JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

history of Israel. These two types of material give a chronological
coverage of the two periods of Edom’s history (see below).
The original and authentic material about Edom is from
the period before the monarchy was established in Israel (it is
not intended here to discuss R.H. Pfeiffer’s Edomite-Seirite,
or Southern source (S); for its scope, character, and time see
*Pentateuch). This material describes the history of Edom
until its conquest by David. On the other hand, the material
about Edom which is contained in the Israelite history covers
the period of the monarchy in Israel and Judah, and, in
fact, beginning with the time of David, the history of Edom
is contained within the history of Israel.
History until Its Conquest by David
From the information contained in Genesis 36, it may be
learned that the Edomites were governed by chiefs (allufim)
and kings in the period which preceded its conquest by David.
The question arises as to whether chiefs and kings ruled at
one and the same time, the kings being only the most powerful
of the chiefs, or whether there were two periods, a first
of chiefs and a subsequent one of kings. It appears that
two periods should be distinguished, the “period of the chiefs”
and the “period of the kings,” typologically paralleling the
“period of the judges” and the “period of the monarchy” in
Israel.
THE PERIOD OF THE CHIEFS (Allufim). It appears that the
chiefs were the heads of the thousands (alafim), which were
tribes or clans (in the broad sense of the word), and later,
heads of regions. This form of organization was prevalent
among nomadic tribes. Actually, only 11 chiefs of Edom are
mentioned, but there is reason to accept the opinion that a 12th
name, which is found in the Septuagint, was left out. The tradition
of the 12-fold organization in Edom is based on, and confirmed
by, the organization of other tribes which are closely
related to Edom in terms of race and origin. This 12-fold organization
is found among the Nahorites (Gen. 22:20–24), the
Ishmaelites (25:13–15), and the Israelites, and it is M. Noth’s
opinion that this system is based on “principles such as were
customary in tribal societies which were still lacking settled
political institutions” (Noth, Hist Isr, 87; for details). Taking as
a starting point the conclusion of Nelson Glueck’s survey that
the Edomites arrived in Edom at the end of the 14th and the beginning
of the 13th century B.C.E., it may then be assumed that
the rule of the chiefs lasted approximately 150 years, until the
middle of the 12th century B.C.E. Actually, the Bible appears to
contain information to the contrary, since in the narrative on
the Exodus from Egypt and the penetration of Canaan it is told
that the Israelites had dealings with the king of Edom (Num.
20:14; if it is assumed, as is the accepted opinion today, that the
Exodus was during the second half of the 13th century B.C.E.).
It is known, however, that the source for the narrative (Num.
20) is late and “the king of Edom” is an anachronism. More
authentic evidence from a very early poetic source, the Song of
the Sea, testifies that at the time of the Exodus the chiefs were
edom
ruling in Edom: “Now are the chiefs of Edom dismayed” (Ex.
15:15). There are also sources outside the Bible which confirm
this. In the Papyrus Anastasi VI from the time of Merneptah
(end of the 13th century B.C.E.) the population of Edom and its
adjuncts is divided into “tribes” or shasu: “[We] have finished
letting the Shasu (šʾsw) of Edom (ʾidm) pass the Fortress [of]
Merneptah” (in Pritchard, Texts, 259). Ramses III (beginning
of the 12th century B.C.E.) boasts: “I destroyed the people of
Seir among the nomad tribes. I razed their tents: their people,
their property, and their cattle as well, without number, pinioned
and carried away in captivity, as the tribute of Egypt”
(see Papyrus Harris I, in: Pritchard, Texts, 262). In any event,
it becomes evident from these two Egyptian sources that there
was a tribal organization, the population was nomadic, and
there was no monarchy.
THE PERIOD OF THE MONARCHY. The genealogy of Edom
in Genesis 36 contains a list of the kings of Edom who ruled
“before any Israelite king reigned” (probably meaning “before
any Israelite king ruled over Edom”). It is not certain whether
“kings” were merely judges or tribal chiefs, or whether they
were literally kings. Those scholars who hold that they were
judges point to the following supporting evidence: the absence
of succession, the absence of a fixed capital city, the parallelism
of melekh/shofet (“king”/“judge”) in Ugaritic and the Bible, as
well as the formula “in those days there was no king over the
Israelites,” which recurs repeatedly in the Book of Judges in
reference to the period of the judges. Thus, king here means
judge (this opinion has been expressed by S. Talmon). It appears
that the second opinion is the correct one, however, and
that kings is meant literally.
The list of the Edomite kings (36:31–39) resembles a
“royal chronicle” in that it includes various details found in
the Judean and Israelite chronicles contained in Kings and
Babylonian Chronicles. Details given in this list – though not
all the details are given for every king – are the name of the
king, his father’s name, the name of his city (or place of origin),
and an informative comment. This list includes eight kings.
The names of the fathers of four of them are given, and the
city (or place of origin) of seven out of the eight is mentioned.
An informative comment is made about two of them. The informative
comment about Hadad son of Bedad is distinctly
historical. It is stated that he “defeated the Midianites in the
country of Moab” (36:35), while the comment about Hadar, the
last king, refers to his wife’s genealogy: “and his wife’s name
was Mehetabel daughter of Matred daughter of Me-Zahab”
(36:39). This list has been analyzed by numerous scholars in
an attempt to derive from it information about the history
of Edom, its chronology and the possibility of synchronization,
its monarchy, and its character. It is clear from this list
that the monarchy in Edom was not dynastic. Not one of the
kings of Edom is said to be son of the former king. However, it
should not be deduced from this, as has been done by several
scholars, that the monarchy was not consistent. The formula:
“when … died, … succeeded him as king” attests to the con-
ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 6 153