JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

edom
sistency and continuity of the monarchy. Further, it should be
pointed out that there was no central authority based in one
capital city. The fact that the king’s capital or place of origin is
mentioned shows that there was no common ruling city for
even two of the kings (cf. the absence of a regular capital city
in the kingdom of Israel until the establishment of Samaria
by Omri). The two informative statements were variously interpreted
by scholars. From the statement about Hadad son
of Bedad E. Meyer tried to establish a synchronistic connection
with events in Israel, namely that Hadad, who defeated
the Midianites, was a contemporary of Gideon who defeated
the Midianites. On the basis of this they attempted to derive
chronological conclusions with regard to the history of the
kings of Edom. There is no certainty, however, about Gideon’s
time, and even less about the time of the kings of Edom, concerning
whom there is no chronological information. From
the information about Hadar’s wife’s lineage on her mother’s
side, and from the naming of her mother and grandmother,
W.F. Albright attempted to deduce the existence of a royal dynasty
in Edom which passed in succession on the side of the
mother and not the father. Thus, the king’s son-in-law because
he marries the queen’s daughter is heir to the throne. A general
conclusion of this nature, derived from a single comment,
is, however, difficult to maintain. Moreover, there are no examples
of such a custom in the ancient Near East to support
this hypothesis (the example of Saul-Michal-David cannot be
explained in this way).
It is most difficult to assess the dating of Edom’s kings
since, as has been stated, there is no chronological information
given in regard to this period. It is only known that it ended
at the time of David’s conquest of Edom. If this assumption
is correct, namely, that at the time of the Exodus, Edom was
ruled by chiefs and not by kings, then the period of these kings
can be set from the middle of the 12th century to the end of
the 11th century B.C.E., i.e., a period of around 150 years, and
an average of approximately 20 years per king.
During this period of chiefs and kings, Edom was strong
and its borders well-fortified by a series of border fortresses
which prevented the penetration of nomadic tribes from the
desert. A series of fortresses was discovered during the archaeological
survey in eastern and southern Edom, and some also
in western Edom. (In the north, Edom shared a common border
with Moab, with which it apparently had close and good
neighborly relationships.) There is almost no biblical information
in regard to contacts between Israel and Edom during this
period, except that Edom is listed among the nations oppressing
Israel which Saul defeated at the end of this period (I Sam.
14:47; it is possible that this refers to Amalek which is related
to Edom). In Psalm 83, which is assumed by B. Mazar and S.
Feigin to be from the period of the judges, Edom (as well as
Amalek and Gebal which belong to Edom) is also mentioned
as joining with Israel’s other neighbors against Israel. It appears,
however, that these two mentions are schematic and it
is difficult to arrive at historically valid conclusions from the
appearance of Edom in these lists.
From David until the Destruction of Judah
THE TIME OF DAVID AND SOLOMON. In David’s wars of expansion,
Edom was conquered after a decisive defeat in the
Valley of Salt. This is echoed in three biblical sources – actually
three accounts of the same battle. According to II Samuel
8:13 it was David who defeated Edom (this should be read instead
of Aram) in the Valley of Salt, slaying 18,000 Edomites.
According to I Chronicles 18:12, “Abishai son of Zeruiah slew
18,000 Edomites in the Valley of Salt,” while according to
Psalm 60:2, it was Joab who defeated Edom, and here there
is a different number given for Edom’s casualties – 12,000.
While a few scholars held that these are accounts of battles
led by the different people mentioned, it appears that they are,
in fact, different accounts of the same event, and the numbers
are schematic. In any event, in order to clarify the historical
aspects, it appears that the original historical version is that
Joab defeated Edom. The introduction of Abishai in Chronicles
is aimed against Joab and is based on the wars in eastern
Transjordan in which Joab and Abishai led the armies. The war
was attributed to David because it appears that the victories
of Joab, his military commander, were credited to the king,
David, as was the case in the defeat of Rabbath-Benei-Ammon
(II Sam. 12:26–31). Edom suffered a decisive defeat, apparently
after a difficult battle. Contrary to his custom with regard to
the other nations of Transjordan, David did not leave the
Edomite monarchy in power but made Edom into an Israelite
province ruled by appointed governors (II Sam. 8:14; I Chron.
18:13). There is additional information about this battle in
I Kings 11:15–16 which states that “For six months did Joab
remain there with all Israel, until he had cut off every male in
Edom.” His reasons for turning Edom into a province which
rendered tribute and was ruled by governors were probably
primarily economic, since Edom controlled the trade routes,
both overland – the “King’s Highway” – and maritime – the
port of Ezion-Geber-Elath. Israel’s rule of Edom by means of
governors lasted throughout David’s reign and apparently also
through most of Solomon’s time, until Hadad, a descendant of
the last Edomite king, rebelled against Solomon. (It is difficult
to determine whether Hadad was the son or the grandson of
the last king of Edom. Actually, this was the introduction of a
dynastic monarchy in Edom. In the opinion of Edward Meyer
the Edomites were loyal to their last king.) This Hadad, who
fled to Egypt during the conquest of Edom, received personal
aid and political support in Egypt, and returned to Edom after
David’s death (I Kings 11:14–22). According to the Septuagint,
what is said about Aram in I Kings 11:25 refers to Edom, and
it thus turns out that this Hadad rebelled at the beginning of
Solomon’s reign and ruled Edom. It is difficult to accept this
version, however, since it would mean that at the beginning
of his reign, a time of prosperity and growth, of the development
of the Negev and Arabah, and of maritime and inland
trade, Solomon did not have absolute control over Edom and
over the routes which crossed its territory. It would therefore
appear that Edom’s liberation was possible only at the end of
Solomon’s reign.
154 ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 6