deception, Jacob had

to take refuge with Eber, the son of Shem, with whom he stayed fourteen years. Esau's fury increased to such an extent at Jacob's escape that he left Hebron and went to Seir, where he took several wives, one of them being Bashemath, whom he called "Adah." After six months he returned to Hebron, bringing his godless wives with him. Eliphaz was born unto him during this time ("Sefer ha-Yashar," l.c.). Grief at the idolatrous practises of Esau's wives caused Isaac's blindness, according to Tan., Toledot, while others hold the expression ("from seeing"; Gen. xxvii. 1, Hebr.) to imply that Isaac had lost his sight previously from the effort not to see Esau's evil deeds (Pesiḳ. R. 12; Meg. 28a; Gen. R. lxv.). Esau was aware of the obnoxious character of his wives. He would not trust his garments to their care (Gen. R. l.c.); hence Rebekah was able to put them on Jacob. Esau spent most of his days visiting the shrines of idols, which vexed his father still more than his mother, who had not been reared in Abraham's family (Gen. R. lxiii.), and was thus not quite so much shocked at idol-worship.

At the end of fourteen years Jacob returns to Hebron. This inflames Esau once more, and he tries to kill him, causing Rebekah to send Jacob to Laban. Esau thereupon commissions his son Eliphaz to lie in wait for Jacob on the road and to kill him. He and ten men of his mother's clan meet Jacob, who, by giving them all he has, bribes them to spare his life. Esau is much vexed at the action of his son, but appropriates to himself all the gold and silver purloined from Jacob ("Sefer ha-Yashar," l.c.). In Gen. R. lxviii. Esau himself is said to have attacked Jacob, dispersing his escort. Having heard the parental injunction to his brother not to marry one of the daughters of Canaan, Esau, to reestablish himself in his parents' graces, now takes to wife Mahalath ("Sefer ha-Yashar," l.c.; comp. Gen. R. lxviii., a play on the name, to indicate that she eased Esau's conscience).(see image) Esau Seeking Isaac's Blessing.(From the Sarajevo Haggadah, fourteenth century.)

His Murderous Intentions Toward JacobHis Murderous Intentions Toward JacobHis Murderous Intentions Toward JacobHis Murderous Intentions Toward Jacob.

Increasing in wealth, Esau and his children have feuds with the inhabitants of Canaan. This induces him to locate at Seir ("Sefer ha-Yashar," l.c.). Laban, vexed at Jacob's departure, treacherously incites Esau to attack his brother on his way home. But Rebekah, apprised of Esau's intention, warns Jacob of the danger, and sends seventy-two of his father's servants to Mahanaim to his aid, with the advice that he should enter into peaceful relations with Esau. Messengers are despatched to Esau, who repulses them, vowing vengeance. Jacob beseeches God for help. Four angels are sent by God to appear each in turn before Esau "like 2,000 men, in four bands under four captains, riding on horses and armed with all sorts of weapons." Esau and his men flee and plead for mercy. He resolves to go and meet Jacob, who at his brother's approach is greatly troubled, but, noticing the greater alarm of the others, receives Esau with brotherly affection("Sefer ha-Yashar," l.c.). The kiss they exchange and the tears they shed at this meeting have been differently construed. The word (Gen. xxxiii. 4), being dotted in the Masoretic text, indicates, according to some, that Esau really repented; while others maintain that even in this scene he acted the hypocrite (comp. Judas' kiss; Sifre, Num. ix. 10; Gen. R. lxxviii.; Ab. R. N. 34; Ex. R. v.). The latter view obtains in Targ. Pseudo-Jonathan to the verse: Jacob wept on account of the pain in his neck, which had been bitten by Esau; and Esau shed tears because his teeth hurt him, Jacob's neck having been turned into smooth stone or ivory (see Rashi ad loc.; Gen. R. lxxi.). Jacob was aware of the hypocrisy of Esau (Pirḳe R. El. xxxvii.), as appears from the latter's explanation offered to God when reproved for having profaned holy things by his gifts and address to Jacob. Esau had planned to kill his brother "not with arrows and bow but by [my] mouth" (Pirḳe R. El. l.c.) "and sucking his blood"; but the fact that Jacob's neck turned into ivory thwarted his intention.

Esau had, as stated above, previously plotted against Jacob's life. Remembering the failure of his son Eliphaz on that occasion, Esau resolves to lie in wait for Jacob at a spot on the road where he can not escape. Jacob, however, having a presentiment of evil, does not take that road, but turns toward the Jordan,

praying to God, who works a miracle in his behalf, and gives him a staff whereby he smites and divides the river. Seeing this, Esau pursues and gets in front of him, when God causes Jacob to enter a place ("ba'arah") that has the appearance of a bath-house (like that at Tiberias). Esau stands guard over the door so that Jacob can not leave, but will have to perish inside. Jacob takes a bath, and God saves him (see Epstein, "Mi-Ḳadmoniyyot ha-Yehudim," pp. 107, 108, Vienna, 1887). Nevertheless, Jacob and Esau meet peaceably at their father's house (Pirḳe R. El. xxxviii.), and both sons at the death of Isaac vie in showing filial piety (ib.). At the division of Isaac's property Esau claims as the first-born the right to choose. On the advice of Ishmael he appropriates all the personal property, but agrees to Jacob's taking title to the land of Israel and the cave of Machpelah. A written instrument of this cession is made, whereupon Jacob orders Esau to leave the country. Esau withdraws (Gen. xxxvi.), and is compensated by one hundred districts in Seir (Pirḳe R. El. xxxviii.).

In the "Sefer ha-Yashar" Esau returns to Canaan from Seir (whither he had emigrated) upon hearing that Isaac is dying. Jacob also repairs thither from Hebron. Jacob and Esau with their respective sons bury Isaac in Machpelah. The division of the property is made on the proposal of Jacob, who leaves Esau to determine which he will take, the personal riches or the land. Nebajoth, Ishmael's son, urges Esau to take the movable property, since the land is in the hands of the sons of Canaan. This he does, leaving "nothing unto Jacob," who writes all particulars of the transaction in a book of sale, Esau returning with his wealth to Seir. In Gen. R. lxxxii. and lxxxiv. Esau is represented as emigrating from Canaan from shame at his former conduct.

Esau's Death.Esau's Death.Esau's Death.Esau's Death.

Esau's death is not mentioned in the Bible. The Rabbis supply the information that it was brought about in an altercation with Jacob's sons over their right to bury their father in the cave of Machpelah (Soṭah 13a). The "Sefer ha-Yashar" gives full details of the dispute. Joseph invokes the "bill of sale" witnessed

between Esau and Jacob after Isaac's death, and sends Naphtali to Egypt to fetch the document. Before quick-footed Naphtali returns, Esau unsuccessfully resorts to war, and is slain by Dan's deaf and dumb son, Hushim, who, though assigned to protect the women and children at Jacob's bier, upon seeing the commotion rushes on Esau, smites him with the sword and cuts off his head; whereupon Jacob is buried in the cave.

The Rabbis emphasize the fact that Esau's "hairy" appearance marked him a sinner (Gen. R. lxv.) and his "red" ("edom") color indicated his bloodthirsty propensities ("dam" = "blood"; Gen. R. lxiii.); they make him out to have been a misshapen dwarf (Gen. R. lxv.; Cant. R. ii. 15; Agadat Bereshit xl.) and the type of a shameless robber, displaying his booty even on the holy "bimah" (Midr. Teh. to Ps. lxxx. 6); but his filial piety is nevertheless praised by them (Tan., Ḳedoshim, 15, where his tears are referred to; ib., Toledot, 24, where the fact that he married at forty, in imitation of his father, is mentioned approvingly).

"Esau" (= Edom) later represents Rome.S. S. E. G. H.

————Critical View:Critical View:Critical View:Critical View:

Esau is assumed to be the progenitor of the Edomites. His character reflects the disposition of this warlike people. The stories in Genesis purpose to account for their relations with the Israelites (Gen. xxv. 27, xxxii. 4, xxxiii. 1 et seq.), as well as to throw light on the fact that the "younger brother"—that is, the tribe or tribes that gained a foothold in the country at a later date—crowded out the "older," and thus acquired the "birthright" (Gen. xxv. 29 et seq., xxvii. 28 et seq.). These narratives belong to both the Elohist and the Jahvist writers, as does Gen. xxxvi., which reflects, in the form of a genealogy, the historical fact of Esau's mixture with Canaanites (Hittites) and Ishmaelites. To the priestly writer is due the statement that Esau's marriage, distasteful to his parents, leads to Jacob's being sent away (Gen. xxvi. 34, 35). The same authority is partly responsible for other names connected with Esau in Gen. xxxvi. 2, 3; xxvii. 46; xxviii. 1 et seq. Esau,

according to this source (P), remains with his parents (Gen. xxxv. 29), and, after Jacob's return, leaves only because of the lack of room (Gen. xxxvi. 6, 7). E. G.