The document discusses Genesis 36, which details Esau's genealogy and raises questions about its significance despite Esau being rejected as the line to the Messiah. It highlights themes of God's faithfulness, contrasts between worldly success and spiritual significance, and emphasizes the importance of spiritual prosperity over material wealth. The chapter serves as a warning against secular greatness and encourages believers to focus on God's promises rather than earthly success.

1. GE ESIS 36 COMME TARY
EDITED 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 "homiletical
suggestions." 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 of
it 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 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."

2. "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

3. 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,
Moses
was writing to people who were about to conquer the land of
Canaan. The Edomites, Esau’s descendants, lived on the borders
of that land. When Israel had sought to pass over their land en
route to Canaan, the Edomite king refused, even though Moses
promised 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!” But
God commanded Israel not to provoke Edom and said that He
would not give Israel any of their land (Deut. 2:2-5). So Israel
needed to know who these people were so that they would treat
them as the Lord had commanded.
A second reason for this chapter is to make Israel and us consider
the outcome of Esau’s profane life, especially as contrasted with
Jacob’s life. There is an obvious contrast between chapter 36,
which outlines the wealth, success and power of Esau and his
descendants and 37:1, which says with understatement, “ ow
Jacob lived in the land where his father had sojourned, in the land
of Canaan.” While Esau was out conquering the land of Edom,
founding a nation, fathering kings, and making a great worldly
success of himself, Jacob was quietly living in a land he didn’t even
own, the land where his fathers had sojourned. While Esau’s

4. descendants were mighty chieftains, famous in their day, Jacob’s
descendants 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 bring
quick, visible results; and, the road of obedience to the will of
God, 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 focuses
on the things which are not seen, but which are eternal and cannot
be taken from us (see 2 Cor. 4:18). So the chapter teaches:
If we succeed by worldly standards, but fail
with God, we fail where it really matters.
The text reveals four areas where Esau and his descendants
succeeded in this world, but failed terribly in light of eternity:
1. A beautiful family by the world’s standards does not
equal a family blessed by God.
Esau’s turn away from God is seen in that he took his wives
from the daughters of Canaan (36:2). Esau’s grandfather,
Abraham, had made his servant swear by the Lord that he
would not take a wife for Isaac from the daughters of the
Canaanites (24:3). But Esau shrugged off the strong warning
of his godly grandfather and chose his wives from the
Canaanites (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 when
it comes to Esau’s line. Abraham had God’s promise of many
descendants, but his wife Sarah was barren. Isaac had the
same promises, but Rebekah could not conceive for the first
twenty years of their marriage. Jacob’s favored wife, Rachel,
was barren for a long time. But Esau’s wives bore him five
sons 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 own
resources. Who needs to depend on God for things when you
can take care of it yourself? Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and
their barren wives, represent God’s way of working. He
humbles our pride by shutting us up with problems we are
incapable of solving-- problems like barren wives in the face
of promises to make us into a great nation. Then, when we
call on Him, He proves Himself mighty to save.
Esau had a beautiful family by the world’s standards. He was
the founder of a dynasty. To be one of Esau’s descendants in
that culture was like being a Ford, Rockefeller, or Kennedy in

5. our day. Esau’s sons and grandsons became chiefs and kings.
Esau’s wives were no doubt beautiful women, as their names
indicate. Their names present a problem, in that the names
given in earlier chapters do not correspond with the names
listed here. In 26:34, it is said that Esau married Judith,
daughter of Beeri the Hittite and Basemath, the daughter of
Elon 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 probably
took different names, either when they moved from Canaan
to Edom, or with changes in them over time (a common
practice; Esau became known as “Red” [“Edom”] over the
incident with the red stew which he traded for his birthright.)
ames weren’t given just because they sounded nice--they
had meaning. So, perhaps, Basemath (“the perfumed one”)
later took on the name Adah (“ornament,” “the adorned
one”), as her focus shifted from perfume to jewelry and
clothes. Mahalath (“the musical one”) took over as the
perfume queen and changed her name to Basemath when she
developed 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 on
some 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 called
Anah. But it is mentioned that he is the Anah who found the
hot springs (hence, he could easily be nicknamed Beeri,
“well-man”). Also, Anah (Beeri) is called a Hittite (26:34); a
Hivite (36:2); and a Horite (36:20). Hittite is a broad term,
roughly equivalent to Canaanite. Hivite is a branch of the
Hittites, and Horite means “cave-dweller.” So the terms are
not contradictory, but explanatory in a more particular sense,
much as we might refer to the same man as an American, an
Arizonan, and a Phoenician (resident of Phoenix).
While the precise meaning of many of these names is
uncertain, it’s interesting that most of the names are not
spiritual, 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 in
reference 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 in
the true God: Reuel (36:10), Esau’s son by Basemath, means

6. “friend of God”; Jeush (36:14), Oholibamah’s son, means
“The Lord helps.” But even these may have been connected
with idolatry. One later king has a name of a false god,
Baal-hanan (36:38).
The point is, Esau’s family was outwardly attractive. His
wives were beautiful women who bore him children. His kids
were born leaders, talented and strong. Esau was a likable,
popular man. He was a skilled outdoorsman, a man who
loved the taste of game, a man caught up with the enjoyment
of the good life. But there was one big problem: God was not
a part of this family. Esau, the grandson of the godly
Abraham, the favorite son of peaceful Isaac, was a thoroughly
secular man who lived for the pleasure of the here and now.
He was a successful man whose sons and grandsons after him
were successful men, by worldly standards. But they all failed
at what matters most because they left God out of their lives.
The most important thing you can impart to your kids is not
how to be a worldly success. It’s easy to encourage our kids to
succeed in the wrong ways. They may make the football team
or be the homecoming queen. They may score well on the
SAT 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 with
God.
There’s a second lesson we can learn by strolling through
Esau’s family cemetery:
2. Material prosperity does not equal spiritual prosperity.
Esau moved east because he was too prosperous to stay near
Jacob (36:6-8). This took place before Jacob returned. Esau
realized that the inheritance was going to Jacob, so he looked
for 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 Abraham
concerning Canaan. Ever since God called Abraham, He repeatedly
emphasized Canaan as the land He would give to
Abraham’s descendants. But for Esau, any nice land would
do. He had no spiritual vision. He was living for himself, not
for God’s purpose. He was materially rich, but spiritually
poor.
To his credit, Esau was not greedy. When he saw Jacob after
their twenty years apart, he declined Jacob’s gift by saying, “I
have plenty, my brother. Keep your things.” But it’s possible
to be generous, contented people, but still to be living for
material things, not for God. The danger is that our material
prosperity dulls our senses with regard to our desperate need
for God. The Lord warned the church in Laodicea, “... you

7. say, ‘I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of
nothing,’ and you do not know that you are wretched and
miserable and poor and blind and naked” (Rev. 3:17). We
American 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’s
perspective 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 Edom
before any king reigned in Israel (36:31). Critics leap upon
this verse as proof that Genesis must have been written after
the beginning of the monarchy, some 300 years after Moses.
But in the previous chapter God had prophesied to Jacob that
kings would come forth from him (35:11), a promise which
had also been made to Abraham (17:6, 16).
Clearly, the point of 36:31 is to show that Esau’s sons, who
walked away from God, had the distinction of being kings
long before Jacob’s sons to whom it was promised. Jacob’s
sons were a nation of slaves at the same time that Esau’s sons
were kings. Esau’s sons could have looked at Jacob’s sons and
scoffed, “Where is your God and His promises?”
Isn’t that how it often seems--that the world is winning, while
God’s people are losing? We’ll reign with Christ someday, but
meanwhile the church is often persecuted and disregarded by
powerful political leaders who laugh at God. But we need to
remember that political power and power with God are two
different things. The world may boast now in its political
power, but He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord scoffs
at them (Ps. 2:4). It is the Lord who “removes kings and
establishes kings” (Dan. 2:21). While it is fine for Christian
people to be involved in politics, we need to keep things in
perspective. Political power is always subject to Him who is
“ruler over the realm of mankind,” who “bestows it on whom
He wishes” (Dan. 4:17). True power is having power with
God.
Esau’s kingdom, Edom, later caused great trouble to Israel.
There were frequent wars between the two nations. Edom
cheered those who attacked God’s people (Ps. 137:7;
Obadiah). Amalek, Esau’s grandson (36:12), became the
founder of a people who were a perennial enemy of Israel

8. (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 name
Edom and its synonym, Seir, are used frequently). The
significance of this otherwise unnecessary repetition seems to
be that God wanted His people to see what results when a
man lives apart from Him. From this one man, Esau, an
outwardly good man, a likable man, a successful man from
the world’s perspective, came the godless nation Edom, which
often plagued the people of God. So God says, “Remember:
Esau is Edom!”
There’s a final lesson we can learn about success and failure
from our stroll through Esau’s cemetery:
4. Temporal fame does not equal eternal recognition by
God.
In their day, Esau was more famous than Jacob. At the end of
their lives, Jacob had about 70 descendants living under Pharaoh’s
umbrella. Esau had conquered Edom and established a
dynasty there. By Moses’s day (over 400 years later), Israel
was a fledgling nation of slaves, recently escaped from Egypt,
owning no land of their own. Edom was an established
kingdom which had the power to refuse Israel passage over
their land.
But this tour through the graveyard of Genesis 36 shows us
that God, not man, writes the final chapter of history. These
once- 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 and
were soon forgotten as others clamored to take their place.
Today we don’t know anything more about them than is
written here. Fame is a fleeting thing.
The Edomite race endured until the time of Christ, when they
were known as Idumeans. They disappeared from history in
A.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed. But before that,
some famous Idumeans, descendants of Esau, ruled over
Israel: Herod the Great and his successor, Herod Antipas.
They were wealthy, power-hungry, cruel despots. Herod the
Great slaughtered the infants of Bethlehem in his attempt to
kill the newborn King of the Jews. Herod Antipas had John
the Baptist beheaded and mocked Jesus just prior to the
crucifixion.
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 each
other. God’s side didn’t seem to be winning. Jacob’s
descendant went to the cross, while Esau’s descendant relaxed

9. in his luxurious palace. But God would write the final chapter
on that part of history as well. The great Herod, like his
ancestor Esau, was a successful man who went to hell. Jesus
Christ, the descendant of Jacob, was raised from the dead and
is 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 person
becomes a Christian, we rush his life story into print and
hustle him onto the TV talk shows. The guy may be a babe in
Christ, who doesn’t know anything about the Bible, but we
listen to his every word as if he’s a spiritual authority.
But the recognition that counts will come soon, when we
stand before the Lord Jesus Christ and hear Him say, “Well
done, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of your
master.” The most awful thing would be to be famous on this
earth--even famous as a Christian--and to stand before the
Lord and say, “Lord, Lord, I’ve done all these things in Your
name,” but to hear Him say, “Depart from Me; I never knew
you.”
CO CLUSIO
On the Shetland Islands off the northern coast of Scotland, a man
spent five years and a lifetime of savings building a 62-foot steel
yacht that weighed 126 tons. On the day of its launching, he
invited a local band to play and the whole town turned out to help
him celebrate. He planned a voyage around the world as soon as
the boat was launched. The band played, the bottle of champagne
was smashed across the bow, and the ship was lowered into the
water. But it sank to the bottom of the harbor! What good is a
beautiful boat that doesn’t float? That man wasted five years and a
lot of money building a useless thing--a boat that didn’t float. What
good is a successful life that ends, whether in 25 or 85 years, if the
person is not ready for eternity? “What does it profit a man to gain
the whole world, and forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36).
Our tour through Esau’s cemetery is over. I hope it’s made you
think about the question, “What am I living for?” While we still
live, we all have a choice: To join Jacob and his descendants in
waiting patiently for God to fulfill His covenant promises to us, as
we labor for His coming kingdom. Or, to look over at Esau,
prospering in the world, and join him in the pursuit of secular
success. If we succeed by worldly standards, but fail with God, we
have failed where it really matters. Whether we fail or succeed by
worldly standards, if we succeed with God, we will have true and
lasting success.
5. HE RY

10. 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 in
this chapter that is so full of strange names. Carolyn Custis, one of our
church secretaries, has put her finger on one that might occur to many
of the readers of it. In a discussion, over the chapter in the church
office, she said, "Perhaps the chapter has been given to test the
perseverance of Bible readers.'" It does do that, without question, and
there 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 the
repetition of most of the material later in 1 Chronicles, testifies to the
generous 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 individuality
of divine judgment. The careful listing of the names of the
family members reminds us that God does keep books that they shall
be opened, and that judgment shall surely take place. One is reminded
of the solemn words of the Apostle John in Revelation 20:11-12, in
connection with the great White Throne Judgment, "And I saw a great
white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and
heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the
dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books
were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life;
and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the
books, according to their deeds."
In the third place, when recollecting the pictures given of Esau and
Jacob in the preceding chapters, one is reminded of the importance of
inward reality as over against outward appearance. There is probably
no greater contrast between the men of Scripture than that between
Jacob and Esau. Esau, it seems from the biblical accounts, was
probably to the natural man an engaging person, attractive and
generous, a genuine man's man. On the other hand, there are many
things about Jacob that repel. His deceitfulness, or under-handedness,
surfaces in the record, in addition to the fact that he seems too tied to
Rebekah's apron strings.
There was a great difference between them, however. In the case of

11. Jacob there existed a true interest in spiritual things, as shown by his
desire for the birthright and the blessing. Imperfect though it was,
Jacob was a man of faith, given him, no doubt, by God. On the other
hand, the true nature of Esau's character emerges in his response to
the loss of the blessing. He immediately threatens to kill his brother,
thus showing that murder existed in his heart alongside the outward
attractiveness. His marriage in unbelief to the Hittite wives, and then
his later attempt to please his father by marrying within the covenant
family further reveal the true nature of Esau . The New Testament
pronounces the ultimate evaluation upon his character, calling him
"profane" (cf. Heb. 12:16). He was sensual, secular, earthbound; God
was not in all his thoughts. Thus, as the Lord instructed Samuel, when
the prophet was of the view that Eliab was surely the son of Jesse that
God intended to anoint in the stead of Saul, "Do not look at his
appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected
him; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward
appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" (cf. 1 Sam. 16:7).
In the fourth place, one sees the issues of irreligion in the degeneration
that existed in the line from Esau. His descendants became bitter
enemies of the Lord's people, devil worshipers, and finally came to
desolating judgment. What we believe does have its ultimate effect in
our lives and actions. One positive thing that might have come from
the Iranian crisis is the insight that a man's religion does influence all
he thinks and does. The Moslem faith permeates the whole of the
cultural and national life of Iran. In American evangelicalism, sad to
say, politics has dominated religion more than religion has dominated
politics. We have tended to become bogged down in such issues as
prayers in Congress or in the public schools rather than in the
challenging of the secular and humanistic presuppositions of our
society. The resurgence of Islam should remind every Christian of the
fact 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 not
only impossible, for our ultimate concerns always emerge in what we
say and do, but it is also bad. We should look at our politics in the
light of the divine principles set forth in the Word of God. By these we
should live and vote. Men cannot and should not ignore their relation
to God. He may be worshiped by the believer, or blasphemed or hated
by the unbeliever, but He cannot be ignored. Religion is rooted in all
the is sues of life, and it will ultimately out. In Esau's line we see it
emerging 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 was
such a towering figure in the Great Awakening.
In the fifth place, one notes the lasting and often crucial importance of
apparently insignificant details. Esau's departure from Jacob is the

12. touchstone of Near Eastern (and world) politics today! Cf. vv. 6-8. The
separation of Esau from Jacob corresponds to the struggle between
Edom and Israel, between the Arab and the Jew, and between human
sin and respon sibility and divine electing grace.
In the sixth place, there stands out here the faithfulness of God to His
promises. He was faithful to Jacob, and the patriarch obtained a
measure of the possession of the land promised to him, when Esau
finally left the land for Seir. He obtained it without scheming and
intrigue, but in God's way. But, on the other hand, God was also
faithful to Esau, for He made promises to him also. These promises are
represented in both prophecy and promise. It was said that he would
serve 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, as
well 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 divine
grace. Jacob was in himself no different from Esau. Both were sons of
Adam naturally, but Jacob was the recipient of distinguishing grace.
His line becomes like a garden in bloom, while Esau's is like a desert
waste. One leads on to the Lord Jesus Christ, while the other leads
inexorably to the black hole of the Lake of Fire. One person is
accepted, and the other is rejected, but both are responsible. Paul tells
the story in Romans 9:10 -13, writing,
And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived
twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet
born, and had not done anything good or bad, in order that God's
purpose according to His choice might stand, not because of works, but
because of Him who calls, it was; said to her, "The older will serve the
younger." 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 to
trust in Him who alone can save us by the merits of His atonement in
His 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

13. 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.

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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_26:34
Basmath (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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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;

23. 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.’

24. 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.

25. 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.)

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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.]

29. "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,

30. 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 which
both Esau and Jacob were present. "Esau and Jacob," Delitzsch
comments, "joined hands once more over the corpse of their father.

31. Thence their ways separated without ever again meeting."1 And now
chapter thirty -six begins with the listing of Esau's wives (cf. Gen. 36:1 -
5; 26:34; 28:9).
BAR ES, "Gen_36:2-5
Esau 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.

32. 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 the
Hivite;
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.

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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.

36. BAR ES, "Gen_36:4-5
Five 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.

37. 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_36:6-8
The 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

38. 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,

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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 Edom
Click on the references for detail Descendants of Esau, Jacob's brother
Genesis 36:1, 9
Denied passage to Israel on the east side of the Jordan River umbers 20:14-21;
Judges 11:17-18
Balaam prophesied their conquest by Israel umbers 24:18
King Saul fought against Edom I Samuel 14:47
King David conquered it II Samuel 8:13-14
After a rebellion, David's General Joab killed all the males in Edom I Kings
11:14-16
Edom's King who fled into Egypt under David returns during Solomon's reign
I Kings 11:17-22
Edom and allies attempted and unsuccessful raid of Judah during King
Jehoshaphat's reign II Chronicles 20:1-2
They rebelled against King Jehoram (Joram) II Kings 8:20-22; II Chronicles
21:8-10
King Amaziah of Judah recaptured Edom II Kings 14:7; II Chronicles 25:11-
12
Edom raided Judah when Ahaz was king II Chronicles 28:17
Edom was controlled by the Assyrians and later, the Babylonians Jeremiah 27
The 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.

42. BAR ES, "Gen_36:9-14
After 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

43. 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

44. 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

45. 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 10
Genesis 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

46. 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.

47. 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.
Amalek
The 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:

48. 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

49. descendants:
The sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau:
Chiefs Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz,
BAR ES, "Gen_36:15-19
The 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.

50. 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.

51. 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.

52. JOH SO In looking over the
names in the light of the history that follows in the Word, it is plain
that Amalek, the son of Eliphaz, is an important figure. He and his
family became one of Israel's bitterest enemies, attacking them as they
came out of Egypt (cf. Exod. 17:8 -13). The Amalekite hordes invaded
Israel from time to time, occasionally with the Midianites and the sons
of the East, and at other times with the Ammonites. They were
defeated by Saul, fre quently chastised by David, and finally the
remnant 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.

53. 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:

54. Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah,
BAR ES, "Gen_36:20-30
This 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)."

55. 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:” ᆇ
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

56. 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 ‫,ארם‬ Aram 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 ‫ם‬ ִ‫מ‬ֵ ַ‫”ה‬ - not “he invented mules,” as the Talmud, Luther,
etc., render it, for mules are ‫ים‬ ִ‫ד‬ ָ‫ר‬ ְ , and ‫א‬ ָ‫צ‬ ָ‫מ‬ 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 20
Genesis 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

57. 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’

58. 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.—‫י‬ ִ‫ֹר‬ ‫,ח‬ from ‫,חוֹר‬
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 ‫ים‬ִ‫מ‬ֵ‫יּ‬ַ‫ה‬, 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.]

59. 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 land
of 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.

60. 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.

61. 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.

62. 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 fed
the 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

63. 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 24
Genesis 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.

64. 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) ;

65. 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) .

66. 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

67. 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. ְ‫ל‬ in enumerations indicates the
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] :

68. BAR ES, "Gen_36:31-39
The 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

69. 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,

70. 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,

71. 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 Moses1
generations of Esau (Gen. 36:31-39). The opening statement has been
taken by some as an indication that Moses did not write it, for how
could he know that kings would ultimately reign over the sons of Israel.
Other orthodox commentators, however, have pointed out that Moses
was quite well acquainted with the promises that kings would come to
Israel. The promise was made to both Abraham and Jacob that kings
would come from them and, furthermore, other specific words on the
subject 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 it
expresses the thought simply that Edom became a kingdom at a much
earlier 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

72. 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 Alluphim
and 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. - Rehoboth
of 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

73. 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:

74. "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

75. 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

76. 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-

77. 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).

78. 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.

79. 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:

80. 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

81. 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.

82. 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, the
daughter 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_36:40-43
The 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.

83. 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.
GILL
After 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

84. 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 Selah
elsewhere (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.—“‫ָה‬‫ל‬ֵ‫א‬ is the sea-point
Aila. ‫ן‬ֹ ‫ינ‬ִ‫ּפ‬ 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.). ‫ן‬ ָ‫ימ‬ ֵ‫,ּת‬ the
capital,‫ִי‬‫נ‬ ָ‫ימ‬ ֵ‫ּת‬ַ‫ה‬ ‫ץ‬ ֶ‫ר‬ֶ‫,א‬ 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

85. 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

86. 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

87. 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 the
land 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

88. 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

89. 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

90. 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

91. 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 PerpetualGod's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a PerpetualGod's Coming Slaughter of Nations; Edom to be a PerpetualGod'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

92. 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.

93. 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

94. 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

95. 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 Flesh
One 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:

96. 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

97. 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

98. 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

99. 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.

100. 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

101. ("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

102. 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.

103. 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,

104. 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

105. 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,

106. 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.