Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/537

 settled times; and the foundation of the Edomite monarchy may be dated approximately from 150 to 200 years before the time of David.—The monarchy was obviously not hereditary, none of the kings being the son of his predecessor; that it was elective (Tu. Kn. Di. De. Dri. al.) is more than we have a right to assume. Frazer (AAO, 11$3$) finds here an illustration of his theory of female succession, the crown passing to men of other families who married the hereditary princesses; but v.$39$ is fatal to this view. The fact that the kings reigned in different cities supports an opinion (Winckler, GI, i. 192; Che. 429) that they were analogous to the Hebrew Judges, i.e. local chiefs who held supreme power during their life, but were unable to establish a dynasty. A beginning of the recognition of the hereditary principle may be traced in the story of Hadad 'of the seed royal' (1 Ki. 11$14ff.$), who is regarded as heir-presumptive to the throne (Meyer).

32. (G )] The name of the first king bears a striking resemblance to, the soothsayer whom the king of Moab hired to curse Israel (Nu. 22 ff.), and who afterwards died fighting for Midian (Nu. 31$8$ [P]). The identity of the two personages is recognised by (amongst others) Kn-Di. Nö. (Unters. 87), Hommel (AHT, 153, 222$1$), Sayce (EHH, 224, 229), Che. al., though the legend which places his home at Pethor on the Euphrates (E) is hardly consistent with this notice.—, his city, is not known; acc. to Jerome, OS, p. 115,$1$ it is Dannaia, between Ar Moab and the Arnon, or Dannaba near Heshbon (cf. Eus. OS, 114$31$, [p. 249]); Hommel and Sayce suggest Dunip, somewhere in N Syria.—33. ([],, etc.)] identified by G (Jb. 42$18$) with the patriarch Job.—] A chief city of Edom (Is. 34$6$ 63$1$, Jer. 48$24$ 49$13. 22$, Am. 1$12$), now el-Buṣaireh, 20 m. SE of the Dead Sea.—34. (, S  = )].—the land of the Temanite] see on v.$11$.—35.  bears the well-known name of an Aramæan deity, whose worship must have prevailed widely in Edom (see v.$39$, 1 Ki. 11$14ff.$).—who smote Midian, etc.] The solitary historical notice in the list. It is a tempting suggestion of Ewald (HI, ii. 336), that the battle was an incident of the great Midianite raid under which Israel suffered so severely, so that this king was contemporary with Gideon (cf. Meyer, 381 f.).—] G =, on which reading Marquart (Fundamente, 11) bases an ingenious explanation of the mysterious name in Ju. 3$8ff.$ (,—a confusion of the third and fourth kings in our list).—36. ] G , perhaps the same name as Solomon.—] A place of this name is mentioned in OS, 137$10$ (p. 277), in Gebalene, the northern