Commentaria in Genesim
Chapter Thirty-six
This chapter describes the posterity, and (verse 15) the dukes, and (verse 31) the kings sprung from Esau: both because he was the son of Isaac and the grandson of Abraham; and to show that the blessing of Isaac, given in chapter 27, verse 39, was in fact fulfilled; and because God wished the Idumeans, who were to coalesce with the Jews into one nation, to be regarded by them as brothers, Deuteronomy 23:7.
1. Now these are the generations of Esau, the same is Edom. 2. Esau took wives of the daughters of Chanaan: Ada the daughter of Elon the Hethite, and Oolibama the daughter of Ana the daughter of Sebeon the Hevite; 3. And Basemath the daughter of Ismael, sister of Nabaioth. 4. And Ada bore Eliphaz: Basemath bore Rahuel: 5. Oolibama bore Jehus, and Ihelon, and Core: these are the sons of Esau, that were born to him in the land of Chanaan. 6. And Esau took his wives, and his sons, and daughters, and every soul of his house, and his substance, and cattle, and all that he could have in the land of Chanaan: and went into another country, and departed from his brother Jacob. 7. For they were exceeding rich, and could not dwell together: neither was the land of their sojournings able to bear them, for the multitude of their flocks. 8. And Esau dwelt in mount Seir, he is Edom. 9. And these are the generations of Esau the father of Edom in mount Seir: 10. And these the names of his sons: Eliphaz the son of Ada the wife of Esau: and Rahuel the son of Basemath his wife. 11. And the sons of Eliphaz were, Theman, Omar, Sepho, and Gatham, and Cenez. 12. And Thamna was the concubine of Eliphaz the son of Esau: and she bore him Amalech: these are the sons of Ada the wife of Esau. 13. And the sons of Rahuel were, Nahath and Zara, Samma and Meza: these were the sons of Basemath the wife of Esau. 14. And these were the sons of Oolibama the daughter of Ana the daughter of Sebeon, the wife of Esau, whom she bore to him: Jehus, and Ihelon, and Core. 15. These were dukes of the sons of Esau: The sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau: duke Theman, duke Omar, duke Sepho, duke Cenez, 16. Duke Core, duke Gatham, duke Amalech: these are the sons of Eliphaz in the land of Edom, and these the sons of Ada. 17. And these were the sons of Rahuel, the son of Esau: duke Nahath, duke Zara, duke Samma, duke Meza: now these are the dukes of Rahuel in the land of Edom: these are the sons of Basemath the wife of Esau. 18. And these were the sons of Oolibama the wife of Esau: duke Jehus, duke Ihelon, duke Core. These are the dukes of Oolibama the daughter of Ana, the wife of Esau. 19. These are the sons of Esau, and these the dukes of them: he is Edom. 20. These are the sons of Seir the Horrite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan, and Sobal, and Sebeon, and Ana, 21. And Dison, and Eser, and Disan: these are dukes of the Horrites, the sons of Seir in the land of Edom. 22. And Lotan’s sons were, Hori and Heman: and the sister of Lotan was Thamna. 23. And these are the sons of Sobal: Alvan, and Manahat, and Ebal, and Sepho, and Onam. 24. And these the sons of Sebeon: Aia, and Ana: this is that Ana that found the hot waters in the wilderness, when he fed the asses of Sebeon his father, 25. And he had a son Dison, and a daughter Oolibama. 26. And these were the sons of Dison: Hamdan, and Eseban, and Jethram, and Charan. 27. These also were the sons of Eser: Balaan, and Zavan, and Acan. 28. And Disan had sons: Hus and Aram. 29. These were the dukes of the Horrites: duke Lotan, duke Sobal, duke Sebeon, duke Ana, 30. Duke Dison, duke Eser, duke Disan: these were the dukes of the Horrites that ruled in the land of Seir. 31. And the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before the children of Israel had a king, were these: 32. Bela the son of Beor, and the name of his city Denaba. 33. And Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zara of Bosra reigned in his place. 34. And when Jobab was dead, Husam of the land of the Themanites reigned in his stead. 35. And after his death, Adad the son of Badad reigned in his place, who defeated Madian in the country of Moab: and the name of his city was Avith. 36. And when Adad was dead, Semla of Masreca reigned in his place. 37. And when he was dead, Saul of the river Rohoboth reigned in his place. 38. And when he also was dead, Balanan the son of Achobor succeeded to the kingdom. 39. And after he was dead, Adar reigned in his stead, and the name of his city was Phau: and his wife’s name was Meetabel, the daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezaab. 40. These are the names of the dukes of Esau in their kindreds, and places, and names: duke Thamna, duke Alva, duke Jetheth, 41. Duke Oolibama, duke Ela, duke Phinon, 42. Duke Cenez, duke Theman, duke Mabsar, 43. Duke Magdiel, duke Hiram: these are the dukes of Edom, dwelling in the land of their government: he is Esau the father of the Idumeans.
2. ADA, THE DAUGHTER OF ELON THE HETHITE.—Note that men and women of old had several names, as I said in chapter 19. So she who is here called Ada, daughter of Elon the Hethite, Genesis 26:34, is called Judith, daughter of Beeri; and she who is here called Oolibama, daughter of Ana, is there called Basemath, daughter of Elon; again, she who is here called Basemath, in chapter 28, verse 9, is called Maheleth.
6. AND ALL THAT HE COULD HAVE—all the possessions which he had acquired in the land of Chanaan: so the Hebrews.
AND HE WENT INTO ANOTHER COUNTRY—into Idumea; whither Esau had gone before, on account of the displeasure of his parents, as is plain from chapter 32, verse 3; but after his father’s death he returned with his whole family to his father’s funeral at Hebron, as if to remain there. But since he abounded in flocks, and the pastures did not suffice for both, namely himself and his brother, he of his own accord yielded Chanaan to his brother, and himself returned to his Idumea. So St. Augustine, Question 119. This was done by the will of God, who had promised Chanaan to Jacob.
9. AND THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS OF ESAU, THE FATHER OF EDOM,—father of the Idumeans, as is plain from verse 43. Foolishly and most ignorantly do Aben Ezra and the Rabbis think Edom to be Rome, and call the Roman Pontiff the Idumean monk; far more probably would they say that the Idumeans are the Jews, as being closest neighbours to one another alike in manners, in situation and in name: whence Pliny calls the Jews Idumeans.
IN MOUNT SEIR—dwelling in Idumea; or rather as if he said: These are the sons, that is, the grandsons, of Esau, whom his sons, born in Chanaan, begot in Seir, that is, in Idumea. For henceforth Moses relates the grandsons of Esau, born to his sons, who were already dwelling in Idumea.
12. AMALECH.—Amalech was therefore a grandson of Esau, by Eliphaz: from him sprang and were named the Amalecites.
15. THESE WERE DUKES OF THE SONS OF ESAU.—Up to this point Moses has simply recounted the sons and posterity of Esau; now he recounts the dukes sprung from Esau: whence it is not wonderful if the same are named a second time; for before they were named simply as sons, here they are named as dukes.
Note: Here dukes are recounted, in verse 31 kings, and again in verse 40 dukes sprung from Esau; because the Idumeans first embraced an aristocracy, in which single dukes presided over and ruled their own tribe and dynasty, not by their own judgment but by that of the nobles, as the Doge of the Venetians does; then they embraced monarchy, in which kings by royal right ruled all Idumea; thirdly, they again embraced aristocracy, and returned to their dukes. Moreover, both the dukes and the kings were elective; hence the successors to the kingdom set down are not the sons of the deceased but others, as Abulensis has noted.
20. THESE ARE THE SONS (that is, the inhabitants) OF SEIR THE HORRITE—as if to say: These are the inhabitants of the mountain which was afterwards called Seir from Esau; inhabitants, I say, Horrites by race and nation, who dwelt on this mountain before Esau, and whom the Esauites drove out, Deuteronomy 2. Those therefore who are named in what follows, namely Lotan, Sobal, Sebeon, and so on, were Horrites, not Esauites. Moses mentions the Horrites both because they were the first inhabitants of Idumea, and because the Esauites took wives from them. For Thamna, the concubine of Eliphaz, son of Esau, was the sister of Lotan the Horrite, as is said in verse 22. So St. Jerome.
24. THIS IS ANA, WHO FOUND THE HOT WATERS IN THE WILDERNESS, WHILE HE FED THE ASSES.—For “hot waters” the Hebrew is jemim, which the Chaldee renders “giants.” Secondly, Aquila, Symmachus and the Septuagint retain the Hebrew name, and render it eamim; thirdly, “some,” says St. Jerome in the Questions, “think that Ana put wild asses to the she-asses, and discovered such a mating that the swiftest of asses should be born of them, which are called jamim. Most think that he was the first to have herds of mares covered by asses, that thence mules, new animals against nature, might be born.” And this the Rabbis, Vatablus and others everywhere follow, who render jemim “mules,” and Calvin and the innovators eagerly seize upon it, to accuse and carp at the Vulgate edition. Hence Robert Stephanus, cleverly but unfaithfully, in his edition of the Vulgate printed, in place of “hot waters,” “hot mares” (equas calidas), and adds in the margin, that is, mules, which mares in heat mixed with asses would have begotten. Some add that, as teomim means twins or pairs, so also jemim is derived from the verb tamam, that is, to complete, to perfect, as though mules were called jemim because they are complete and perfect, sprung from a twofold, or double, species of animals, namely from a mare and an ass.
But our Interpreter very well renders jamim “hot waters,” first because in the Punic tongue (which is akin to the Hebrew), according to the testimony of St. Jerome, jamim signifies hot waters; secondly, because our translator reads not jemim but, with other points, jammim, whence St. Jerome also reads jamim: now jammim in Hebrew signifies an abundance of waters, and thence the sea, and so Eusebius, Diodorus, Theodoret and Procopius render and read it here. Thirdly, in the Hebrew is haiammim, for which chaiammim seems to be the right reading; for one letter seems to have been corrupted and depraved into its neighbour; for the Septuagint, retaining the Hebrew name, render eamim; and they are accustomed to render the Hebrew chet by epsilon, whence for pesach they render phase, for Corach Core, for Therach Thare. Now chaiammim seems to be composed of cham, that is, hot, and jammim, that is, waters; properly, therefore, chaiammim signifies hot waters; which note: for by no one, so far as I know, has this been observed.
Ana therefore found in the desert thermal springs, such as are the baths of Aix, which are hot and medicinal, because they glide and pass through sulphur and sulphurous veins, and therefore cure many diseases, especially those arising from phlegm. Wherefore Ana was the inventor of baths. So Torniellus.
Tropologically, Blessed Peter Damian, book 2, letter 12, to Desiderius, Abbot and Cardinal: “What is it, he says, figuratively, for Ana to feed the asses of his father in the wilderness, if not for some spiritual man, whose Father is God, to keep simple brethren under the study of a more retired discipline? And what is it to find hot waters, if not to break forth into tears of compunction, which are drawn out by the fervour of the Holy Spirit? For Ana is interpreted as sorrow or sadness, or also muttering or murmuring. For whoever is truly saddened by the sorrow of compunction is compelled, as under a kind of plaintive muttering, to murmur against the wickedness of his own life. Sebeon, moreover, is interpreted as standing in equity, which no one at all is ignorant befits God. For He principally stands in equity, because, constrained by no necessity, He never swerves from the rectitude of justice. Ana therefore, while he feeds in the wilderness the asses of his father Sebeon, finds hot waters; because whoever shows himself a son to God by uprightness of life, and grieves to the very marrow for his sins, while he renders himself solicitous in the watchful care of the brethren, receives by divine gift the grace of tears.”
These words seem to have been added after Moses by him who arranged the diaries of Moses; for in the time of Moses there was no mention of a king in Israel. See what was said in the preface to Genesis.
A twofold difficulty arises here. One is, how, if Moses is the author of this passage, he could have written: Before a king reigned over the Israelites. For these words seem to befit an author of a later age rather than Moses. The other is, how Moses, in his own age, in weaving the Idumean history, could have written first the entire succession of 14 Idumean phylarchs, then the order of 8 kings succeeding one another, and then again (verses 40–43) the connected series of phylarchs who ruled the affairs of the Idumeans after the kings? For it is scarcely credible that it could have happened that, from the death of Esau to the time at which Moses wrote, between which and him there was not much more than an interval of two centuries, Idumea should have had so many dukes, after the dukes kings, and again after the kings dukes.
33. JOBAB.—This is St. Job, the mirror of patience; for although the Hebrews and St. Jerome would have St. Job born of Hus, son of Nachor, brother of Abraham, yet it is truer that St. Job sprang from Esau, and was his great-grandson. For Esau begot Rahuel, Rahuel begot Zara, Zara begot Jobab, or Job; whence his friend was Eliphaz the Themanite, the firstborn of Esau. Job was king in Idumea, and the second in order. This is the opinion of the Septuagint Interpreters at the end of the book of Job; it is also that of Origen, Philo, St. Athanasius, Chrysostom, Augustine, Theodoret, Gregory, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Tostatus, Pererius, and Pineda on chapter 1, verse 1, number 31. Hence it is plain that St. Job was king in Idumea. It is plain, secondly, that St. Job was born about the time when Jacob went down to Joseph into Egypt. For Job was third from Esau; and Esau took a wife and began to beget children in his 40th year. Jacob, however, went down into Egypt in the year 130 of his age, when the third generation was that in which Job was born.
Hence, thirdly, it follows that St. Job lived down to the time of Moses; for St. Job lived at least two hundred and ten years, as Pineda shows on Job 42:16, number 3. He lived therefore with Moses, as a great-grandson of Esau.
the promises made by God to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, received by hearsay, it is credible that they held it as most firmly persuaded that kings would one day rule over the Israelites; see chapter 17, verse 6, and chapter 35, verse 11. Moved by which persuasion Moses both gave the Israelites the royal law, Deuteronomy 17:14–20, and in Deuteronomy 28:36 foretold the deportation of a future king. Besides, since the words “before a king reigned” can rightly be taken of both the future and the present time, in this sense: Before a king shall reign, or before a king reigns over the Israelites, these words contain nothing that excludes Moses from having written them. As to the other point, by which they judge that this passage cannot have been recorded by Moses, namely that the series of dukes and kings of the Idumeans here described is much too ample for so many dukes and kings, and after them dukes again, to have succeeded one another within the narrow space of 238 years, Michaelis replies, first, that it is assumed without suitable reason that among the Idumean people three changed forms of government followed one another, and that those dukes, both those who preceded the Idumean kings and those who followed them, succeeded one another in the order in which Moses enumerates them. For the Hebrew word means not so much princes as heads of tribes, or phylarchs, who are to be taken not alone but with the tribes over which they presided, and not as successive but as simultaneous.
37. SAUL OF THE RIVER ROHOBOTH.—That is, as ... Rohoboth, which is situated beside the river.” Hence it is plain that Rohoboth is a city, situated beside a river. By this river some understand, by antonomasia, the Euphrates, the river celebrated in Scripture. Whence the Chaldee renders: Saul of Rohoboth, which is upon the Euphrates.
40. THESE ARE THE NAMES OF THE DUKES OF ESAU IN THEIR KINDREDS
These are the names of the sons of Esau, who were dukes and heads of kindreds and tribes dwelling in Idumea, through the places and regions assigned to them, which they severally called and designated by their own names. So Vatablus.
and regions mentioned in the table of those kings; for that they were not royal but native and paternal seats is the more certain, the more incredible it is that eight kings succeeding one another continuously should all and each have wished to choose new seats of the kingdom... Hence, however, from the fact that the kingdom of the Idumeans here described both admitted foreign (kings) and was such that kings were created by election and did not succeed one another by hereditary right, it follows that it must have been that ancient kingdom, brought down to the times of Moses, and not the later one contemporary with David and Solomon, as that one was hereditary and bound to a certain family of the Idumeans. Cf. 1 Kings 11:14; 2 Kings 8:14. At the same time the reconciliation of so many kings of the Idumeans with that stretch of time which elapsed from the death of Esau to the death of Moses becomes easier: for that within the space of two centuries eight kings could hold the rule will seem incredible to no one. To prove the authenticity of this passage about the kings of the Idumeans, Michaelis finally says this too, that, as was observed before, when Moses wrote there were among the Edomites both kings and dukes. Hence we gather thus: if those parts of this chapter which treat of the dukes of the Idumeans acknowledge Moses himself as author, then so do these also of the same chapter which treat of the kings of the Idumeans; but those parts about the dukes of the Idumeans have Moses himself as author, none opposing it, at least with effect: therefore these about their kings also. The contrary assertion would involve some absurdity, imputing to the most holy Writer that he thought it worth while to describe the dukes and phylarchs of the Idumeans, but omitted the kings, who were of greater moment and who already then existed.” These things aptly Rosenmüller on this place.