Solomon's Satans

Notes and Ponderings on Hadad the Edomite

Copyright @ 2017 by Zion School

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or

reproduced by any means without the written permission of the

publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in

critical articles and reviews.

1
Contents
Introduction.................................................................................4
1.1 Methodology.....................................................................6
1.2 Main Texts on Hadad......................................................11
2.0 Examination of Existing Literature.....................................18
2.1 Montgomery and Gehman...............................................19
2.2 Cogan..............................................................................20
2.3 Long................................................................................22
2.4 Devries............................................................................23
2.5 Zakovitch........................................................................23
2.6 Naaman...........................................................................27
2.8 Bartlett and Moon............................................................28
2.9 The Fugitive Hero...........................................................28
Pattern Features.....................................................................29
2.10 Hadad the Edomite as King in Genesis..........................31
The Reconstruction of Hadad's life and Influence in Biblical
Light......................................................................................33
2.11 Hadad, Pharaoh, Nehemiah and Artaxerxes..................37
2.12Hadad in the Lexicon.....................................................38
3.0 The Tale of Hadad and the Fugitive Hero Features.........41
3.1Young Hadad Flees Because of Political Crisis................45
3.2 Female Support of Hadad................................................49
3.3 The Evil of Hadad: The End............................................50
3.4 The Hero Hadad Returns Home......................................51
3.5 The Hero Moves to the North..........................................53

2
 4.0 Another Perspective: The Macrostructural Frame of
Brotherhood: Word, Action, Manifestation...........................61
4.1 Edom's Land Given to them by Yahweh.........................66
4.2 Saul the Benjamite and Doeg the Edomite.....................68
4.3 Saul the Benjamite and Saul of Rehovoth.......................72
4.4 Egypt and the Kingdom of Edom....................................75
4.5 David son of Yishai and Baal Hanan son of Achbor.......78
4. 6 Hadar the King of Edom and Hadad the Edomite of the
Royal Family.........................................................................85
4.7 David and Hadad: Israel and Esau?.................................89
Conclusionpossibly.............................................................102
Appendixes..........................................................................102
1 Worship of Adad in Israel................................................102
2 The Name Hadad /Adad and Significance of Adad..........105
3 Alternative literary Approaches........................................110
A Lord Raglan Myth, Tradition and Drama........................110
B Cyrus Gordon..................................................................114
C Vladimir Propp................................................................116
D Booker: Seven Basic Plots...............................................117
Bibliography............................................................................120

3
Introduction
Not many people have been unfortunate enough to be given
the title satan. Jobab was given that title by Abraham
Abulafia, but unfortunately for Hadad the Edomite and
Rezion the son of Eliada they were given the title satan by
the Scriptures themselves. In this paper we will reflect on
Hadad the Edomite. We think that the author of Kings
understood that Hadad the Edomite of 1 Kings 11:14-25
was the same person as Hadar (d) the King who succeeded
Baalhanan son of Achbor (David) as king in Edom who in
turn succeeded Saul of Rehovoth (Saul) (Gen 36:37-39)
and the ancestor to Ben Hadad I (1 Kgs 15:18-20). We will
argue that he was a vassal of Pharaoh King of Egypt and
that having returned from exile failed to gain enough
support in Edom to revolt against Solomon so he moved
north to Aram and aligned himself with Rezon of
Damascus and established himself in the region of Aram.
After he worked with Rezon ruler of Damascus against
Solomon he left behind a line of kings called Ben Hadad.
Hadad was not his only name we will suggest it was with
Hadad Hezion or Hadad Tab-rimmon (1 Kings 15:18-21).
The main damage he brought to Israel was the intelligence
he sent back to Pharaoh regarding the wealth of Solomon
and the weaknesses of Solomon and that in combination

4
with Pharaoh's other vassal Jeroboam son of Nebat led to
end of the United Kingdom, and all the wealth gained by
Saul, David and Solomon which had been stored up in the
Temple being taken by Shishak as spoil to Egypt (1 Kings
14:29) and any left overs by Ben Hadad I through Asa's
request (1 Kgs 15: 18-21). This was in revenge for near
total destruction of either ruling Edomite male population
or the entire male population of Edom by Joab and David
of Israel. On this understanding of Hadad King of Edom we
will compare him to the Fugitive Hero Pattern. He will be
seen to be a fugitive who returns to his land with the
authority of Egypt. He then moves north and clearly
succeeds in hurting the people who hurt his people, to the
Edomites then he would be a hero but also to the Aramean
who also saw the house of David as illegitimate rulers or
oppressors. To fulfil the pattern however he needs to
establish a cult, the evidence for this may be not so easy to
obtain.

1.0 We first give an outline of our methodology and

sources. 2.0 We follow this with a literary review of
scholars who have studied the story of Hadad the Edomite
not only from a literary perspective but also those who have
tried to make sense of the difficult text so as to understand
what the text actually does tell us about Hadad in the

5
context of the Primary history of the Bible from Adam to
Jehoichin . 3.0 Then we will outline the features of the
Fugitive Hero model (FH). Following this we will compare
the features of the narrative and report about Hadad as we
have understood it. We will then give justification of the
Hadad we have identified and conclude.

1.1 Methodology
We want to first observe the literary features of the story
and then seek a structure into which it might best fit in
other words look at a literary hypothesis that might best
elucidate the story. Bearing in mind the important words of
Mickelsen: "Simply stated the task of interpreters of the
Bible is to find out the meaning of the statement
(command, question) for the author and for the first hearers
of readers, and there upon to transmit that meaning to
modern readers" (Mickelsen, 1963, p. 5)1. In dealing with
the story we will observe the helpful distinction between
the plot and the story posited by Barnet et al. "For many
critics story is the sequence in which events occur as part of
a happening, and the plot is the sequence in which the
author arranges (narrates or dramatizes) them" (Barnet,
1960). Also in looking at the potential that Hadad the

1
A similar point was made by Greenstein in a lecture course on the
subject of the Fugitive Hero Pattern in later 2016.

6
Edomite fits into the pattern proposed by Greenstein of the
Fugitive Hero we will need to observe many comparative
features in the tale of Hadad with others who are
considered fugitive heroes by Greenstein. In this the
observation of Garsiel is important:

Comparison or contrast arise of themselves when

the raw materials of the fiction involve the
elemental relationships of everyday life. Thus a
comparison between Jacob and Esau, is the natural
product of the initial basic link between them-the
fact that they are brothers. Such a comparison
would occur in a world of nonfictional reality
(which of us does not compare brothers with each
other being alike or not alike?), and we transfer it as
a convention to mimetic fiction, which contains
numerous elements that reflect ordinary life. All the
more so, then, is a comparison of this sort of
necessity in biblical narrative, whose world is that
of the actual past (Garsiel M. , 1990, p. 18).

Sutherland gives an elucidating illustration of the mainly

structural approach which we are seeking to apply in this
investigation

7
 Structuralism is unusually good at explaining itself
to newcomers. Jonathan Culler (its high priest)
offers an illuminating parable. If while strolling
through the grassy meadow, I happen on a spherical
stone and kick it between a couple of logs that
happen to be nearby, what does it mean? Nothing.
Just that I wanted to swing my leg.

Supposing, on a pitch in Wembley, David Beckham

shoots the ball into a net between opposition
uprights. What gives his kick the meaning 'goal'?
Not the grass, not the wooden uprights, not the
netting, not the spheroid, not Beckham's genius left
foot, but the rules of association football. If
Beckham picked up the soccer ball and ran with it
through the posts that would be a foul. But why, a
couple of miles away, might it be a 'try'?
(Sutherland, 2010, p. 122)

Thus we can say: What would give the character of Hadad

the Edomite the meaning Fugitive Hero?

Although our investigation is not strictly historiographical

the sources from which we draw evidence are a complex
mixture of different genres. Each one looks at the Edomites

8
and Hadad from their own perspective. The nations touched
by the Hadad's story include Edom, Israel, Midian, Paran,
Egypt, Aram, Hatti, and Assyria. Some scholars hold that
within the Primary history there are Edomite archivists who
have a positive view of Edom (Honeyman, 1948) (Pfeifer,
1930). The other sources of Israel which our author uses in
Kings includes at least a Judahite sources and a source
using Israelian Hebrew (Rendsburg, 2002). Our Egyptian
sources give the perspective from the super power to the
south. Tutmosis I passed Edom on the way to the Euphrates
(ANE, 1958, p. 174), by 1530 he ruled Gaza (Filiu, 2014, p.
4). For the next two centuries the Egyptians were there,
around 1294 Sethi I led a campaign to the east (Filiu, 2014,
p. 4). In the next generation Ramses II checked the Hittite
threat from the north, more than sixteen Pharaohs are said
to have resided in Gaza. In the 12th century the sea peoples
invaded. Ramses III defeated them. They also brought an
end to the Hittite Empire and settled on the coast of
Canaan. Gaza went to the Philistines. At the latter end of
the tenth century BCE Sheshonq I founder of the 22nd
dynasty occupied Gaza and raided Canaan (Filiu, 2014). In
the texts from Egypt the Edomites might be called sam-su-
a-doma (Rainey & Notley, 2006)2, they might be called

2
Thutmoses III, Papyrus Anastasi (ANET 259), Merenptah, Akhenaten.

9
shasu3 Asiatics or even Syrians or Arameans (ANE, 1958).
Retenu is the name of Syria-Canaan in general (ANE,
1958, p. 175). They could also be seen as among the
habiru. Our Assyrian sources tend to be from a later period
and give the perspective from the super power to the north
east4. They refer to Arameans as from the East of the river
Euphrates and the kings of Hatti as from the west of the
Euphrates. All the characters that reflect the Fugitive Hero
pattern come from the near east. Whereas literary scholars
of the past have tended to work toward universal models
for analyzing stories for example the seven basic plots of
Booker's the Fugitive Hero Pattern is felt to be peculiar to
the Ancient Near East. We are then taking an eclectic
literary approach in seeking to understand if the character
of Hadad haedomi as expressed in his story is best
explained as an example of Greenstein's Fugitive Hero or
some other literary models hero such as Lord Raglan's,
Otto Rank's, Vladimir Propp's, or Christopher Booker's,
Seth Postel's or Sailhammer's.
3
These are located not just in Edom and Seir but also in Canaan and
Aram (Bartlett J. , 1992, p. 287)
4
The land is refered to as Edom: Adad Nirari III (811-783), Tiglath
Pileser (745-727) mentions Qaushmalaka ‫( קוסמלך‬Qos is king) of Edom
next to Jehoahaz of Judah. Sennacharib (705-681) lists Edom's king
Ayarammu as a king of the Amurru. Essarhaddon (681-669) mentions
Qaus gabri as king and he is classified among the kings of Hatti. There
is a bullae with his name ]‫( קוסג[בר] מלך א[דם‬Cogan M. , 2008, pp.
132-136) (Ahituv, 1992)

10
1.2 Main Texts on Hadad
The three main texts in our study of Hadad the Edomite are
Genesis 36:31-39 where we have a listing of the first kings
of Edom. The last of these king is called Hadar but is most
likely a Hadad. He is given a wife Mehetabel and her
mother Matred and her grandmother name Me-Zahab. The
next important text is that most definitely referring to
Hadad and probably alluding back to the Hadad in Genesis.
This is 1 Kings 11:14-25. What is interesting here is that
this character is also given family details. This time we are
given possibly is wife's sister's name Tahpanes and we are
given his son's name, Genubat. The final text I consider
connected to Hadad is 1 King 15:18-21. Again we are
given family details. This time it is Ben Hadad who's father
is Tabrimmon, the son of Hezion the king of Aram who
was ruling in Damascus. Thus we have as in the table
below:

Names ‫מי זהב‬

‫מטרד‬
‫הדד‬ )‫מהיטבל (תחפניס‬ ‫חזיון‬

11
 ‫גנבת‬ ‫טברמון‬
‫בן הדד‬

Etymology

Offspring of the
shining one
(YAC) or waters
of gold
Driving,
persisting,
pursuer
Roar. shout El is doing good Vision ca, 925
(wife in BCE
Egyptian)
Thief or? Rimmon
(thunderer) is
good ca 905 BCE
Son of Hadad
(shout) 906BCE

Genesis 36:31-239

12
 32
‫ְוֵ֙אֶּל֙ה ַהְּמ ָלִ֔כ ים ֲאֶׁ֥ש ר ָמ ְל֖כ ּו ְּבֶ֣א ֶר ץ ֱא֑ד ֹום ִלְפֵ֥ני ְמ ָלְך־ֶ֖מ ֶלְך ִלְבֵ֥ני ִיְׂשָר ֵֽאל׃‬
‫ ַוָּ֖יָמת ָּ֑ב ַלע ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו‬33 ‫ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ֶּבֱא֔ד ֹום ֶּ֖ב ַלע ֶּבן־ְּב֑ע ֹור ְוֵׁ֥ש ם ִע י֖ר ֹו ִּד ְנָֽהָבה׃‬
35
‫ ַוָּ֖יָמ ת יֹוָ֑ב ב ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ֻחָׁ֖ש ם ֵמ ֶ֥אֶר ץ ַהֵּת יָמ ִֽני׃‬34 ‫יֹוָ֥בב ֶּבן־ֶ֖זַר ח ִמ ָּבְצָֽר ה׃‬
‫ַוָּ֖יָמ ת ֻחָׁ֑ש ם ַוִּיְמ ֹ֙לְך ַּת ְחָּ֜ת יו ֲהַ֣ד ד ֶּבן־ְּבַ֗ד ד ַהַּמ ֶּ֤כה ֶאת־ִמְד ָי֙ן ִּבְׂש ֵ֣ד ה מֹוָ֔א ב ְוֵׁ֥ש ם‬
‫ ַוָּ֖יָמ ת ַׂש ְמ ָ֑לה‬37 ‫ ַוָּ֖יָמ ת ֲהָ֑ד ד ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ַׂשְמ ָ֖לה ִמ ַּמְׂש ֵר ָֽק ה׃‬36 ‫ִע י֖ר ֹו ֲעִֽוית׃‬
‫ ַוָּ֖יָמ ת ָׁש ֑א ּול ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ַּ֥בַעל ָחָ֖נן‬38 ‫ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ָׁש ֖א ּול ֵמ ְר ֹח֥ב ֹות ַהָּנָֽהר׃‬
‫ ַוָּיָמ֘ת ַּ֣ב ַעל ָחָ֣נן ֶּבן־ַעְכּבֹו֒ר ַוִּיְמ ֹ֤ל ְך ַּת ְחָּת י֙ו ֲהַ֔ד ר ְוֵׁ֥ש ם ִע י֖ר ֹו ָּ֑פ עּו‬39 ‫ֶּבן־ַעְכּֽבֹור׃‬
‫ְוֵׁ֙שם ִאְׁשּ֤ת ֹו ְמ ֵֽהיַטְבֵא ֙ל ַּבת־ַמ ְטֵ֔ר ד ַּ֖ב ת ֵ֥מי ָזָֽהב׃‬
)Gen 36:39 WTT(

TNK
Genesis 36:31 These are the kings who reigned in the
land of Edom before any king reigned over the Israelites. 32
Bela son of Beor reigned in Edom, and the name of his city
was Dinhabah. 33 When Bela died, Jobab son of Zerah,
from Bozrah, succeeded him as king. 34 When Jobab died,
Husham of the land of the Temanites succeeded him as
king. 35 When Husham died, Hadad son of Bedad, who
defeated the Midianites in the country of Moab, succeeded
him as king; the name of his city was Avith. 36 When Hadad
died, Samlah of Masrekah succeeded him as king. 37 When
Samlah died, Saul of Rehoboth-on-the-river succeeded him
as king. 38 When Saul died, Baal-hanan son of Achbor
succeeded him as king. 39 And when Baal-hanan son of
Achbor died, Hadar succeeded him as king; the name of his

13
city was Pau, and his wife's name was Mehetabel daughter
of Matred daughter of Me-zahab. (Gen 36:31 TNK)

BGT
Genesis 36:31 καὶ οὗτοι οἱ βασιλεῖς οἱ βασιλεύσαντες
ἐν Εδωμ πρὸ τοῦ βασιλεῦσαι βασιλέα ἐν Ισραηλ 32 καὶ
ἐβασίλευσεν ἐν Εδωμ Βαλακ υἱὸς τοῦ Βεωρ καὶ ὄνομα τῇ
πόλει αὐτοῦ Δενναβα 33 ἀπέθανεν δὲ Βαλακ καὶ
ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Ιωβαβ υἱὸς Ζαρα ἐκ Βοσορρας 34
ἀπέθανεν δὲ Ιωβαβ καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Ασομ ἐκ
τῆς γῆς Θαιμανων 35 ἀπέθανεν δὲ Ασομ καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν
ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Αδαδ υἱὸς Βαραδ ὁ ἐκκόψας Μαδιαμ ἐν τῷ
πεδίῳ Μωαβ καὶ ὄνομα τῇ πόλει αὐτοῦ Γεθθαιμ 36
ἀπέθανεν δὲ Αδαδ καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Σαμαλα ἐκ
Μασεκκας 37 ἀπέθανεν δὲ Σαμαλα καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽
αὐτοῦ Σαουλ ἐκ Ροωβωθ τῆς παρὰ ποταμόν 38 ἀπέθανεν δὲ
Σαουλ καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Βαλαεννων υἱὸς
Αχοβωρ 39 ἀπέθανεν δὲ Βαλαεννων υἱὸς Αχοβωρ καὶ
ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Αραδ υἱὸς Βαραδ καὶ ὄνομα τῇ
πόλει αὐτοῦ Φογωρ ὄνομα δὲ τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ Μαιτεβεηλ
θυγάτηρ Ματραιθ υἱοῦ Μαιζοοβ (Gen 36:31 BGT)

‫ ַו ָּ֙יֶק ם ְיהָ֤וה ָׂש ָט֙ן ִלְׁש ֹלֹ֔מ ה ֵ֖א ת‬WTT 1 Kings 11:14
‫ ַו ְיִ֗ה י ִּֽבְה֤יֹות ָּד ִו֙ד ֶאת־ֱא֔ד ֹום ַּבֲע֗ל ֹות‬15 ‫ֲהַ֣ד ד ָהֲא ֹדִ֑מ י ִמֶּ֧זַר ע ַהֶּ֛מֶלְך ֖ה ּוא ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום׃‬
‫ ִּ֣כי ֵׁ֧ש ֶׁש ת ֳחָד ִׁ֛ש ים‬16 ‫יֹוָא֙ב ַׂ֣ש ר ַהָּצָ֔ב א ְלַק ֵּ֖ב ר ֶא ת־ַהֲחָלִ֑לים ַוַּ֥יְך ָּכל־ָזָ֖כר ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום׃‬

14
 ‫ָֽיַׁש ב־ָׁ֥ש ם יֹוָ֖א ב ְוָכל־ִיְׂשָר ֵ֑א ל ַעד־ִהְכִ֥ר ית ָּכל־ָזָ֖כר ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום׃ ‪ַ 17‬וִּיְבַ֣ר ח ֲאַ֡ד ד הּו֩א‬
‫ַוֲא ָנִׁ֙שים ֲא ֹדִמ ִּ֜י ים ֵמַעְבֵ֥ד י ָאִ֛ביו ִאּ֖ת ֹו ָל֣ב ֹוא ִמְצָ֑ר ִים‬
‫ַוֲהַ֖ד ד ַ֥נַער ָקָֽטן׃ ‪ַ 18‬ו ָּיֻ֙ק מּ֙ו ִמִּמ ְד ָ֔י ן ַו ָּיֹ֖ב אּו ָּפ אָ֑ר ן ַוִּיְק חּ֩ו‬
‫ֲא ָנִׁ֙שים ִעָּ֜מ ם ִמ ָּפ אָ֗ר ן ַו ָּיֹ֤ב אּו ִמְצַ֙רִי֙ם ֶאל־ַּפְר ֹ֣ע ה ֶֽמֶלְך־ִמ ְצַ֔ר ִים ַו ִּיֶּת ן־֣ל ֹו ַ֗ב ִית‬
‫‪19‬‬
‫ְוֶ֙לֶח֙ם ָ֣א ַמ ר ֔ל ֹו ְוֶ֖א ֶר ץ ָ֥נַת ן ֽלֹו׃‬
‫ַוִּיְמָצ֙א ֲהַ֥ד ד ֵ֛ח ן ְּבֵעיֵ֥ני ַפְר ֹ֖ע ה ְמ ֹ֑א ד ַו ִּיֶּת ן־֤ל ֹו ִאָּׁש ֙ה‬
‫ֶא ת־ֲא ֣ח ֹות ִא ְׁש ּ֔ת ֹו ֲא ֖ח ֹות ַּת ְחְּפֵ֥ניס ַהְּגִביָֽר ה׃ ‪ַ 20‬וֵּ֙תֶלד ֜ל ֹו ֲא ֣ח ֹות ַּת ְחְּפֵ֗נ יס ֵ֚א ת‬
‫ְּגֻנַ֣ב ת ְּב֔נ ֹו ַוִּת ְגְמֵ֣להּו ַת ְחְּפֵ֔נ ס ְּב֖ת ֹוְך ֵּ֣ב ית ַּפְר ֹ֑ע ה ַוְיִ֤ה י ְגֻנַב֙ת ֵּ֣ב ית ַּפְר ֹ֔ע ה ְּב֖ת ֹוְך‬
‫ְּבֵ֥ני ַפְר ֹֽעה׃‬
‫‪ַ 21‬וֲהַ֞ד ד ָׁש ַ֣מ ע ְּבִמ ְצַ֗ר ִים ִּֽכי־ָׁש ַ֤כב ָּד ִו֙ד ִעם־ֲא ֹבָ֔ת יו‬
‫‪22‬‬
‫ְוִכי־ֵ֖מ ת יֹוָ֣א ב ַֽׂשר־ַהָּצָ֑ב א ַו ֹּ֤יאֶמ ר ֲהַד ֙ד ֶא ל־ַּפְר ֹ֔ע ה ַׁש ְּלֵ֖ח ִני ְוֵאֵ֥לְך ֶא ל־ַאְר ִֽצי׃‬
‫ַו ֹּ֧י אֶמ ר ֣ל ֹו ַפְר ֹ֗ע ה ִּ֠כ י ָמ ה־ַא ָּ֤ת ה ָחֵס֙ר ִעִּ֔מ י ְוִה ְּנָ֥ך ְמ ַבֵּ֖ק ׁש ָלֶ֣לֶכת ֶא ל־ַאְר ֶ֑צ ָך‬
‫ַו ֹּ֣יאֶמ ר׀ ֹ֔ל א ִּ֥כי ַׁש ֵּ֖לַח ְּת ַׁש ְּלֵֽחִני׃‬
‫‪ַ 23‬ו ָּ֙יֶק ם ֱא ֹלִ֥הים לֹ֙ו ָׂש ָ֔ט ן ֶא ת־ְר ֖ז ֹון ֶּבן־ֶאְל ָיָ֑ד ע ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר‬
‫ָּבַ֗ר ח ֵמ ֵ֛את ֲהַד ְד ֶ֥עֶזר ֶֽמֶלְך־צֹוָ֖ב ה ֲא ֹדָֽניו׃ ‪ַ 24‬וִּיְק ֹּ֤ב ץ ָעָלי֙ו ֲא ָנִׁ֔ש ים ַו ְיִ֣ה י ַׂש ר־ְּג֔ד ּוד‬
‫ַּב ֲה ֹ֥ר ג ָּד ִ֖וד ֹאָ֑ת ם‬
‫ַוֵּיְל֤כ ּו ַד ֶּ֙מ ֶׂש ֙ק ַוֵּ֣יְׁש בּו ָ֔ב ּה ַֽוִּיְמ ְל֖כ ּו ְּבַד ָּֽמֶׂש ק׃‬
‫‪ַ 25‬ו ְיִ֙ה י ָׂש ָ֤ט ן ְלִיְׂש ָר ֵא ֙ל ָּכל־ְיֵ֣מ י ְׁש ֹלֹ֔מ ה‬
‫ְוֶאת־ָהָר ָ֖ע ה ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ֲהָ֑ד ד ַו ָּ֙יָק ֙ץ ְּבִיְׂשָר ֵ֔א ל‬
‫ַוִּיְמֹ֖ל ְך ַעל־ֲא ָֽר ם׃ פ‬

‫)‪(1Ki 11:14 WTT‬‬

‫‪TNK‬‬
‫‪1 Kings 11:14 So the LORD raised up an adversary‬‬
‫‪against Solomon, the Edomite Hadad, who was of the royal‬‬

‫‪15‬‬
family of Edom. 15 When David was in Edom, Joab the
army commander went up to bury the slain, and he killed
every male in Edom; 16 for Joab and all Israel stayed there
for six months until he had killed off every male in Edom.
17
But Hadad, together with some Edomite men, servants of
his father, escaped and headed for Egypt; Hadad was then a
young boy. 18 Setting out from Midian, they came to Paran
and took along with them men from Paran. Thus they came
to Egypt, to Pharaoh king of Egypt, who gave him a house,
assigned a food allowance to him, and granted him an
estate. 19 Pharaoh took a great liking to Hadad and gave him
his sister-in-law, the sister of Queen Tahpenes, as wife. 20
The sister of Tahpenes bore him a son, Genubath. Tahpenes
weaned him in Pharaoh's palace, and Genubath remained in
Pharaoh's palace among the sons of Pharaoh. 21 When
Hadad heard in Egypt that David had been laid to rest with
his fathers and that Joab the army commander was dead,
Hadad said to Pharaoh, "Give me leave to go to my own
country." 22 Pharaoh replied, "What do you lack with me,
that you want to go to your own country?" But he said,
"Nevertheless, give me leave to go." 23 Another adversary
that God raised up against Solomon was Rezon son of
Eliada, who had fled from his lord, King Hadadezer of
Zobah, 24 when David was slaughtering them. He gathered

16
men about him and became captain over a troop; they went
to Damascus and settled there, and they established a
kingdom in Damascus. 25 He was an adversary of Israel all
the days of Solomon, adding to the trouble caused by
Hadad; he repudiated the authority of Israel and reigned
over Aram. (1Ki 11:14 TNK)

‫ ַו ִּיַּ֣ק ח ָ֠א ָסא ֶא ת־ָּכל־ַהֶּ֙כֶסף ְוַה ָּזָ֜ה ב ַֽהּנֹוָת ִ֣ר ים׀‬WTT 1 Kings 15:18
‫ְּבאֹוְצ֣ר ֹות ֵּבית־ְיהָ֗ו ה ְוֶאת־ֽאֹוְצרֹו֙ת ֵּ֣ב ית )ֶמ ֶלְך] (ַהֶּ֔מ ֶלְך[ ַֽוִּיְּת ֵ֖נם ְּבַיד־ֲעָבָ֑ד יו‬
‫ַוִּיְׁש ָלֵ֞ח ם ַהֶּ֣מ ֶלְך ָאָ֗ס א ֶא ל־ֶּבן־ֲ֠ה ַד ד ֶּבן־ַט ְבִר ֹּ֤מ ן ֶּבן־ֶחְזיֹו֙ן ֶ֣מ ֶלְך ֲא ָ֔ר ם ַה ֹּיֵׁ֥ש ב‬
‫ ְּבִר י֙ת ֵּב יִ֣ני ּוֵב יֶ֔נ ָך ֵּ֥בין ָאִ֖ב י ּוֵ֣ב ין ָאִ֑ב יָך ִהֵּנ֩ה ָׁש ַ֙לְחִּֽתי ְלָ֥ך‬19 ‫ְּבַד ֶּ֖מ ֶׂש ק ֵלאֹֽמ ר׃‬
‫ֹׁ֙שַח֙ד ֶּ֣כֶסף ְו ָזָ֔ה ב ֵ֣לְך ָהֵ֗פ ָר ה ֶאת־ְּבִֽר יְת ָ֙ך ֶאת־ַּבְעָׁ֣ש א ֶֽמֶלְך־ִיְׂש ָר ֵ֔א ל ְוַיֲעֶ֖לה ֵמָעָֽלי׃‬
‫ ַוִּיְׁשַ֙מ ע ֶּבן־ֲהַ֜ד ד ֶא ל־ַהֶּ֣מ ֶלְך ָאָ֗ס א ַ֠ו ִּיְׁש ַלח ֶאת־ָׂשֵ֙רי ַהֲח ָיִ֤לים ֲאֶׁש ר־לֹ֙ו ַעל־ָעֵ֣ר י‬20
‫ִיְׂש ָר ֵ֔א ל ַו ַּיְ֙ך ֶאת־ִעּ֣יֹון ְוֶא ת־ָּ֔ד ן ְוֵ֖א ת ָאֵ֣ב ל ֵּֽבית־ַמֲעָ֑כ ה ְוֵא ֙ת ָּכל־ִּכְנ֔ר ֹות ַ֖ע ל‬
‫ ַֽוְיִה֙י ִּכְׁשֹ֣מ ַע ַּבְעָׁ֔ש א ַוֶּיְחַּ֕ד ל ִמ ְּב֖נ ֹות ֶא ת־ָֽהָר ָ֑מ ה ַוֵּ֖יֶׁש ב‬21 ‫ָּכל־ֶ֥אֶר ץ ַנְפָּת ִֽלי׃‬
‫ְּבִת ְר ָֽצה׃‬
(1Ki 15:18 WTT)

TNK
1 Kings 15:18 So Asa took all the silver and gold that
remained in the treasuries of the House of the LORD as
well as the treasuries of the royal palace, and he entrusted
them to his officials. King Asa sent them to King Ben-
hadad son of Tabrimmon son of Hezion of Aram, who
resided in Damascus, with this message: 19 "There is a pact

17
between you and me, and between your father and my
father. I herewith send you a gift of silver and gold: Go and
break your pact with King Baasha of Israel, so that he may
withdraw from me." 20 Ben-hadad responded to King Asa's
request; he sent his army commanders against the towns of
Israel and captured Ijon, Dan, Abel-beth-maacah, and all
Chinneroth, as well as all the land of Naphtali. 21 When
Baasha heard about it, he stopped fortifying Ramah and
remained in Tirzah.
We observe that in the Primary history the last mention of
Hadad in Genesis 36:39 these three texts can almost be
seen as Hadad may span about 90 years. This means it is
practically possible for Hadad to be succeeded by Ben
Hadad. All three texts also show detailed interest in two or
three generation genealogies. If they do belong together
they do not cancel each other out but dove tail.

2.0 Examination of Existing Literature

Scholars have looked at the story of Hadad from their
different methodological perspectives. We will look at
scholars who have investigated Hadad whether there
perspective is literary or historical. This is necessary in
order to establish the scope and full meaning of the actual
Hadad tale. It is only after understanding the full scope of
the Hadad tale that the literary methods can safely be

18
applied to understanding to which models or models he
may best be explained.

2.1 Montgomery and Gehman

Montgomery and Gehman see the reference to Hadad as
historical. They suggest it reflects the situation of Egypt
and Edom as reflected in "Herodotean anecdotes"
(Montgomery & Gehman, 1951). They see the LXX
additions as a Midrash on the historical core. The Hebrew
is considered awkward. The addition in the Greek of Hadad
despising Israel "expresses political contempt" or racial
hostility (Montgomery & Gehman, 1951, p. 240). They
understand that Gen 36:31-39 gives a series of eight kings
who reigned in Edom…Two of the series are named
Hadad, including the last king, with whom our prince may
have been closely connected" (Montgomery & Gehman,
1951, p. 240). They also suggest a comparison of the
Biblical names Hadoram and Adoram. Montgomery and
Gehman see the important possibility of the connection
between Hadad the Edomite and Hadar the king, however
they do not make a positive identification. They do not see
Hadad as a literary model like the Fugitive Hero or see
Hadad as the king in Genesis 36 nor do they see the part he
plays in Egypt's plan for the kingdom of David and
Solomon.

19
2.2 Cogan
Cogan explains that the term ‫ שטן‬refers to a human foes and
compares first the reference in Solomon's prayer (1 Kings
5:185). Cogan also notes that in Late Biblical Hebrew
(LBH) the word developed the meaning of prosecutor (Job
1:6, Zech 3:1-6) and later still referred to one who incited
sinful acts (1 Chr 21:1). Cogan suggests the name Hadad is
a hypocoristicon in which only "the divine name is
retained" (Cogan, 2000, p. 330). This he maintains is
unusual. He also notes that the name is attested in the
Amarna letters in "Yaptih-Hadad" (ANE, 1958, p. 272) of
Moreshet Gath and in a previous Edomite personal name
(Gen 36:35) (EA 288:45). This being a letter from Abdu
Heba to "the king, my lord, my Sun-god" Pharaoh
Akhenaton of Middle Egypt and the 18th Dynasty6 Because

5
Compare also Num 22:22, 32, 1 Sam 29:4, 2 Sam 19:23, Psalm 109:6
6
Akhenaton in the received chronology is dated to the 15th century
BCE but recently the received chronology has of let come under harsh
criticism at the hands of revisionists (Kitchen K. , 2003) (Rohl, 1995)
(Rohl D. , 1998). Rohl would redate the 18th dynasty and Akhenaton to
from the 14th to the 11th century making Yaptih-Hadad a contemporary
of Hadad the Edomi, but the new chronology is based on Egyptology
and is also considered problematic (Wood, 2001). Our author does not
mention the date or the name of the Pharaoh and so he was not
drawing out attention to these issues. His mentioning of Shishak in
regard to Jeroboam son of Nebat is then all the more interesting,
although dating Shishak is also not as cut and dried as it would appear
(Shortland, 2005) (Bimson J. , 2015)

20
of this he considers unnecessary Lemaire's suggestion that
the whole story should be rewritten and transferred to Aram
(Cogan, 2000). He also draws attention to the commentary
of the prose title of Psalm 60 which appears to hold a
tradition that it was Joab who was responsible for the
slaughter in Edom whilst David was in the north battling
Aram-Zobah and Aram Naharaim (Psalm 60:1). The war
which led to the flight of Hadad is mentioned in three
places (2 Sam 8:13, Ps 60:2 and 1 Chr 18:12). Cogan notes
that there are different Midianite clans and that Midian is
sometimes associated with Transjordan. For example in the
Balaam tale (Num 22-23) the Amalekite and Qedemite
raiders (Jud 6-8). He understands that it was a different
Midianite tribe who joined Israel in their wanderings (Ex
18). He thinks the reference to Paran and to picking up men
there may refer to guides to help them through the desert.
He estimates that if Hadad was a child when he arrived and
grew up married had a child and David died that it would
be around 990 when he arrived and that the Pharaoh may
have been Amenemope. In regard to the giving of the house
and the estate Cogan suggests a comparison with Sinuhe
(ANET 22a). He notes the LXX does not mention the
giving of land. The Pharaoh in which he finds favor is not
that which gave his daughter to Solomon, he suggests

21
Siamun. The word Tahpenes is not considered a proper
name, contrary to Albright (1955) nor is it to be confused
with the cities with similar names (Jer 43:7, Ezek 30:18).
Cogan gives a very thorough insightful look into the case of
Hadad. However Cogan does not accept that the Hadad is
the King mentioned in Genesis and part of Pharaoh's plan
to weaken the kingdom of Israel and plunder the treasures
of Solomon. He does not focus on the possibility that
Hadad may be a character following a literary pattern like
that of the Fugitive Hero.

2.3 Long
Long sees the Hadad, Rezon stories as a composite literary
redaction. He describes the Hadad tradition as a fragment
of a story and the information about Rezon as report similar
to those seen in the Babylonian or Assyrian Chronicles
(Long, 1984). He sees there being some dramatic tension
in regard to who will be the one to get the ten parts of the
kingdom (Ibid, 1984). Long takes a more literary approach
to Hadad but does not focus on Hadad as the King in
Genesis or specifically at his role in the plan of Egypt.

2.4 Devries
Devries notices the important of "divine causation" behind
the good or evil implied. The name Hadad or the Thunderer

22
is a regular appellation NW Semitic cultures. He notices
that we are not told what happened to Hadad's father nor is
Hadad's return to Edom recorded. The names of the mother
and son are considered historical if possibly garbled. The
Pharaoh is thought to come from the 21 dynasty. He
assigns the reference to Aram in verse 25 to Rezon not
Hadad (Devries, 1985). Devries has more of a focus on
literary and theological features. However he limits his
focus on the meaning of the name to the thunderer and does
not pay attention to the other nuances of the meaning of the
name. He does not focus on Hadad as king or on him as a
Fugitive Hero.

2.5 Zakovitch
Zakovitch in his insightful work Covert Faces of the
Exodus Pattern takes a reasonably detailed look at the
Hadad story in light of the Exodus tradition and the
Jeroboam tradition. He compares the story of Hadad in the
MT with the story of Jeroboam in the LXX. He indicates
that in both stories they: 1. hear about the death of the
rulers in Israel, 2. In both they speak to a Pharaoh and ask
to leave as Moses asked Pharaoh to let Yahweh's people go.
3. In both Pharaoh replies in a way which discourages
leaving. 4. Both are given a sister of Tahpenes the
Pharaoh's wife as a wife. 5 They both receive a son.

23
Jeroboam gets Abia and Ader gets Genubath. They both
insist on leaving. Jeroboam leaves but we are not told what
Hadad did (Zakovitch, 2000). For Zakovitch these are
duplicate traditions. He notes that Talshir understood that
Hadad's story was the original. "According to Talshir, the
Jeroboam duplicate tradition is built from fragments
borrowed from 1 Kings 11, 1 Kings 12 and 1 Kings 14
including the Hadad story" (Zakovitch, 2000, p. 95) Her
argument being that it is unreasonable to assume that
elements would be "stolen" from a Jeroboam tradition "to
create a tradition about a minor character like Hadad"
(Zakovitch, 2000) Talshir p173-174). Zakovitch disagrees
with this reasoning arguing that the Hadad story borrowed
from the Jeroboam story. He argues there were northern
writers who wanted to present Jeroboam as a new Moses
(Zakovitch, 2000), but there were Judean writers "not
approving of the Mosaic lines of Jeroboam's image
attempted to reduce the resemblances between the
traditions. One of the ways they accomplished this was to
transfer a traditions from one figure to another" (Zakovitch,
2000, p. 96). He say this process took place in this case
between Jeroboam and Hadad. He argues these Judean
writers did not completely succeed in removing the
memory of the Jeroboam-Moses story because "The

24
original tradition found its way to a manuscript which
became the Greek translator's Vorlage. For the northerners
Jeroboam liberated was a second Moses liberating the
people from a second Pharaoh, the King of Judah.

Whilst the reading of Zakovitch shows some brilliant

insight and give some explication to the story it also gives
the sense of being predicated on assumptions and in some
degree speculation and this is problematic. One problem is
the fact that in his theory the story of the Exodus explains
both stories that predate the Exodus and postdate it. This in
a sense means he reads everything in light of the Exodus
although the fact that some stories with Exodus features
predate the Exodus may indicate the Exodus is structured
on them not them on it. Secondly he admits that
"sometimes the comparison emphasizes the differences
between Moses and his successors" (Zakovitch, 2000, p.
98). Since these differences are there this surely indicates
something which is not modeled on the Exodus. Thirdly the
idea of the "original lines" of the Mosaic biography "were
deliberately blurred even concealed because they did not
correspond with concepts held by the biblical
historiographers…Echoes of these hidden traditions found
their way into to other biographies which were formed after
the mold of Moses: Jeroboam's kingship and priesthood,

25
and Elijah's ascent" (Zakovitch, 2000, p. 98). This
reasoning seems to imply that Zakovitch has an idea which
he understands should have been in the Moses Exodus
tradition but which is not present, in his terms it is
concealed. Another reading of the same data could say it
was never there and it is he imposing his idea on a group of
speculated scribes following out an agenda which he feels
they should be following. In general this means evidence
which is not present and does not support his hypostasis
should not be developed without concrete evidence in the
written text. In terms of Hadad it appears to me that he
focuses too much on the similarities between Hadad, Moses
and Jeroboam and not enough on the differences. For
example Moses message to Pharaoh was a prophetic one
demanding Pharaoh let Yahweh's people go that they could
worship him. Hadad was not a prisoner of Pharaoh or a
slave nor did he have a prophetic word he was a refugee
who was taken in at the kindness of Pharaoh, he was not
being set free from slavery. In addition we are not told what
Hadad did. Another example is Moses left Egypt and
escaped to Midian and stayed and married in Midian and
returned to Egypt delivered Israel, returned to Midian
established a covenant and headed to Moab. Hadad on the
other hand left his land Edom, picked up men in Midian,

26
did not marry there, continued to Paran picked up more
men and arrived in Egypt. He remained in Egypt married in
Egypt and produced a child there. He then requested to
leave Egypt, not to return to Midian, not because he was a
slave. The differences in the stories are perhaps as many as
the similarities. Zakovitch also ignores the similarities
between Moses story and other ancient near eastern figures
such as Sargon of Akkad. Zakovitch dos not focus on
Hadad as the king in Genesis nor on his role in the plot of
Pharaoh to break up the kingdom of Solomon and plunder
the wealth.

2.6 Naaman
Naaman has considered the story from a historical and
archaeological perspective (Naaman, 2015), For him it is
the first of three short story cycles covering the history of
the relationship between Judah in Israel. He is not focused
on the Hadad as the king in Genesis nor on the idea of a
literary pattern which it may conform to like the Fugitive
hero patterns.

2.8 Bartlett and Moon

The scholars above are just representative of the various
approaches to Hadad. Other very important studies on
Hadad include the studies of Bartlett Edom and the

27
Edomites and "An Adversary against Solomon, Hadad the
Edomite" (Bartlett J. , 1976) (Bartlett J. , 1992). Also very
important is the study of Moon A Political History of Edom
in the Light of Recent Literary and Archaeological
Research. These studies are very thorough archaeological
and literary studies of Edom but literary more in the older
sense of the world in trying to piece together where the
literary sources came from. Neither had a focus on Hadad
as King and possible Fugitive Hero and his role in
Pharaoh's plan for the Kingdom of David and Solomon.

2.9 The Fugitive Hero

The Fugitive Hero Pattern (FH) is a literary model
developed by Edward Greenstein illustrated well in his
study "The Fugitive Hero Narrative Pattern in
Mesopotamia" (Greenstein, 2005). The FH is built up of ten
to fourteen features, some necessary, some not but a
sufficient number, about ten, are needed to qualify the
character as a Fugitive Hero.

The fourteen features are as follows:

Pattern Features
1. The hero is a younger or youngest brother.
2. There occurs a political and/or personal crisis.
3. The hero flees or is exiled. 4. The hero

28
 enjoys the support of a female protector (sometimes
a goddess). 5. The hero marries the daughter of his
host in exile. 6. The hero assumes a position of
responsibility in the host’s household. 7. The
hero has a divine encounter (often divination or
revelation). 8. The hero is joined by kin. 9.
There is a seven-year period (usually of exile). 10.
The hero repels an attack (or attacks). 11. The hero
takes spoil or plunders. 12. The hero returns
home. 13. The hero is restored to a position of
leadership and/or honor. 14. The hero establishes
or renews a cult (often appointing an immediate
relative as priest)" (Greenstein, 2005, p. 23).

This model has been observed in analyzing the heroes

Sinuhe the Egyptian, Idrimi the Aramean, Hattishili III the
Hittite, Jacob the Aramean, Joseph the Aramean, Moses the
Aramean, David the Moabite (1 Sam 22:3-4), Essarhaddon
the Assyrian, Nabonidus the Chaldean and Israel as a
nation of Arameans all of whom were at one point
fugitives. In the Former Prophets in 1 Kings within in the
story of the house of David and particular of Solomon the
story is told of a character raised up (‫ )ויקם‬by Yahweh7 ((‫יהו‬

7
We follow Mowinckel's rendering of the memorial name as opposed
to Albright (Mowinckel, 1961)

29
‫ה‬, against Yedidiyah-Solomon ( (‫ידידי‬-‫( שלמה‬2 Sam 12:25).
The tale is related in less than 190 words but is by no
means simple and deals with the early royal house of Israel
under the second king of the Davidic dynasty (‫ )דוד‬and its
subjugation (kibosh ‫ )כבש‬of the royal house of Edom under
a relative of ‫ הדד האדמי‬Hadad the Edomite (1 K 11:14) also
referred to as 8‫( אדד‬1 K. 11:17, 1 K 11:14-25), and Ader is
the LXX version of the name9. He is an Edomite leader
raised up by Yahweh10 for fulfilling his word of judgment
against King Solomon. Of the at least three versions of the
story we will focus mainly on the Masoretic Text (MT)11
preserved in the tenth century Leningrad Codex represented
in BHS critical edition. The other versions, The LXXa and
Josephus' Antiquities, Book 8 chapter 7 will be referenced
and are important for interpretation. The manuscripts of

8
Cogan believes this is the North Semitic version of the name (Cogan,
2000).
9
If we add the reference in Genesis the LXX also has Arad.
10
Perhaps to fulfil his word to King David (2 Sam 7) In the Dtrh
Yahweh had said to David through and oracle to the prophet Nathan
that he would establish his seed forever. However he also said that if
his seed sinned against him he would strike him (hakachtiv) with the
rod (shevet) of men and with the wounds of men (nigei benei adam).
‫ֲאִנ֙י ֶאְהֶיה־ֹּ֣ל ו ְלָ֔א ב ְו֖ה ּוא ִיְהֶיה־ִּ֣לי ְלֵ֑ב ן ֲאֶׁש ֙ר ְּבַ֣ה ֲע ֹוֹ֔ת ו ְוֹֽהַכְחִּת י֙ו ְּבֵׁ֣ש ֶבט ֲא ָנִׁ֔ש ים ּוְבִנְגֵ֖ע י ְּבֵ֥ני‬14
‫ָאָֽדם׃‬
Sam 7:14 2

11
We follow BHS for our MT text.

30
Antiquities Book 8 go back to the eleventh CE (Josephus,
93-94 CE) (NIESE, 1885-95).

2.10 Hadad the Edomite as King in Genesis

One of the most difficult problems in ascertaining whether
Hadad the Edomite is a FH is the problem of understanding
who the author is telling us he is. Scholars have come up
with different ideas. The MT does not appear to tell us if he
was king of anywhere but indicates he married into the
royal house of Egypt which would perhaps make him a
prince of Egypt. As the Hittite Suppiluliumas adopted
Aziras as a Hittite brother so Pharaoh (Siamun)12 adopted
Hadad as an Egyptian son like Joseph and Moses before
him (ANE, 1958). The LXXa tells us he reigned as a king
(εβασιλευσεν) in Edom13. Schulman suggests that Hadad
did become king in Edom but because of Solomon's grip
failed to cause it to revolt. He then went north and aligned

12
We can have no certainty as to which Pharaoh it was because
Egyptian chronology is so uncertain. However following the main work
on the Third Intermediate period and assuming Shishak of the Bible is
identical with Sheshonq of Egypt (which is by no means certain),
Siamun the last king of the 21sst dynasty is likely to be the host of
Hadad and Sheshonq the first king of the 22nd is likely to be the host of
Hadad (Kitchen K. A., 1986) but compare Rohl (Rohl D. , 1995) and
even Velikovsky (Velikovsky, 1952) and Gertoux (Gertoux G. , 2015)
13
With it agrees Velikovsky who also believed he was succeeded by
his son Genubat and was a vessel to Pharaoh (Velikovsky, 1952). S. A
Pharaoh which is historically impossible given present day academic
consensus regarding chronology.

31
with Rezon, attacked Israel from Syria. He understands that
Josephus understood the MT 1 King 11:25 to refer to Aram
not Edom (Schulmann, 1986 ). For Bartlett, Hadad was a
much less important enemy to Israel than Rezon. He had no
success in Edom. He also believes that "Of Hadad and his
son Genubat we hear no more" (Bartlett J. , 1992, p. 112).
Following Bartlett's reasoning there can be no FH for
Hadad was a fugitive returned failed and disappeared, he
was no hero. Burney on the other hand suggests the Hadad
tale is made up of two characters, one called Hadad the
Edomite and the other Adad the Midianite (Burney, 1903).
Based on Burney's ideas Winckler gave the scenarios of the
two characters. The first character was adopted by
Tahpenes as a small child. When he grew up he was
allowed to return to Egypt protected by Egypt (Moon,
1971, p. 53). The second character, Adad escaped Joab's
slaughter comparatively mature traveled through Midian
and Paran to Egypt, received the sister of Tahpenes as wife
and she bore him the son Genubat14. These reconstructions
require massive emendation of the text and are clearly not
the intention of our author who presents Hadad and Adad
as the same person. They leave us no FH. Moon believes
Hadad's story probably belongs to the Acts of Solomon and

14
See Moon for Bibliography.

32
is free from the influence of the Deuteronomist. Honeyman
(Honeyman, 1948) holds that Hadad is the King mentioned
in Genesis 36. We want to follow the suggestion of
Honeyman and accept Hadar of Genesis 36:39 and Hadad
the Edomi are the same character in the mind of the author
of Kings. He perceived himself as filling in on the story of
Hadar.
Thus our undemonstrated reconstruction might look like
this based on following the names Hadad, the Edomi, King,
Edom and Aram.
The Reconstruction of Hadad's life and Influence in
Biblical Light
1. Hadad the Edomite was from a ruling family of
Edomites (1 Kgs 11:14). When he was child, the
ruling Elite, reinforced by intelligence from Doeg
the Edomite, who escaped Israel with the fall of the
Benjamite dynasty of Saul15, suddenly attacked the
15
The Rabbinic sources suggest Doeg was the Amalekite who came to
David and claimed to have killed Saul, but this is extremely
problematic in light of the fact that David knew Doeg very well and if
he was the closest adviser to Saul as the Rabbis also suggest,
everybody knew him (Feuer, 1985). As the star of Benjamin set Doeg
possibly had two main choices, change sides and show David he was
like Abner, but this is highly unlikely because he had really angered
David, he would then more than likely return home to Edom and
prepare for the coming war. He probably took counsel Saul of Rehovot
or if Saul of Rehovot is actually Saul the King of Israel, the Benjamite,
Doeg probably temporarily wielded extreme power in Edom until the
coming of Baal Hanan who either fought against David or was David.

33
 southern borders of Israel under David to
devastating effect (Bartlett J. , 1992). 2. They were
aligned with Saul in the war. 3. This resulted in the
writing of Psalm 60 or similar Psalms where David
feels God had rejected his army. 4. David at the
time was in the north fighting Aram Naharaim
(Psalm 60, 2 Sam 8;3-8). Joab took men from all the
12 tribes of Israel south to engage the armies of
Edom in the Valley of Salt (2 Sam 8:13, 2 Kgs 14:7,
1 Chr 18:12, 2 Chr 25:11). Joab arrived in the Edom
and buried the dead sons of Israel and then perhaps
after the war the tens of thousands of Edomite male
corpses. In reaction to the surprise attack of Edom
in laying in wait with the sword16 for Israel and the
murder of the priest by Doeg the Edomite17, Joab
attempted to strike and cut off ‫ כל זכר‬in Edom and

‫ ֹּ֚כ ה ָאַ֣מ ר ְיהָ֔ו ה ַעל־ְׁש ֹלָׁש ֙ה ִּפְׁש ֵ֣ע י ֱא ֔ד ֹום‬WTT Amos 1:11 16

‫ְוַעל־ַאְר ָּבָ֖ע ה ֹ֣ל א ֲאִׁש יֶ֑ב ּנּו ַעל־ָר ְד ֙פֹו ַבֶ֤ח ֶר ב ָאִחי֙ו ְוִׁש ֵ֣ח ת ַר ֲחָ֔מ יו‬
‫ַוִּיְטֹ֤ר ף ָלַע֙ד ַא ּ֔פ ֹו ְוֶעְבָר ֖ת ֹו ְׁש ָ֥מָר ה ֶֽנַצח׃‬
(Amo 1:11 WTT)
‫ ַו ֹּ֤יאֶמ ר ַהֶּ֙מֶלְ֙ך )ְלדֹוֵיג] (ְלדֹוֵ֔א ג[ ֹ֣ס ב ַא ָּ֔ת ה‬WTT 1 Samuel 22:18 17
‫ּוְפַ֖גע ַּב ֹּכֲהִ֑נים ַו ִּיֹּ֞ס ב )ּדֹוֵיג] (ּדֹוֵ֣א ג[ ָהֲא ֹדִ֗מ י ַוִּיְפַּגע־הּו֙א ַּבֹּ֣כ ֲהִ֔נ ים‬
‫ ְוֵ֙א ת ֹ֤נ ב‬19 ‫ַוָּ֣יֶמ ת׀ ַּבּ֣יֹום ַה֗ה ּוא ְׁש ֹמִ֤נים ַוֲחִמָּׁש ֙ה ִ֔א יׁש ֹנֵׂ֖ש א ֵא ֥פ ֹוד ָּֽבד׃‬
‫ִעיר־ַהֹּֽכֲהִני֙ם ִהָּ֣כה ְלִפי־ֶ֔ח ֶר ב ֵמִא יׁ֙ש ְוַעד־ִאָּׁ֔ש ה ֵמ עֹוֵ֖לל ְוַעד־יֹוֵ֑נק‬
‫ְוׁ֧ש ֹור ַוֲח֛מ ֹור ָוֶׂ֖ש ה ְלִפי־ָֽחֶר ב׃‬
(1Sa 22:18 WTT)

34
 remained there with all Israel ‫ כל ישראך‬for six
months (1 Kgs 11:16) as all Israel had approached
the land of Edom in the wanderings of the
wilderness to ask permission to pass the kings
highway but Edom had refused and threatened them
with the sword18 so all Israel was with Joab. The
phrase ‫ כל ישראל‬and ‫ כל זכר‬can be seen as parallel.
They do not mean every single person, man, woman
and child but rather representative of all Israel and
all ruling parties in Edom (Bartlett J. , 1992) or men
of military age (Johnstone, 2000) As Joab struck
males from Edom fled and became fugitives from
their land. These fugitives had a promise of
protection from Yahweh. Hadad the Edomi was one
of the fugitives. The name Hadad was probably a
hypocoriston of his full name (Cogan M. , 2000). It
means to rejoice loudly, or a loud sound like that of
a crashing building or the waves of the sea or
thunder. He may have been the Tabrimmon the son
of Hezion19. Those who succeeded him on the

‫ ַו ֹּ֤יאֶמ ר ֵא ָלי֙ו ֱא ֔ד ֹום ֹ֥ל א ַת ֲעֹ֖ב ר ִּ֑ב י‬WTT Numbers 20:18 18

‫ֶּפן־ַּבֶ֖ח ֶר ב ֵא ֵ֥צא ִלְק ָר אֶֽתָך׃‬
(Num 20:18 WTT)
‫ ֶא ל־ֶּבן־ֲ֠ה ַד ד ֶּבן־ַטְבִר ֹּ֤מ ן ֶּבן־ֶחְזיֹו֙ן ֶ֣מ ֶלְך ֲא ָ֔ר ם ַה ֹּיֵׁ֥ש ב ְּבַד ֶּ֖מ ֶׂש ק‬19
‫ ְּבִר י֙ת ֵּב יִ֣ני ּוֵב יֶ֔נ ָך ֵּ֥בין ָאִ֖ב י ּוֵ֣ב ין ָאִ֑ב יָך ִהֵּנ֩ה ָׁש ַ֙לְחִּֽתי ְלָ֥ך‬19 ‫ֵלאֹֽמ ר׃‬
35
 throne of Damascus took the name Ben Hadad after
his throne name (1 King 15:18-21, 20:1-34, 2 Kings
3-25). In line with the submission to Egypt of
Rehoboam, Hadad was also in covenant with
Rehoboam both being vassals of Shishak (1 Kgs
15:18-21). For Asa asked Ben Hadad to make a
covenant with him as there had been a covenant
between their fathers.
Hadad was married to the sister of Pharaoh Siamun or
Pharaoh Pseusennes wife's sister. He had a child with her
called Genubat. If he is the same character as Hadar of
Genesis 36:39, as we propose then his wife's name is
Mehatabel. Thus the couple are Hadad Tabrimmon and
Mehatabel. She is hypothetically the sister of Tahpenes
wife of Siamun or Pseusennes. Mahtabel is the daughter of
Matred who is the daughter or son (LXXa) of Mezahab.
The question would then remain: What is the name of Ben
Hadad I? Genubat? Thus the Ben Hadad community in
Damascus spring from the reign of Hadad who was given
authority in some degree by Pharaoh20.

‫ֹׁ֙שַח֙ד ֶּ֣כֶסף ְו ָזָ֔ה ב ֵ֣לְך ָהֵ֗פ ָר ה ֶא ת־ְּבִֽר יְת ָ֙ך ֶא ת־ַּבְעָׁ֣ש א ֶֽמֶלְך־ִיְׂש ָר ֵ֔א ל‬
‫ְוַיֲעֶ֖לה ֵמ ָעָֽלי׃‬
(1Ki 15:18 WTT)
20
A difficulty in this position is that Hadad is said to rule in Aram not in
Damascus, but on the other hand Rezion is seen as secondary to
Hadad although scholarship says he was by far the most dangerous

36
2.11 Hadad, Pharaoh, Nehemiah and Artaxerxes
As seen above Hadad was raised up an adversary to
Solomon but a possible deliverer for Edom.

The fact that the writer of Nehemiah chose to use the verb
‫ תשלחני‬in describing the sending of Nehemiah may indicate
that he understood that Hadad was sent on a mission by
Pharaoh as Nehemiah was sent by Artaxerxes (Neh 2:5).
This means in looking for the solution as to Hadad role as a
satan to Solomon and hero to Edom, Moab or Aram he
would seem to be an agent of Pharaoh, sent by Pharaoh to
work for Egypt and Edom against Solomon and later with
Rezon against Israel. The second important addition of the
LXX is καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐν γῇ Εδωμ. Here the LXX
indicates first that Hadad reigned as king ἐβασίλευσεν. In
the Pattern of the Fugitive Hero it is essential that the
Hadad is not only a Fugitive but returns and rules as a hero.
The MT does not give us certainty that Hadad returned and
ruled. The LXX however indicates that Hadad ruled in
Edom. The MT says
‫ְוֶאת־ָהָר ָ֖ע ה ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ֲהָ֑ד ד ַו ָּ֙יָק ֙ץ ְּבִיְׂשָר ֵ֔א ל ַוִּיְמ ֹ֖ל ְך ַעל־ֲאָֽר ם׃‬
(1Ki 11:25 WTT) (1 Kgs 11:25). It is unclear whether it
refers to Rezon or Hadad who rules in Aram, and some
manuscripts read Edom at this point as does the LXXa. The

37
verb ַ ‫ ָּ֙יָק ֙ץ‬has been given differing interpretations. The
Syriac reads it not as abhorred but as "oppressed" Israel in
line with the LXXa (Bartlett J. , 1992).

2.12Hadad in the Lexicon

The problem of resh and dalet is prominent in the literary
texts dealing with the tale of Hadad and its setting. These
are mainly in regard to ‫ ארם‬and ‫( אדום‬2 Sam 8:12, 13; 1 Chr
8:11) and ‫ הדד‬or ‫הדר‬. In addition we have ‫ אדד‬for ‫הדד‬. Since
the word Hadad/Adad refers to deities or a deity, places and
names of kings whether personal or throne names there is
much room for confusion, as is also the case with the
permutations of the two daleths and the two resh.

‫אדד‬ ‫הדד‬
‫אדר‬ ‫הדר‬
‫ארד‬ ‫הרד‬
‫ארר‬ ‫הרר‬
Gesenius says ‫( הדד‬BDB 212b) is from an unused root
cognate to Arabic ‫هد‬to break and in Hebrew used
figuratively to mean to break into joyful sounds (Gesenius,
1979 [1857]) or perhaps loud noise (BDB). He connects it
to ‫ הידד‬a masculine noun meaning shout, shouting or cheer
of the enemy (Isaiah 16:9, Jer 51:4). It can be shouting in
the harvest (Is 16:10, Jer 48:33). Also ‫ הד‬used in Ezekiel

38
7:7 ‫ הד הרים‬a joyous shout in the mountains compare to
‫ מהומה‬the noise of battle (BDB). In Arabic he also compares
it to ‫ هد‬the cry of a camel heavy thick voice or ‫ هاد‬the sound
of waves breaking on the sea, and finally ‫ هدة‬the crash from
a building falling. The derivatives from the root include
verbs ‫ הד‬hed, ‫ הידד‬and the nouns ‫ הדי‬,‫ הדדעזר‬,‫הדד‬, and
‫( הדדרמון‬Gesenius, 1979 [1857]).

The proper noun ‫ הדר\ד‬is a king of Edom (Gen 36:35, 36,

39 1 Chr 1:46, 47, 50) and the name of a Syrian idol. The
name ‫ הדדעזר‬is translated "whose help is Hadad" and
appears in an Aramaic inscription(BDB) (Gesenius, 1979
[1857]), hence Hadad Ezer the contemporary of David son
of ‫ רחב‬king of ‫(צובה‬2 Sam 8:3, 10:16, 19, 1 Chr 18,
19:16,19). In Samuel as ‫ הדדעזר‬but in Chronicles as ‫הדרעזר‬
and the LXXa follows Chronicles. For Gesenius ‫ הדדרמון‬is
a town situation in the plain of Meggido (Zech 12:11)21.
Hadad and Rimmon are names of Syrian idols (Gesenius,
1979 [1857]) Rimmon is also Ramman some scholars tie it
to ‫ ההרמונה‬of Amos 4:3. BDB draws attention to Hadad as a
proper divine name, hence ‫עבדהדד‬. He notes Hadad, Adad
or Addu is known as an Aramaic deity a weather or storm
god. It also appears in Sabean. TWOT notes that Edomite
king Hadad ben Bedad defeated Midian in battle (Gen

21
Josephus calls the town Maximianopolis.

39
36:35-36) and the later king Hadad (1 Chr 1:50) or Hadar
(Gen 36:39). He raises the possibility this king Hadad is
identical with Hadad the Edomite (TWOT, 1980). If this is
the case it would support the position of him being
possibility an FH because he would have returned and ruled
as king even in the place from which he was a fugitive.
TWOT also notes that the name Hadad for a king may be
"an abbreviation of the names compounded with Hadad"
(TWOT, 1980, p. 206). It also notes that Hadad may be the
same as Ugaritic hd an alternative name of Baal and the
Babylonian Adad and Addu.

3.0 The Tale of Hadad and the Fugitive Hero Features

‫ ַו ָּ֙יֶק ם ְיהָ֤וה ָׂש ָט֙ן ִלְׁש ֹלֹ֔מ ה ֵ֖א ת‬WTT 1 Kings 11:14
‫ֲהַ֣ד ד ָהֲא ֹדִ֑מ י ִמֶּ֧זַר ע ַהֶּ֛מֶלְך ֖ה ּוא ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום‬
This statement is preceded by a prophecy by
Yahweh about taking most of the kingdom of Israel away
from Solomon's in the reign of unnamed son. The author
raises the question: "How will Yahweh do this?" As in the
case of Adam, Eve and the Serpent (Gen 3) and the
predicted war between the seed of the woman and the seed
of the ‫ נחש‬in verses 11-13, and the case of David, Bat
sheva, and the sword of beni ammon under Hanun ben
Nachash (2 Sam 12:9) (2 Sam 11:47) and hence the sword

40
never leaving the house of David because David despised 22‫ב‬
‫ זה‬the commandment of Yahweh (2 Sam 11:10), Yahweh
speaks to Solomon's sins and outlines the divine response.
We are as in those cases waiting to see how Yahweh will
fulfil his word. Although the MT recognizes a literary unit
including the prophecy setting it off with a ‫ פתוחא‬before
verse 11 and completing it with the same at verse 25,
within that literary unit ‫ ויקם‬starts a short internal literary
unit of the tale. This is in verse 14 where the author
introduces the root ‫ קו''ם‬which is often used to indicate
Yahweh will establish his covenant or his word or for
example Moses raising the tabernacle (Ez 40:18) or
Yahweh raising up the judges who delivered the people
from those who plundered them (Judges 2:16). Here it is a
vav consecutive hifil imperfect 3rd person singular
apocopated form ‫ַוָּיֶק ם‬. It introduces Hadad as ‫ שטן‬and as
raised up by Yahweh23 to fulfil his word and is an
introduction or topic sentence for the paragraph with the
tale of Hadad24. In terms of the FH the FH "has a divine
encounter". We do not appear to have evidence directly for
22
The root ‫ בזה‬despised is used in the story of David, also in the story
of Esau regarding him despising his birth right, and in Obadiah where
Edom is described as ‫בזוי אתה מאד‬.
23
Cf. Ex 40:18
24
Scholars note that literarily it is larger than a report e.g. that on
Rezon in verse 23-24, but less than a full blown story, which is why I
have used the term tale.

41
this but we see Hadad is the work of Yahweh perhaps
similar to Cyrus the Persian who was used by Yahweh for
the sake of Judah and Jerusalem although he did not know
Yahweh (Isaiah 45:4). The form ַ‫ ָּ֙יֶק ם‬is repeated again in
verse 23 although there it is ‫ אלהים‬who is said to raise up
Rezon, Israel's adversary in the north. The outer frame then
starts with ַ‫ ָּ֙יֶק ם‬and ends with ‫וימלך על ארם‬. The inner frame
of the narrative begins ‫ ויהי בהיות‬like the story of Cain and
Abel (Gen 4:8) and ends ‫( ויאמר לא כי שלח תשלחני‬verse 22),
this last word ‫ תשלחני‬occurring in only one other case in
Scripture in the request of Nehemiah to King Artaxerxes of
Persia asking to be sent to Jerusalem the city of his father's
tombs to rebuild it25. This may help us understand better
what the author is implying about the work of Hadad which
would be good for Egypt and Edom or Aram but bad for
Solomon and Israel. The first use of the root ‫ ק''ום‬is in the
Primeval History is in the story of Cain and Abel. There it
is used in narrative vav consecutive (‫( ַוָּ֥יָק ם‬Gen 4:8 WTT))
the exact same letters but it is vowel pointed in the MT as
qal imperfect 3ms apocopated. Hadad is a satan to

‫ ָו ֹאַ֣מ ר ַלֶּ֔מ ֶלְך ִא ם־ַעל־ַהֶּ֣מ ֶלְך ֔ט ֹוב ְוִא ם־ִייַ֥טב ַעְבְּד ָ֖ך ְלָפֶ֑ניָך ֲא ֶׁ֧ש ר‬5 25
‫ִּת ְׁש ָלֵ֣ח ִני ֶאל־ְיהּוָ֗ד ה ֶא ל־ִ֛עיר ִק ְב֥ר ֹות ֲא ֹבַ֖ת י ְוֶא ְב ֶֽנָּנה׃‬
(Neh 2:5 WTT) In this parallel Nehemiah becomes Hadad in
exile and favored of his host, Nebuchadnezzar becomes
Joab, Artaxerxes becomes Pharaoh.
42
Solomon because Solomon turned from Yahweh. This
opposition need not be military because we have a similar
literary construction in the case of Balaam's angel:

‫ ַו ִּֽיַחר־ַ֣א ף ֱא ֹלִהי֘ם ִּֽכי־הֹוֵ֣לְך הּו֒א ַוִּיְת ַיֵּ֞צ ב ַמ ְלַ֧אְך‬WTT Numbers 22:22

‫ֹת ֹו ּוְׁש ֵ֥ני ְנָעָ֖ר יו ִעּֽמ ֹו׃‬
‫ְיהָ֛וה ַּבֶּ֖ד ֶר ְך ְלָׂש ָ֣ט ן ֑ל ֹו ְוהּו֙א ֹרֵ֣כב ַעל־ֲא ֔נ‬
(Num 22:22 WTT)

As Yahweh was angry with Balaam he was angry with

Solomon. In the case of Balaam his satan was invisible to
him, as was Solomon's to him but only because he was not
aware of him. We see a different manifestations of Satan in
the case of David (1 Chr 21:1), Job (Job 1), and Joshua the
high priest26 (Zech 3:1). In all these cases though the
opposition was invisible. Job and David were being tested.
David was moved to sin by numbering Israel. In the
Samuel version of the story there is no satan intermediate
between Yahweh and David and the anger of Yahuah
incited David to act. Balaam was being warned27. Hadad
may play a bit of both roles because he was around for
almost the whole of Solomon's reign. Perhaps like Balaam
he advised Pharaoh how he could cause Solomon to sin and
to lose his favor with Yahweh. This would be why Pharaoh
26
In this case Satan is a proper noun.
27
Moses and Balaam both appear to have instructions from God and
on their way to doing it were threated with death. Moses was saved
by his wife and Balaam perhaps by his ass.

43
may have married his daughter to Solomon. However all of
this we do not know at the introduction of Hadad.

3.1Young Hadad Flees Because of Political Crisis

1. The hero is a younger or youngest brother. 2.
There occurs a political and/or personal crisis. 3. The
hero flees or is exiled.

‫ ַו ְיִ֗ה י ִּֽבְה֤יֹות ָּד ִו֙ד ֶאת־ֱא֔ד ֹום ַּבֲע֗ל ֹות יֹוָא֙ב ַׂ֣ש ר ַהָּצָ֔ב א‬15 ‫׃‬
‫ ִּ֣כי ֵׁ֧ש ֶׁש ת ֳחָד ִׁ֛ש ים ָֽיַׁש ב־ָׁ֥ש ם יֹוָ֖א ב‬16 ‫ְלַקֵּ֖ב ר ֶא ת־ַהֲחָלִ֑לים ַוַּ֥יְך ָּכל־ָזָ֖כר ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום׃‬
‫ ַוִּיְבַ֣ר ח ֲאַ֡ד ד הּו֩א ַוֲא ָנִׁ֙שים ֲא ֹדִמ ִּ֜י ים‬17 ‫ְוָכל־ִיְׂשָר ֵ֑א ל ַעד־ִהְכִ֥ר ית ָּכל־ָזָ֖כר ֶּבֱאֽד ֹום׃‬
‫ֵמַעְבֵ֥ד י ָאִ֛ביו ִאּ֖ת ֹו ָל֣ב ֹוא מבִשְצָ֑ר ִים ַוֲהַ֖ד ד ַ֥נַער ָקָֽטן׃‬
(1Ki 11:14 WTT)
We see that Hadad the Edomi is a young man and
because of a political crisis between Israel and Edom
he fled making him a fugitive. The introduction of
Hadad is as an Edomite. In Biblical literature the
adjective ‫( ָהֲא ֹדִ֑מ י‬1Ki 11:14 WTT) in the singular is
used only seven times. Only two named individuals
bear this epithet in the singular, Doeg and Hadad. Doeg
the Edomite served Saul and did harm to David by the
intelligence he gave to Saul when no one else was
willing. He also slaughtered 85 people from among the
priests at the command of Saul. Doeg's position as
Saul's avir haroim mighty one of the shepherds and

44
 servant of Saul and among the Benjamites as though
one of them may say something about the relationships
of the Edomites to Saul and Israel at this time.

‫ ַו ַּ֜י ַען ֹּדֵ֣א ג ָהֲא ֹדִ֗מ י ְו֛ה ּוא ִנָּ֥צב ַעל־ַעְבֵֽדי־ָׁש ֖א ּול ַוֹּיאַ֑מ ר‬WTT 1 Samuel 22:9
‫ָר ִ֙איִת ֙י ֶא ת־ֶּבן־ִיַׁ֔ש י ָּ֣ב א ֹ֔נ ֶבה ֶא ל־ֲאִחיֶ֖מ ֶלְך ֶּבן־ֲאִחֽטּוב׃‬
(1Sa 22:9 WTT)
Doeg was mighty among the servants of Saul. This
position is consistent with the hypothesis that Saul was
not at enmity with Edom at this time but was king over
them as argued by honeyman and others (Honeyman,
1948). However the act perpetuated by Doeg in killing
the priests led to the assignment of Psalm 52 to him in
the biblical tradition. It was because of Doeg's
reporting the falsehood that Abimelech had consulted
the oracle for David that Saul commanded the killing of
the priests for treason.
In Deuteronomy 23:7 where the Israelites are given a
command in relation to Edom:

‫ ֹֽלא־ְת ַת ֵ֣ע ב ֲא ֹדִ֔מ י ִּ֥כי ָאִ֖ח יָך ֑ה ּוא ס ֹלא־ְת ַת ֵ֣ע ב‬WTT Deuteronomy 23:8
‫ִמ ְצִ֔ר י ִּכי־ֵ֖גר ָהִ֥ייָת ְבַאְר ֽצֹו׃‬
(Deu 23:8 WTT)
The verb ‫ תתעב‬is only used in this form in one other
place in biblical literature in Psalm 107:18

45
 ‫ ָּכל־ֹ֭א ֶכל‬18 ‫ ֱ֭א ִוִלים ִמֶּ֣ד ֶר ְך ִּפְׁשָ֑ע ם ּֽ֜ו ֵמֲעֹֽו ֹנֵת יֶ֗ה ם ִיְת ַעּֽנּו׃‬WTT Psalm 107:17
‫ְּת ַת ֵ֣ע ב ַנְפָׁ֑ש ם ַ֜ו ַּיִּ֗ג יעּו ַעד־ַׁ֥ש ֲעֵר י ָֽמֶות׃‬

(Psa 107:17 WTT)

Thus the evilim because of their criminal ways were
afflicted and no longer desired food, they no longer
wanted it or rejected it. Israel was not to treat the
Edomite that way in the Deuteronomic tradition.
Indeed whereas the Moabite and the Ammonite were
forbidden to enter the congregation of Yahweh until
even the tenth generation which some scholars read as
forever because they had hired Bilaam from Aram to
curse Israel, the Edomite was permitted into the
congregation in the third generation. This verse also
addresses the Egyptian. The Egyptian is not to be
detested because Israel were a ger sojourners in his
land.
When Hadad was a child his land came under attack
from David and his head of military Joab. They sought
to cut off "all males from Edom" (MT) (1 Kgs 11:15, 2
Sam 8)28. Josephus has all males of military age and
28
The story to which Hadad story is a side story is that of the military
victories of David. These stories have references to Aram and Edom
which are confused because of the presence of resh and dalet which are
easily confused (2 Sam 8:3). But they also point to the literary
connection between the two realms of the battle the extreme north and
the extreme south of the nation David subdues. The literary allusion to

46
 some scholars believes this refers to the royal family of
Edom not every male. Joab and all Israel spent six
months cutting off every male in Edom. This alludes to
the one of the battles in Gei Melakh the Salt Valley
(Psalm 60, 1 Chr. 18:12).
(H)adad29 a naar qetan and his father's servants flee
Edom for Egypt. Thus he became a fugitive answering
to feature 3 of the FH pattern.
Adad left Midian, south of Edom beyond Edom's land
beyond Ezion Geber, (today in Saudi Arabia or if East
of the Red sea Sinai) and comes to Paran (where
Ishmael and Hagar had gone). He is a fugitive but
clearly with connections.
They left Paran with some men and come to Egypt to
Pharaoh. He was given a house, food and land. Here his
is a Fugitive arriving with a delegation to Egypt.
Perhaps he would look a little like the Asiatic

Gen 1:28 where the eretz is to be subdued ‫ כבשה‬kibusha is seen in that

the goyim that are subdued ‫ כבש‬kibesh (2 Sam 8:11). Another less
convincing literary hint is the presence of the friendly King ‫ נחש‬and his
seed ‫ חנון‬who insults David's ambassadors who then go to Jericho (the
place of first victory for Israel in the land) whilst David has to battle
many Arameans and Ammonites. Thus the seed of a nakash attacks the
seed of Israel. David's personal name may well be Baal hanan in the
source of the Edomite archivists (Honeyman, 1948) (Garsiel M. ,
2009).
29
Adad is the East Semitic form of the Aramaic form Hadad (Cogan,
2000, p. 331).

47
 immigrants we see in the pictures of the Beni Hasan
(ANE, 1958).

3.2 Female Support of Hadad

4. The hero enjoys the support of a female protector
(sometimes a goddess). 5. The hero marries the
daughter of his host in exile. 6. The hero assumes a
position of responsibility in the host’s household.

‫ ַוִּיְמָצ֙א ֲהַ֥ד ד ֵ֛ח ן ְּבֵעיֵ֥ני ַפְר ֹ֖ע ה ְמ ֹ֑א ד ַו ִּיֶּת ן־֤ל ֹו ִאָּׁש ֙ה‬WTT 1 Kings 11:19
‫ ַוֵּ֙תֶלד ֜ל ֹו ֲא֣ח ֹות ַּת ְחְּפֵ֗נ יס ֵ֚א ת‬20 ‫ֶא ת־ֲא֣ח ֹות ִאְׁש ּ֔ת ֹו ֲא֖ח ֹות ַּת ְחְּפֵ֥ניס ַהְּגִביָֽר ה׃‬
‫ְּגֻנַ֣ב ת ְּב֔נ ֹו ַוִּת ְגְמ ֵ֣להּו ַת ְחְּפֵ֔נ ס ְּב֖ת ֹוְך ֵּ֣ב ית ַּפְר ֹ֑ע ה ַו ְיִ֤ה י ְגֻנַב֙ת ֵּ֣ב ית ַּפְר ֹ֔ע ה ְּב֖ת ֹוְך ְּבֵ֥ני‬
‫ַפְר ֹֽעה׃‬
(1Ki 11:19 WTT)
Hadad found grace in the eyes of Pharaoh, and
Pharaoh gave him as wife the sister of his wife
(Tahpenes). This point of marriage does not answer
exactly to that of the FH where the FH marries the
daughter of the host in exile, but the marriage to the
sister of Pharaoh's wife must answer to feature 5 and in
the FH pattern. In addition the fact that Pharaoh's wife
is named30 and takes care of Hadad's son answer to
feature 4.

30
But compare Cogan who says Tahpenes is a title not a proper name
(Cogan M. , 2000).

48
They had a son called Genubat31(thief in Hebrew but of
uncertain meaning in Egyptian)

Genubat grew up among Pharaoh's children weaned by

Tahpenes Pharaoh's wife and grew up with Pharaoh's
children.

3.3 The Evil of Hadad: The End

The summary of Hadad's role is a very difficult
clause. Thus the text says: ‫( וֶאת־ָהָר ָ֖ע ה ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ֲהָ֑ד ד‬1Ki 11:25
WTT). Gesenius indicates that the predicate of the relative
clause is missing (Ges.117). This problem has led to
various scholarly responses. Some scholars suggest adding
a verb. The LXXa version of the plot has a different order
to the plot of MT. The story of Esrom (Rezion) is
introduced in verse 14 at the beginning of the pericope. In
verse 25, the end of the unit it indicates two things. The
first is that it supplies a verb in the translation:

1Ki 11:25 αὕτη ἡ κακία, ἣν ἐποίησεν Αδερ· καὶ

ἐβαρυθύμησεν ἐν Ισραηλ καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐν γῇ Εδωμ.
Thus the verb ἐποίησεν he did in the aorist active indicative
third person masculine singular is added in relation to MT.
31

49
Thus some scholars suggest the addition of the verb ‫ עשה‬or
rather that the verb ‫ עשה‬has dropped out and the MT needs
to be emended in line with the supposed LXX vorlage at
this point. However since the difficult Hebrew appears to
demand a verb it is possible the LXX translators supplied
the verb to make sense of the text. Pat El in her paper "On
Periphrastic Genitive Construction in Biblical Hebrew"
argues that ‫ אשר‬in this case taken a genitive meaning (Patel,
2010)32. Thus the text would read "The evil of Hadad". This
solution needs no emendation to the text and fits well with
the context. Thus taking the framing of the tale we can see
that Hadad was raised up by Yahweh but sent by Pharaoh
at Hadad's request.
3.4 The Hero Hadad Returns Home

12. The hero returns home. 13. The hero is restored

to a position of leadership and/or honor.

‫ ַוֲהַ֞ד ד ָׁש ַ֣מ ע ְּבִמ ְצַ֗ר ִים ִּֽכי־ָׁש ַ֤כב ָּד ִו֙ד ִעם־ֲא ֹבָ֔ת יו‬WTT 1 Kings 11:21
22
‫ְוִכי־ֵ֖מ ת יֹוָ֣א ב ַֽׂשר־ַהָּצָ֑ב א ַו ֹּ֤יאֶמ ר ֲהַד ֙ד ֶא ל־ַּפְר ֹ֔ע ה ַׁש ְּלֵ֖ח ִני ְוֵאֵ֥לְך ֶא ל־ַאְר ִֽצי׃‬
‫ַו ֹּ֧י אֶמ ר ֣ל ֹו ַפְר ֹ֗ע ה ִּ֠כ י ָמ ה־ַא ָּ֤ת ה ָחֵס֙ר ִעִּ֔מ י ְוִה ְּנָ֥ך ְמ ַבֵּ֖ק ׁש ָלֶ֣לֶכת ֶא ל־ַאְר ֶ֑צ ָך‬
‫ ַו ָּ֙יֶק ם ֱאֹלִ֥הים לֹ֙ו ָׂש ָ֔ט ן ֶאת־ְר ֖ז ֹון ֶּבן־ֶאְל ָיָ֑ד ע‬23 ‫ַו ֹּ֣יאֶמ ר׀ ֹ֔ל א ִּ֥כי ַׁש ֵּ֖לַח ְּת ַׁש ְּלֵֽחִני׃‬
32
I consulted Jan Joosten on this function through Academia.edu he
noted " Yes, it's a marginal function, but it does
seem to be attested (and it has good parallels in
other languages, notably Aramaic)"

50
 ‫ ַוִּיְק ֹּ֤ב ץ ָעָלי֙ו ֲא ָנִׁ֔ש ים ַו ְיִ֣ה י‬24 ‫ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ָּבַ֗ר ח ֵמ ֵ֛את ֲהַד ְד ֶ֥עֶזר ֶֽמֶלְך־צֹוָ֖ב ה ֲא ֹדָֽניו׃‬
‫ ַו ְיִ֙ה י‬25 ‫ַׂש ר־ְּג֔ד ּוד ַּב ֲה ֹ֥ר ג ָּד ִ֖וד ֹאָ֑ת ם ַוֵּיְל֤כ ּו ַד ֶּ֙מ ֶׂש ֙ק ַוֵּ֣יְׁש בּו ָ֔ב ּה ַֽוִּיְמ ְל֖כ ּו ְּבַד ָּֽמֶׂש ק׃‬
‫ָׂש ָ֤ט ן ְלִיְׂש ָר ֵא ֙ל ָּכל־ְיֵ֣מ י ְׁש ֹלֹ֔מ ה ְוֶאת־ָהָר ָ֖ע ה ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ֲהָ֑ד ד ַו ָּ֙יָק ֙ץ ְּבִיְׂשָר ֵ֔א ל ַוִּיְמ ֹ֖ל ְך‬
‫ַעל־ֲאָֽר ם׃ פ‬

(1Ki 11:21 WTT)

Hadad heard that David slept with his father's and
Joab had died he asked Pharaoh to send him home
‫ַאְר ִצי‬-‫ַׁש ְּלֵחִני ְוֵאֵלְך ֶא ל‬.
1 Pharaoh objected but after a repeated request let him
go.
‫ ָלֶלֶכת‬,‫ ְוִהְּנָך ְמ ַבֵּקׁש‬,‫ַאָּת ה ָחֵסר ִעִּמ י‬-‫ ִּכי ָמ ה‬,‫ַוֹּיאֶמ ר לֹו ַפְר ֹעה‬
‫ ִּכי ַׁש ֵּלַח ְּת ַׁש ְּלֵחִני‬,‫ַאְר ֶצָך; ַוֹּיאֶמ ר ֹלא‬-‫ֶא ל‬

10 In MT the plot takes a short detour to introduce the

story of Rezon of Damascus and his sub plot.

11 It then returns to Hadad again recognizing that these two

characters Rezon and Hadad were satans33. Hadad to
Solomon (1 Kings 11:17) and Rezon to Israel during
Solomon's time (1 Kings 11:25). Thus the term satan
appears in the first verse of the story and the last verse of

33
The sense that this term had by the time of the LXX taken on more
than simply a lexical meaning of adversary or opponent is seen in the
fact that the LXXa at this place in the text leaves the word untranslated.

51
the story. This perhaps indicating its centrality as a theme
in the story for the author.

12 We are not told what Hadad did, rather he is just

described as evil ‫ְוֶאת־ָהָר ָ֖ע ה ֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ֲהָ֑ד ד‬.

13 It appears Hadad is ruling in Aram ‫ארם‬, but some

versions of the story read ‫אדם‬

,‫ יד ַוָּיֶקם ְיהָוה ָׂש ָטן ִלְׁש ֹלֹמה‬14 And Yahweh raised up an

:34‫ ֵאת ֲהַד ד ָהֲא ֹדִמ י‬adversary unto Solomon,
.‫ ֶּבֱאדֹום‬,‫ ִמ ֶּזַר ע ַהֶּמ ֶלְך הּוא‬Hadad the Edomite; he was
of the king's seed in Edom.

3.5 The Hero Moves to the North

Hadad and Josephus Antiquities, Book 8 chapter 7

The solution of Josephus to this many serious difficulties

in the text or his traditions brings Ader or Hader closer to
the essential features needed for Hadad to be classified as a
fugitive hero.

34
The Lxx adds: "and Esrom son of Eliadae who dwelt in Raama,
and Adadezer king of Suba his master; (and men gathered to him,
and he was head of the conspiracy, and he seized on Damasec,) and
they were adversaries to Israel all the days of Solomon:" In the MT
the story of Rezon (Esrom) appears in verses 23-25. The connection
between the two characters is alluded to by a return to Hadad at the end
of the report about Rezon.

52
 202 When he heard in Egypt that both David
and Joab were dead, he went to ask Pharaoh's
permission to return to his native land, but the king
asked what was wrong with him or what suffering
caused him to want to leave him; and though he
often pressed and begged him he did not let him go
at the time. 203 But when Solomon's affairs began
to worsen due to his aforesaid lawlessness and
God's anger at them, Ader came to Idumaea with
Pharaoh's permission, and when he failed to make
its people forsake Solomon, for it was held by many
garrisons and it was unsafe to rebel, he moved from
there and went to Syria. 204 There he found and
befriended a man called Razo, who had run away
from his master, king Adraazaron of Sophene, and
become a brigand in that land and had already
gathered a thieving gang around him. So he went
and captured that part of Syria and was made king
of it, and also made incursions into the land of the
Israelites, doing it significant harm and ravaging it
already in the lifetime of Solomon. This was the
disaster the Hebrews suffered by Ader.

Here Josephus' tradition differs from both the MT and the

LXXa. Ader does not just return when Joab dies but when

53
Solomon's situation worsens because of his sin. In this
story we see the control of Pharaoh more clearly. Pharaoh
first refuses permission for the timing was not right. He
later permits Joseph to go after Solomon's affairs had
worsened because of his sins. Ader then comes to Edom
and attempts to turn the people from Solomon but fails
because of all the garrisons. He then moves north and
aligns himself the Syrian Razo who had escaped from his
master Adraazaron (Hadad Ezer), and set up a thieving
gang. Through this alliance Ader becomes king in that part
of Syria. He then conducted incursions into Israel from the
north. In Josephus tradition Ader does become a military
opponent of Solomon. He does significant harm through
ravaging Northern Israel. He does not arrive back before
Solomon falls but clearly after Solomon had begun
marrying the strange women. Ader fails in Idumea but does
become king and rules in Syria. Thus he would fit the role
of a fugitive who returns and becomes a hero by attacking
the enemy and rules as a king but not directly of his own
people, the Edomites. It would clearly be a variation of sort
on the FH pattern for he is a fugitive from one land but
return to rule another. In the sense however that both Edom
and Aram would have been angry at Solomon because of
the activities of David they may have seen him as a hero

54
also. Josephus tradition give some explanation as to why
the MT may have Aram at the end and not Edom.

This reading gains further credence when added to the fact

that Jeroboam son of Nebat was also hosted as a refugee
and then had a part in dividing Solomon's Kingdom into
north and south. Although we do not have a treaty of
Egyptians with Edom we do have illustrations of the
dangers perceived by rulers of the ancient near east in
regard to fugitives like Hadad and Jeroboam which no
doubt our author would have been aware of when writing
and the fact that Pharaoh took great interest in what was
happening north of them35 from the Execration Texts
through Tutmosis III to Sheshonq, Shishak and Necho. Our
author is clearly aware of this. In the first case for example
in the treaty of Suppiluliumas (1380-1346)36 the "Sun",
military leader, high priest and judge of the Hittites and
Aziras of Amurru "[If from Hattusa somebody man or
woman, escapes and comes to your country you will not
say as follows 'True [I] am under a treaty properly sworn
to, but I can [not] know in anyway where amidst my
country these (people) [hide]". You Aziras will seize
35
For example even in the battle of Qarqat when Shalmeneser III was
attacking the area the alliance of 12 kings included a contingent of a
thousand troops from Egypt.
36
This is the Amarna period in Egypt under Akhenaten (1379-1362)
under which we get the Amarna letters.

55
[them] and hand [them] over to the king of Hatti land"
(Pritchard, 1975, pp. 44-45). Suppiluliumas states the same
in regard to a Hittite fugitive in the same treaty. Another
illustrative principle of the relations of Aziras and Egypt
(Langer, 1968, p. 49). "Formerly in fact, the king of the
land of Egypt, the king of Hurri land [etc] all these kings
were hostile [to the Sun], but Azarias king of [Amurru
land] , parted from the gate of Egypt and became
subservient to the Sun the k[ing of H]atti land. And the Sun
was very happy about …that Aziras fell down at the feet of
the Sun…and added him to his brethren" (Pritchard, 1975,
pp. 42-43). Another example of the perceived danger of
fugitives is seen in the treaty between Niqmeqa of Alalakha
and Irim Tunip. "If someone from my land [plots against
me], if you hear of it, you must not conceal it from me, if
he lives in your land, you must extradite him" (Pritchard,
1975, p. 46). These illustrations of the relations of the
fugitives to the kings of the ANE can help us picture two
things. Hadad's refuge in Egypt may indicate to us that the
author understood Egypt at that point had no treaty with
Solomon. It would appear that at the point in our narrative
when Solomon marries Pharaoh's daughter Hadad is sent
by Pharaoh back to his land which at the time was
Solomon's land. Thus in 1 Kings 2:34 Benaiah kills Joab

56
and in 1 Kings 11:21 Hadad's hears of Joab's death and
requests to be sent to his own country. After the death of
Joab the case of Shimei is taken up and he is not killed for
three years (1 Kgs 2:39). However after three years two
servants of Shimei escape (‫ )ויברחו‬to Achish son of Maacah
king of Gath. They were actually then fugitives in Gath but
Shimei got them back (similar to the cases above in the
treaties). However he transgressed the oath of Yahweh in
doing this and is executed. Solomon then proclaims:

‫ ְוַהֶּ֥מֶלְך ְׁש ֹלֹ֖מ ה ָּב ֑ר ּוְך ְוִכֵּ֣ס א ָד ִ֗ו ד ִיְהֶ֥יה ָנ֛כ ֹון ִלְפֵ֥ני ְיהָ֖וה ַעד־עֹוָֽלם׃‬45
(1Ki 2:45 WTT)

Solomon was not aware that some two years or more

previous to this statement that Hadad had been sent to
Edom in service of Pharaoh most likely his suzerain. It is
clear to the author that Hadad owed something to Pharaoh
at the least. There is evidence from an earlier period of the
purpose of Pharaoh in taking in the young children of
foreign lands. In the records of Tutmosis III it states
"Behold, the children of the chiefs and their brothers were
brought to be in strongholds in Egypt. Now whosoever died
among the chiefs, his majesty would cause his son to stand
in his place" (Records, 1906, p. vol ii s.467) (Velikovsky,
1952, p. 182) In light of this the alliance between Pharaoh

57
and Solomon sometime after the arrival of Hadad in Edom
takes on a new light. In the tale of Hadad he is married to
Tahpanes Pharaoh's wife's sister (1 Kgs 11:19). With
Solomon married to Pharaoh's daughter he would be
married to someone who in all likelihood grew up with
Hadad, like brother and sister37. In light of this in trying to
identify what Hadad did as the invisible non-military
adversary of Solomon it would appear his opposition was
verbal and perhaps in the realm of intelligence. Pharaoh or
Egypt could have been taking a three pronged approach to
the destruction of the mighty kingdom of Israel. The first
by making covenants with her southern neighbor, Edom,
but perhaps additionally with Midian and Paran from whom
men were taken who joined the delegation with Hadad. In
addition Pharaoh aided and sent Jeroboam which split the
kingdom of Israel into two the greater part belonging to
Pharaoh's ally Jeroboam. Our author being aware of the
fact that Ephraim and Manasseh had in fact Egyptian
ancestors, the wife of Joseph was the Egyptian Priestess of
On, Asenath. Thirdly after the kingdom was split and thus
37
Velikovsky whose research has been in the main rejected by the
Academic consensus suggests something apparent historically
impossible that the Genubatye recorded in the writings of Tutmosis III
are some how related to the Edomite Genubat son of Hadad. "When
his majesty arrived in Egypt the messengers of the Genubatye came
bearing their tribute" (Records, 1906, p. vol ii s.474) (Velikovsky, 1952,
p. 181).

58
thoroughly weakened Pharaoh Shishak invaded Judah and
robbed the Jerusalem temple. All the treasures stored up by
David and Solomon in their temple bank was transferred to
Egypt. Hadad's role in this could initially have been
intelligence and the weakening of Judah's southern border.
Thus in this reading the author is indicating that the damage
caused by Hadad was through his connection with Pharaoh.
There are no wars reported between Hadad and Solomon. It
would appear the author has intentionally left it vague but
also expects the reader to understand from the rest of the
Primary history more of what Hadad did. This reading is
perhaps indicated by the prophetic word promising action
in the life time of Solomon's son (Much as David was told
in Samuel that the sword would never leave his family
which was also a problem revolving around Solomon's
mum or a woman as is the case with Solomon's many
women. Both the division of the Kingdom and the raid on
the Temple were the result of Egyptian centered activity
and according to the author were Yahweh's doing.

59
4.0 Another Perspective: The Macrostructural Frame of
Brotherhood: Word, Action, Manifestation
The literary themes and echoes taken up in the story of
Hadad the Edomite and his relationship to David, Joab and
Solomon are legion. Sailhammer posits that three key
themes (blessing, seed and eretz) run through the
macrostructure of the Pentateuch consisting of the Primeval
history (Gen 1-11) and part of the Primary history (Genesis
through 2 Kings) are laid out in Genesis 1- 2:4 which are
seen as the literary introduction to the Pentateuch when
conceived as one book. Further since the Primary history
continues exactly where the Pentateuch ends and stretches
all the way to the end of 2 Kings this introduction to the
Pentateuch can be conceived as an introduction to the entire
Primary history, the brothers in Genesis, Cain and Abel,
Esau and Jacob as a foreshadowing of the brothers David
and Hadad in 2 Samuel 8:13, 1 Kings 11:15. The theory of
a Deuteronomistic history sees the stories contained from
Joshua to 2 Kings as based on the principles of
Deuteonomy (Noth, 1967 [1943]). However it has been
shown that Deuteronomy also has many literary
dependences on the preceding Tetrateuch (Sailhammer,
1992) (Postel, 2011) (Friedman R. , 1998) (Friedman R. ,
1987), and for some scholars is seen as one book with the

60
books Genesis to Numbers (Sailhammer, 1992) (Postel,
2011). As noted by Scroggie "The dominating notes are all
here; the choice of Genesis, the deliverance of Exodus, the
holiness of Leviticus and the guidance of Numbers"
(Scroggie, 1940). The protological role of Genesis 1:2-4 in
the Primary history, Genesis 1-2:4 is the first literary block
in the Primary history and stands at the beginning as a
literary introduction (Postel, 2011) (Sailhammer, 1992)38.
The three themes are taken up first in Genesis 1:28

28 And God blessed them; and God ,‫ ֱאֹלִהים‬,‫כח ַוְיָבֶר ְך ֹאָת ם‬

said unto them: 'Be fruitful, and ‫ַוֹּיאֶמ ר ָלֶהם ֱא ֹלִהים ְּפרּו‬
multiply, and replenish the earth, ,‫ָהָאֶר ץ‬-‫ּוְר בּו ּוִמ ְלאּו ֶא ת‬
and subdue it; and have dominion ,‫ְוִכְבֻׁש ָה; ּוְר דּו ִּבְד ַגת ַהָּים‬
over the fish of the sea, and over the ,‫ַחָּיה‬-‫ ּוְבָכל‬,‫ּוְבעֹוף ַהָּׁש ַמ ִים‬
fowl of the air, and over every .‫ָהָאֶר ץ‬-‫ָה ֹרֶמֶׂש ת ַעל‬
living thing that creepeth upon the
earth.'
The three themes are blessing (barakha), seed (pru urvu)
and land (fill the eretz and subdue or conquer it (likbosh39)).
Along with Postel, Sailhammer argues that these themes
embedded in the macrostructure of the Primary history
have a powerful explanatory power when applied to the
38
But compare Friedman (Friedman R. , 1987) (Friedman R. , 1998)
39
Postel understand that the meaning of likbosh as conquers as not
been given the attention it deserves (Postel, 2011)

61
literary semantic fields of the relationships between the
brothers, Cain and Abel, Jacob and Esau, Israel and Edom,
and their royal seed David-Solomon-Rehoboam and
Hadad-Genubat. These three themes are taken up directly
in the conflict between Jacob and Esau with their struggle
over the blessing of Isaac and the legal right to lands which
it seems spring from the blessing. This springing from the
selling of Esau's birthright for a bowl of "the red this red"
(haadom haadom ha zeh) (Gen 25:30). The literary naming
of Esau (hairy) and Jacob (heal-supplant) seem to be in
relation to one another from birth and the themes taken up
between David-Solomon-Rehoboam and Hadad-Genubat
move along the track of these macrostructural themes as
examples of microstructural applications. Each element of
the structure effects the other (Postel, 2011). In the case of
the descendants of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Israel and
David, and Solomon commands are given. In the case of
Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Israel (the people) and
David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Jeroboam, Yahweh appears or
speaks to them through a prophet and gives or confirms a
covenant or an application of a covenant. To subsidiary
characters in the web of relationships of blessing-berakah ,
seed-zeroa and land-eretz, words are spoken regarding the
kind of blessing they will have in regard to the primary

62
blessing of fruitfulness and multiplication, filling the land
and conquering it. Thus Jacob havinf received the main
blessing from Isaac as master of his brethren, and Canaan's
land, Esau the brother receives the subsidiary blessing of
future freedom (Gen 27:39-40) and another land (Gen
36:6). The question as to which extent and which kind of
land is addressed in the case of each character granted the
blessing: of seed and land, as is the question in which way
they will fill it and subdue or conquer it. Thus the structure
proceeds in binary steps with words spoken regarding
blessing/curse, seed/barrenness and land ruled/wandering
landless. The earlier the word the more universal its
application in the structure and the words apply to the
character who received it and to his seed. Within this
binary structure there are a number of words spoken which
apply to David-Solomon-Rehoboam and Hadad-Genubat
which were given to their ancestors and which the author
draws our attention to through various literary devices.
Thus Solomon comes from Rebekah the Aramean of Haran
who is given promises regarding Esau and Jacob to become
in the Primary history Edom and Israel. She is told:

]‫ ַו ֹּ֙יאֶמ ר ְיהָ֜ו ה ָ֗ל ּה ְׁש ֵ֤ני )ֹגִיים‬WTT Genesis 25:23

‫(גֹוִי֙ם [ ְּבִבְטֵ֔נ ְך‬
‫ּוְׁש ֵ֣ני ְלֻאִּ֔מ ים ִמ ֵּמַ֖ע ִיְך ִיָּפֵ֑ר דּו ּוְל ֹא֙ם ִמ ְלֹ֣א ם ֶֽיֱאָ֔מ ץ‬

63
 ‫ְו ַ֖ר ב ַיֲעֹ֥ב ד ָצִֽעיר׃‬

(Gen 25:23 WTT)

Genesis 25:23 And Yahweh said unto her, Two nations

are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be
separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be
stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the
younger. (Gen 25:23 )

In addition Isaac has some very relevant and important

words for the Edom:

‫ ַוַּ֛יַען ִיְצָ֥ח ק ָאִ֖ב יו ַו ֹּ֣יאֶמ ר ֵאָ֑ליו ִה ֵּ֞נ ה ִמ ְׁשַמ ֵּ֤ני ָהָ֙אֶר ֙ץ ִיְהֶ֣יה ֽמ ֹוָׁש ֶ֔ב ָך ּוִמ ַּ֥ט ל‬39
‫ַהָּׁש ַ֖מ ִים ֵמ ָֽעל׃‬
‫ ְוַעל־ַחְר ְּבָ֣ך ִֽתְחֶ֔י ה ְוֶאת־ָאִ֖ח יָך ַּת ֲעֹ֑ב ד ְוָהָי֙ה ַּכֲאֶׁ֣ש ר ָּת ִ֔ר יד ּוָפַר ְק ָּ֥ת ֻעּ֖ל ֹו ֵמַ֥על‬40
‫ַצָּואֶֽר ָך׃‬

(Gen 27:39-40 WTT)

KJV
Genesis 27:39 And Isaac his father answered and said
unto him, Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the
earth, and of the dew of heaven from above; (Gen 27:39
KJV)

KJV
Genesis 27:40 And by thy sword shalt thou live, and
shalt serve thy brother; and it shall come to pass when thou

64
shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt break his yoke
from off thy neck.
(Gen 27:40 KJV)

The fact that these realms are given to these groups with
rights is confirmed both in the Pentateuch and in the
literature of the Prophets, the two remain brothers with
responsibilities as brothers (Num 20:14, Deu 2:4, 23:8.
Amos 1:11, Obad 1:10)40

4.1 Edom's Land Given to them by Yahweh

For Edom at least two texts affirm their own land is given
to them by Yahweh and is different to Israel's. In Numbers
20:14-29 Moses sends messenger to request access to the
Kings highway through the land of Edom, Edom refused.
In Deuteronomy 2 when Moses reviews the episode and
relates the word Yahweh spoke to him regarding the sons
of Esau:

‫) ַאל־ִּת ְת ָּג֣ר ּו ָ֔ב ם ִּ֠כ י ֹֽלא־ֶא ֵּ֤ת ן ָלֶכ֙ם ֵֽמַאְר ָ֔צ ם‬Deuteronomy 2:5 WTT(
‫ ִּֽכי־ְיֻר ָּׁ֣ש ה ְלֵעָׂ֔ש ו ָנַ֖ת ִּת י ֶאת־ַ֥הר ֵׂש ִֽעיר׃‬41‫ַ֖ע ד ִמְד ַ֣ר ְך ַּכף־ָ֑ר ֶגל‬
Thus Yahweh gave Mount Seir to Edom as an inheritance
as he gave Canaan to Israel. In this respect the Edomites

40
But compare Jeremiah 49;7-22 and Ezekiel 25:12-15
41
With the focus on the sole of the foot perhaps it is no unconnected
that Psalm 60 and 108 when referring to Edom speak of lifting the
shoe over Edom. This is clearly a metaphor of some sort.

65
could conceivably sing about their land as Israel could sing
about theirs (Ps 95, 1 Chr 16). Hadad the Edomite was in
Edom, as Israel were in Canaan before the famine, and that
should have been his rightful place to be but Edom is a
large area and 1 Kings does not tell us which part of Edom
Hadad was in42. This could be the author indicating to us
that as we noted above Yahweh said to Moses not even a
sole of the foot of the land of Edom would be given to
Israel. Rashi notes that Abraham was promised the land of
ten nations, seven were given to Israel and the rest to
Edom, Moab and Ammon (Cohen, 1968). This is a
recognition that in some sense the Edomites were
participating in the blessing of Abraham. Thus like Israel
before him Hadad has to leave his promised land not for a
famine but because of a war. He departs and like the
Israelites before him settles in Egypt though we do not
know where. In his case however he does not become a
slave nor does a Pharaoh arise who does not know him,
rather at some point for a reason inexplicable to Pharaoh he
asks to be sent back to his land. In Israel's case the
persecution got hard and Yahweh raised up Moses. In
Hadad's case the reason for his determination to return is
concealed. He does not tell Pharaoh why he wants to leave
42
Although if he is linked to the Hadar of Genesis 36 he is
linked to Pogor (Peor-Pau) in Moab which is north of Edom.
66
or at least the author does not share the reason with us the
readers. Here though we are getting ahead of ourselves, we
turn to the relationship between Edom and Israel before the
war mentioned in the story of Hadad.

4.2 Saul the Benjamite and Doeg the Edomite

In light of the relationships outlined between Israel,
Edom and Egypt above we notice that later on in the
Primary history we find an Edomite and the seed of Edom
become servants (‫ )עבדים‬of the seed of Israel (2 Sam 8:14)
for example we are introduced to Doeg the Edomite as a
servant of Saul the Benjamite the first king of all Israel, but
no explanation is given as to how this came about (1 Sam
21:7). In view of the literary fact that Yahweh gave Mount
Seir to Edom it is interesting that the first place we find
Doeg called an Edomite when he is detained before
Yahweh ‫( ֶנְעָצ֙ר ִלְפֵ֣ני ְיהָ֔ו ה‬1Sa 21:8 WTT). Radmacher
indicates this means he was under a vow to Yahweh
(Radmacher, 1982)43, others scholars suggest he was in the
process of converting but this makes little sense
considering he was over all of Saul's servants. Feuer gives a
Rabbinic traditions perspective and understands quite the
opposite of him being in the process of conversion he is the
43
Some scholars see him as being converted but in the context of
eleventh century BCE communities that would raise the question:
What was he converted from and what too?

67
head of the Sanhedrin and Saul's closest adviser and on a
spiritual retreat (Feuer, 1985, p. 665) We also notice that in
the book of Judges, Edom do not appear among the
oppressors of Israel44, on the contrary Edom is mentioned
twice in the song of Deborah. There the focus is on
Yahweh proceeding out from Edom.

‫ ְיהָ֗ו ה ְּבֵצאְת ָ֤ך ִמֵּׂשִעי֙ר ְּבַצְעְּד ָ֙ך ִמְּׂש ֵ֣ד ה ֱא֔ד ֹום ֶ֣א ֶר ץ ָר ָ֔ע ָׁש ה ַּגם־ָׁשַ֖מ ִים ָנָ֑ט פּו‬4
‫ַּגם־ָעִ֖ב ים ָ֥נְטפּו ָֽמִים׃‬
(Jdg 5:4 WTT)

This refrain is repeated in Deuteronomy 33:2 and Psalm

68:7, Hosea 3:3ff45. Thus there is much in the tradition
which points to the land of Edom as the place from which
Yahuah proceeds. In addition to this we have the very
special reconciliation of Esau and Jacob where Esau
appears to have lost his grudge and the desire to kill his
brother (Gen 27:41). The memory of the fall out was still
totally fresh with Jacob, he was fearful although it was
decades later (Gen 32:7). The messengers he sent ahead of
him declaring him the servant of Esau (Gen 32:4) returned

44
As the primary history treats Amalek as an entity independent of
Edom although proceeding from Edom if we read Amalek we do not
assume Edom, the decree to be at war with Amalek from generation
to generation at the time of Judges and Kings
45
It also appears to be the possible focus of an Egyptian inscription
from Abu simbel where the name Yehuah is given in hieroglyphics and
connected to the shasu (Gertoux, 1999).

68
with the message Esau is coming with 400 men46. He was
afraid and spent night in a struggle with an angel and
prevailed. He received a new name and understood that it
was as if he had seen the face of God. In view of these
positive images when we find Doeg the Edomite as the
chief shepherd of Saul it would raise reasonable questions
as to what relationship Saul had with the king of Edom. At
the least we can say Saul was a master to the mighty man
Doeg the Edomite and Doeg had a very high position in the
administration of Saul, he was over Saul's servants ‫ַא ִּ֥ביר‬
‫( ָה ֹרִ֖ע ים‬1Sa 21:8 WTT). This of course also begs the
question: "Why does the author place an Edomite in such a
privileged position in Saul's government?", and secondly:
"Why is Doeg not serving his own king "Saul"?" How
serious this question is can be seen from Rabbinic
commentaries on the issue. For example Midrash Shocher
give six explanations as to why he was called an Edomite
and none of them was because he was from the offspring of
Edom (Feuer, 1985, p. 667)47. Radak suggests he lived in
46

47
1 he was envious of David who was ‫ אדומי‬2 ,‫ אדמוני‬is connected to
blood ‫דם‬, and Doeg perverted the truth in order to shed blood. 3 He is
accused of calling for the shedding of David's blood (1 Sam 20:31)
because he was the head of the Sanhedrin and advised Saul David
deserved to die. 4. He forbade Saul from shedding the blood of Agag
the Amalekite king 5. His superior scholarship enabled him to ‫מאדים‬

69
Edom (Feuer, 1985). One thing is clear he was aligned with
the cause of Saul and through his adding the idea that
Ahimelech had inquired to Yahweh for David and then
gave him a sword he gave the impression that David had
enquired as to how best he could kill Saul. According to
some scholars such a prerogative of inquiry rested only
with the king.

4.3 Saul the Benjamite and Saul of Rehovoth

A Hadad (R) is the last king of Edom in the kings of
Genesis 36:39 and 1 Chronicles 1. He succeeds Baal Hanan
who succeeds Saul of Rehovoth.

‫ ַוָּ֖יָמת ַׂש ְמ ָ֑לה ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ָׁש ֖א ּול ֵמ ְר ֹח֥ב ֹות ַהָּנָֽהר׃‬WTT Genesis 36:37
‫ ַוָּיָמ ֘ת ַּ֣בַעל ָחָ֣נן‬39 ‫ ַוָּ֖יָמת ָׁש ֑א ּול ַוִּיְמ ֹ֣ל ְך ַּת ְחָּ֔ת יו ַּ֥בַעל ָחָ֖נן ֶּבן־ַעְכּֽבֹור׃‬38
‫ֶּבן־ַעְכּבֹו֒ר ַוִּיְמ ֹ֤ל ְך ַּת ְחָּת י֙ו ֲהַ֔ד ר ְוֵׁ֥ש ם ִע י֖ר ֹו ָּ֑פ עּו ְוֵׁ֙שם ִאְׁש ּ֤ת ֹו ְמ ֵֽהיַטְבֵא֙ל‬
‫ַּבת־ַמְטֵ֔ר ד ַּ֖ב ת ֵ֥מי ָזָֽהב׃‬
(Gen 36:37 WTT)

The author here tells of the death of Samlah, Saul and

Baal Hanan but not of the death of Hadad. This has led
Fausett to speculate that Hadad was a contemporary with
the author (Fausett, 1881-1910), whilst some date the
source to the tenth century (Pfeifer, 1930). The next

redden with shame of those who discussed law with him. 6 He sullied
the achievements of David like Edom who disparaged Israel (Feuer,
1985, p. 667). Radak suggests he lived in Edom.

70
mention of a Hadad in the Primary history is Hadad the
Edomite who is described as of the royal family of Edom.
This author of 1 Kings is surely alluding to the earlier
reference, just as he refers to the war of David (1 Kgs 11).
It seems reasonable to assume that the reader is expected to
remember the royal house of Edom mentioned earlier in the
Primary history (or independently in a source) and is to turn
his attention there (Montgomery & Gehman, 1951). We
observe that these two are related by name not just family.
When we turn to Genesis we find more details about a
Hadad, his city and his mother and grandmother. Whereas
with the other kings he gives the details of their place of
rule or origin and their death (except Jobab whose father's
name is given) he does more for the two Hadads in his list.
Some scholars hold that Genesis 36:31-39 to which the
reader's attention is turned is a special source originating in
Edom or thereabouts (Pfeifer, 1930) (Bartlett J. , 1992).
The first king Hadad, we would say King Hadad I was
famed because he defeated Midian in the field of Moab48.
King Hadad II was from Pau ‫פעו‬. The LXX translates this
Phogor Φογώρ and in 1 Chronicles it appears as ‫פעי‬.
Eusebius also calls it Phogor (Bartlett J. , 1992, p. 49). This
48
Bartlett observes that three of the kings on the list have Moabite
connection, Bela of Beor being the first. Hoeh in his doctoral thesis
suggests Bela is Belus founder of the dynasty of Sparta in Greek
mythology (Davidy, 2015, p. 33) (Hoeh, 1967)

71
name Phogor is also the Greek translation of ‫ פעור‬which is
in Moab (Num 23:28, 25:18, 31:16, Josh 22:17). Whilst
Bartlett says "It is tempting to think of Pau as deriving from
the well-known Peor by error; it is otherwise unknown"
(Bartlett J. , 1992), this is clearly the position the translators
of the LXX took. They use the term Φογώρ in place of the
Chronicles rendering Pai and the Genesis rendering Pau
and the version in Numbers, Deuteronomy and Joshua
Peor. It would appear the LXX Vorlage had Peor. This
being the case we find that the location is "A mountain in
the land of Moab, the last of the three heights to which
Balaam was guided by Balak in order that he might curse
Israel (Num_23:28)" (ISBE). This is consistent with the
picture so far, Peor of Moab is here mentioned after
mentioning a king of the same name who had won a victory
over Midian in Moab. Now if we continue to Hadad the
Edomite, the next Hadad in the Primary history we find
more literary and geographical connections to the kings in
Genesis 36:31-39. Hadad the Edomite is in Edom but it
does not say where. He is however like Hadad the king
from the royal family but we know that each royal family
was different and it does not appear from Genesis that sons
succeeded fathers on the throne, they were not dynasties.
The eight kings listed do not appear to be related and are

72
connected to different cities (Moon, 1971) (Bartlett J. ,
1992). Our Hadad then in being related to the last king of
Edom was also related to Phogor (Peor) although according
to the author of kings he was in Edom during the war with
David and Joab. We need to have some idea of the dates of
these kings in Genesis in order to be sure a connection is
possible.
4.4 Egypt and the Kingdom of Edom
Ramses III describes his attack on Seir Edom: "I destroyed
the people of Seir among the Bedouin tribes. I razed their
tents their people their property, and their cattle as well
without number, pinioned and carried away into captivity,
as a tribute to Egypt. I gave them to the Ennead of the
gods" (Moon, 1971, p. 133) (Records, 1906). Moon reasons
that because of such attacks the Edomites decided to set up
a kingdom and he dates it to around 1140 BCE or just after
the conventionally accepted date of death of Ramses III
(Moon, 1971, p. 137)49. He concludes that Saul of
Rehoboth is a contemporary of Saul the first king of Israel.
49
But compare Bartlett (Bartlett J. , 1992). Bartlett understands that
the biblical narrative pictures of Edom are unreliable and based on the
time of the Israelite and Judahite monarchies. He illustrates by reading
Gen 27:39-40 to mean Edom would live "away from the fatness of the
earth" (Bartlett J. , 1992, p. 85). Other scholars read this as 'from the
fatness of the earth" as translated by KJV and many other translations
eg: Brenton LXX, ASV, JPS. Thus
‫משׁמני הארץ יהיה מושׁבך ומטל השׁמים מעל‬

73
He interprets "before there was king in Israel" (Gen 36:31)
to refer to David not Saul and refers to the first king to rule
actually over Edom (Moon, 1971, p. 139). He considers
Saul Rehoboth the last king of the early kingdom. "It
appears that at the beginning of his reign, Edom became
involved in direct confrontation with Israel" (Moon, 1971,
p. 145). However by this Edom he actually means the
Amalekites at that point (Moon, 1971, p. 146). Then during
the end of Saul of Rehovoth's reign Edom proper was
invaded by Joab. This is the battle in the valley of Salt (2
Sam 8). Thus accepting the connection between King
Hadad and Hadad the Edomite we can look more closely at
the relationship between Edom and Israel's rulers at this
time (Montgomery & Gehman, 1951).

Edom last Early Israel Other names

kings Early
kings
WTT
‫שׁאול מרחבות הנהר‬ ‫שׁאול בן‬ 1 Samuel
‫קיש‬ 9:1
*‫ַֽוְיִהי־ִ֣א יׁש )ִמ ִּבן־‬
]‫ָיִמ ין‬
‫(ִמ ִּבְנָיִ֗מ ין[ ּ֠ו ְׁש מֹו‬

Is actually a blessing but Bartlett has read it as a curse and claims it

reflects the later circumstances.

74
 ‫ִ֣ק יׁש ֶּבן־ֲאִב יֵ֞א ל‬
‫ֶּבן־ְצ ֧ר ֹור‬
‫ֶּבן־ְּבכֹוַ֛ר ת‬
‫ֶּבן־ֲאִ֖פ יַח ֶּבן־ִ֣א יׁש‬
‫ְיִמ יִ֑ני ִּגּ֖ב ֹור ָֽחִיל׃‬
(1Sa 9:1
WTT)
‫דוד בן ישי בעל חנן בן־עכבור‬ 2Sa 21:19
‫אלחנן בן־יערי‬
‫ארגים בית‬
‫הלחמי‬

‫ֲהַ֔ד ר ְוֵׁ֥ש ם ִע י֖ר ֹו ָּ֑פ עּו‬ ‫שלמה בן‬ ‫ידידיה‬

‫דוד ְוֵׁ֙שם ִאְׁש ּ֤ת ֹו ְמ ֵֽהיַטְבֵא ֙ל‬
‫ַּבת־ַמ ְטֵ֔ר ד ַּ֖ב ת ֵ֥מי‬
‫ָזָֽהב׃‬

It is clear when accepting that it was a later generation who

finalized the writing of the Primeval and Primary histories
in order to find the full literary allusions one needs to look

75
both backwards to see what foreshadowed the actions and
raising up of Hadad and forward to see how the authors and
editors see the result of the coming of the possible Edomite
Hero Hadad. For example Solomon is told that Yahweh
will carry out his decree in the time of his son not in his
time (1 Kings 11:12) but immediately afterwards he starts
the history of Hadad with a flashback of decades covering
nations (1 King 11:15). Josiah is foreshadowed in the
actions of the anonymous man of God who went from
Judah to prophesy against the altar of Bethel with almost
three centuries separating them(1 Kings 13:2). Thus we
will find clues of Hadad in the future and the past of the
narratives and if we accept that the last event of the
Deuteronomic history is the exaltation of Jehoiachin from
his prison garments in about 560 BC about the same time
Cyrus took the throne of Elam then included in the writers
understanding of the actions of Edom are the words of the
prophets "written on the subway [temple] walls" of oral
traditions and developing texts (Mowinckel S. , 2002
[1946]) (Noth, 1967 [1943]). We now turn to the
alternative name of David.

4.5 David son of Yishai and Baal Hanan son of Achbor

Honeyman in his study "The Evidence of Regnal Names
among the Hebrew" suggests that Hadad is the king in

76
Edom who succeeded David. For Honeyman David is the
throne name of the character David. His personal name was
Elhanan ben Yishai. His argument is based on textual
difficulties and evidence in 1 Samuel 16 regarding David's
name, 1 Samuel 17 regarding David slaying Goliath and 2
Samuel 21. 1. First he notes that Solomon's personal name
Yedidiyah is never mentioned afterwards, just his throne
name Shlomoh. 2 From 1 Samuel 16 he notes that David's
name is not mentioned in verses 11-13. It only appears after
he is anointed and receives the Spirit. 3. He goes next to the
case of the slaying of Goliath. He notes there is a double
account of the issue. In 1 Samuel 17: 49 David kills
Goliath. However in 2 Samuel 21:19 another character is
said to have killed Goliath.

‫ ַוְּת ִהי־֧ע ֹוד ַהִּמ ְלָחָ֛מה ְּב֖ג ֹוב ִעם־ְּפִלְׁשִּ֑ת ים ַו ַּ֡י ְך‬WTT 2 Samuel 21:19
‫ֶא ְלָח ָנ֩ן ֶּבן־ַיְעֵ֙רי ֹאְר ִ֜ג ים ֵּ֣ב ית ַהַּלְחִ֗מ י ֵ֚א ת ָּגְלָ֣ית ַה ִּגִּ֔ת י ְוֵ֣ע ץ ֲחִני֔ת ֹו ִּכְמ ֖נ ֹור‬
‫ֹאְר ִֽגים׃ ס‬
(2Sa 21:19 WTT)

He notes that the word ‫ ֹאְר ִ֜ג ים‬has been introduced into the
name by dittography.

The reading ‫ יערי‬is understood to be a corruption which is

acknowledged in the MT by a smaller lettering of the letter
resh. The ‫ ער‬were really ‫ש‬. This corruption occurred before

77
the Chronicler and the LXX and "in the script of SS VI-IV
‫ ש‬mighty easily be mistaken for a crowded ‫ ער‬with the left
portion of the resh effaced" (Honeyman, 1948, p. 24). 4.
Thus the original reading was ‫ ישי‬and the killer of Goliath
was El Hanan the son of Jesse. 5. He concludes "Elhanan
can be none other than he who reigned as David; the name
was properly Baalhanan and by this name he was known to
the Edomite archivists" (Honeyman, 1948, p. 24) He also
points to another example where a Baal name was changed
to an El name by comparing ‫( ֶא ְל ָיָ֖ד ע‬2Sa 5:16 WTT) and
‫( ְבֶעְל ָיָ֖ד ע‬1Ch 14:7 WTT). There are a number of names of
the form Elhanan including those in the table Baal Names:

Baal Names
‫ בעלידע‬a son of David ‫( אלידע‬2 Sam ‫יהוידע‬
(1 Chr 14:6) 5:16)
‫ הניבעל‬grace of Baal
‫ מלקרת בעל צר‬lord of The greeks called
Tyre him Hercules,
Hercules Tyrius
(Gesenius, 1979
[1857])
‫ בעל חנן‬Lord of
benignity

78
 6. He finally points in a foot note to Hadad "Gen 36:38=1
Chron 1:49. Baal Hanan-David is preceded on the throne
by Saul and followed by Hadad who appears as an
adversary of Solomon in 1 Kings 11:14ff50.

Honeyman refers to the Edomite archivists as the source of

the use of the name Baal hanan. Moon in looking at the
same material understands "Internal evidence suggests a
non-Israelite source" (Moon, 1971, p. 29). Garsiel whilst
agreeing with the analysis of the Honeyman regarding
David as Elhanan assigns the source to an anti-monarchy
writer (Garsiel M. , 2009). He also adds an argument of his
own pointing out 2 Samuel 21: 22:

‫ ֶא ת־ַאְר ַּ֥בַעת ֵ֛אֶּלה ֻיְּל֥ד ּו ְלָהָר ָ֖פ ה ְּבַ֑גת ַו ִּיְּפ֥ל ּו‬WTT 2 Samuel 21:22
‫ְבַיד־ָּד ִ֖וד ּוְבַ֥יד ֲעָבָֽדיו׃ פ‬
50
See the stury of Krasovec (Krasovec, 2010)

79
 (2Sa 21:22 WTT)

He notices that the text says the four giants were killed by
David and his servants. However in the stories of the
killings David is not mentioned but the character who
killed Goliath is Elhanan son of the Bethlehemite as we
saw above. Secondly he notes that only one character in
scriptures is called the Bethlehemite and that is Yishai
(Garsiel M. , 2009)51.

The position of Honeyman has potential but he does not

address the fact that the character Baal-hanan is son of
Achbor whilst the name by which David's father is known
is Jesse. On the surface this difficulty many seem great but
in reality so many biblical characters are known by more
than one name it is quite reasonable to suppose that
archivists who because they are against David and the
monarchy call him Baal hanan, his birth name instead of
David the beloved king might call his father by another
name or even as in many cases in biblical literature call him
by an insulting name. Thus for example Jeremiah names
Pashur and Shemaiah the Nehelemi was probably never
known by that name in Judah (Hylton A. , 2015). So the

51
Some of the reconstruction of Garsiel's argument came from a class
with him in 2016.

80
fact that the Edomite archivists call David's father by
another name than Yishai is not an insurmountable
objection. This still begs the literary question Why ben
‫ עכבור‬achbor? Bartlett has made an important observation
regarding Baal hanan ben Achbor, he is the only character
in the list of eight kings who is not connected to a particular
place. This means he has been treated differently to the
other characters if he really is David this might not be
surprising. The name ‫ עכבור‬means mouse or rat, the word
for mouse being ‫עכבר‬. One of the figurative meanings given
to the word in biblical literature is a spy (Robertson, 2001).
Even as only two characters in the Primary history bear the
name Baal-Hanan so only a few carry the name Achbor.
First the father of Baal-hanan (El hanan), secondly the
father of El natan a character who tracked down Urijah a
prophet who sought to take refuge in Egypt in the time of
Jehoiakim having prophesied against Zion like Micah (Jer
26:22, Micah 1:1, Psalm 79:1) the son of Micaiah who was
a courtier under King Josiah (2 Kgs 22:12). Achbor is also
called Abdon the son of Micah (2 Chr. 34:20). It may come
from the root ‫ עכ''ב‬an unused root which may mean agility
and alacrity (Gesenius, 1979 [1857]). BDB suggests it may
share the name root as ‫ עכביש‬in the secondary sense of
attacking. The noun ‫ עכבר‬also has a very limited range of

81
use. If this name is to allude to something it will probably
be in these texts. The fact of David's association to the
Philistines and the plague of rats or mice associated with
their capturing the ark could perhaps be used as a reason to
use the epithet to refer to his close association with them.

Whilst the source holds little weight for us here because

we are dealing with the literary work of our author the fact
is that our author had intelligence regarding the activities of
the Edomite Hadad and if he is alluding to the last king of
Edom mentioned in the early period of the Monarchy of
Israel he is referring to this source as he refers to 2 Samuel
8 and Joab's activities also in the tale of Hadad52. Pfeifer
dates the source to the tenth century that is to the period of
Solomon and Hadad. This perhaps is gives some context to
the comment of Fausett who understood that Hadad the
King in Genesis 36 was still alive at the time that list was
written because the author writes that all the kings had died
except for Hadad for his death was not mentioned in
Genesis but was mentioned in 1 Chronicles (Fausett, 1881-
52
For Pfeifer the Edomite material is reflected in the stories of
Creation, Cain's line and the giants, Noah's curse of Canaan, blessing of
Shem and Japhet, the tower of Babel, Abraham against the kings of
the east (Gen 14), deliverance of Lot, the origin of Moab and Ammon,
the annals of Edom down to David (36:9-39). He sees similarities and
influences in the literature of Job, Isaiah (, 43:2754:9), Ezekiel (28:1-19,
32:27). He dates this Edomite source to the tenth century (Pfeifer,
1930).

82
1910). If this reading of the material is correct we have a
hero because David's rule was succeeded by Hadad's rule
although this does not preclude him from having to move
north and make an alliance with Rezon and of setting up a
kingdom in an area of Aram. This would not necessarily
make him a fugitive hero for that he would need to
establish a cult

4. 6 Hadar the King of Edom and Hadad the Edomite of the

Royal Family
The author in Genesis also wants us to know about
Hadad's family. His wife is Maheitabel (God benefits)
daughter of Matred daughter of May Zahav.
We again have a variation in the LXX

BGT
Genesis 36:39 ἀπέθανεν δὲ Βαλαεννων υἱὸς Αχοβωρ
καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾽ αὐτοῦ Αραδ υἱὸς Βαραδ καὶ ὄνομα
τῇ πόλει αὐτοῦ Φογωρ ὄνομα δὲ τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ
Μαιτεβεηλ θυγάτηρ Ματραιθ υἱοῦ Μαιζοοβ
(Gen 36:39 BGT)

Here she is Μαιτεβεηλ daughter of Ματραιθ son of

Μαιζοοβ. Thus the wife remains the same but the parent of
the wife is the mother in the MT and a father in the LXX,
clearly pointing to a different Hebrew vorlage for the LXX.

83
The grandmother of Hadad's wife is May Zahav and the
grandfather is Maizoob. It is clear that either the LXX has a
different vorlage or they did not understand the name.
However Genesis tells us nothing about the offspring of
Hadad. For this we need to go to the author of 1 Kings. In
this case we find out that the character there married an
unnamed Egyptian princess and bore a child called
Genubat.

The Hebrew names then in the two tradition are:

‫ ְמ ֵֽהיַטְבֵא ֙ל‬Gen Wife Whom God benefits a

36:39, 1 Chr Chaldee form for ‫מיטיב‬
1:50, Neh 6:10 ‫( אל‬Gesenius, 1979
[1857])
h‫ַּבת־ַמ ְטֵ֔ר ד‬ Mother in Pushing forward
law (Gesenius, 1979 [1857]),
Driving forth from ‫מרד‬,
continue
uninterruptedly, cf
Kemuel ‫קמואל‬
(Robertson, 2001, p.
523)
‫ַּ֖ב ת ֵ֥מי ָזָֽהב׃‬ Grand- Water of gold,
mother in splendour of gold.

84
 law Arabic Mezab (a male
name) (Gesenius, 1979
[1857])
‫( ְּגֻנַ֣ב ת‬1Ki 11:20 Son Theft (Gesenius, 1979
WTT) [1857])

Although this issue is clearly important what is more

important is that the author of Genesis is clearly sharing
content which he considered relevant to his readers so that
the reader could understand which Hadad the author was
referring to. In the LXX the name of the King is Arad and
in the MT kings Hadar and in the MT Chronicles Hadad

It would the relations between the two nations were good.

One text appears to militate against this positive reading
that is 1 Samuel 14:47:

‫ ְוָׁש ֛א ּול ָלַ֥כד ַהְּמ לּוָ֖כ ה ַעל־ִיְׂשָר ֵ֑א ל ַו ִּיָּ֣לֶחם ָסִ֣ב יב׀‬WTT 1 Samuel 14:47
‫ְּֽבָכל־ֹאְיָ֡ב יו ְּבמֹוָ֣א ב׀ ּוִבְבֵני־ַעּ֙מֹון ּוֶבֱא֜ד ֹום ּוְבַמ ְלֵ֤כי צֹוָב֙ה ּוַבְּפִלְׁש ִּ֔ת ים ּוְבֹ֥כ ל‬
‫ֲאֶׁש ר־ִיְפֶ֖נה ַיְר ִֽׁשיַע׃‬
(1Sa 14:47 WTT)

85
In this text Saul fights against his enemies and Edom is one
of them. This would have been when Hadad was very
young, indeed probably when Saul of Rehobot (one who
makes room) was ruling over Edom (Gen 36). However the
LXXa reads Aram for Edom (Bartlett J. , 1992, p. 103). In
addition more details are given of the against the
Ammonites and the Philistines (1 Sam 11,13,14), no more
details are given of the war with Edom. Following the LXX
makes more sense of the important role of Doeg in Saul's
government. This would also mean that Saul and Edom
were aligned making necessary the conquest of Edom by
David (2 Sam 8, 1 Kgs 11:15). This fits with the pattern of
David gaining the government. First he was anointed as
king over Judah (2 Sam 2:4), then he fought with Ish
bosheth who was in all likelihood still aligned with Edom.
Even as the tribes in the North did not automatically come
over to David nor would Doeg the Edomite or the rest of
the Edomites. David had in his employ the priest who
informed him of the atrocity of Doeg the last remaining
priest of Nob. The most likely scenario would be that as
David's power increased Doeg the Edomite would have left
Saul's Kingdom and headed back to Edom but we are not
told of him any more except in Psalm 60

86
 Later still we see Edom free itself from the service to
Israel (2 Kgs 8:20) in accordance with the word of Isaac.

4.7 David and Hadad: Israel and Esau?

According to our tradition David stuck down (lenakot-
nakah) every male (col zakar) in Edom. After they were
struck down Joab buried many corpses (1 Kings 11).
However on the other side in the tale Hadad escapes to
Egypt and is given produces seed and is given land away
from his brother Solomon (1 King 11:17). In light the
above positive relations the author in the story of Hadad the
Edomite begs the question: Why Did David strike all the
males in Edom? Is such an activity foreshadowed
anywhere or reflected on anywhere?53 David did not kill all
the males of Moab, Ammon or Aram but this activity is
attested in the case of Edom. In seeking an answer for this
question we perhaps need to look at the macro structural
framework. In one sense we have two intersecting literary
53
This literary device of word foreseeing fulfilment
through land transfers in regard to land (Solomon inherited
land from beyond Damascus (Aram land) (2 Sam 8:6) to
Ezion Geber (Edom land) (1 Kgs 9:26, 2 Chr 8:17), and
rule transfer in regard to surviving seed, Solomon ruled in
Edom, and from Benjamin to beyond Damascus (Aram
Zobah) (1 Kgs 8:65) (Weinfeld M. , 1993), this produced
wealth for the rulers, but also the multiplication of the
blessed seed or the division and reduction of "cursed" seed.

87
realms. The first is the web of words outlining what is
going to happen sometimes predicated on obedience or
disobedience to the words of Yahweh or Elohim, for
berakha (Gen 1:28) or aror or qalal but at the same time
following the track outlined by the blessings of the fathers
(Gen 49), or curses of the fathers (Gen 9:20-25) and oracles
to the mothers (Gen 25:23), dreams to individuals (Gen
37:1-5). The second is a web of actions and circumstances
also described with a literary web of words giving
testimonies as to what happened to fulfil the realm of
prognostications. These testimonies are written from the
perspectives of the particular writer54.

Thus for Solomon the prophetic word references two

other events in the life of Solomon where Yahweh
appeared to him and gave him words of encouragement and
warning, the latest word is based on the previous
appearances and words and Solomon's response to them (1
Kgs 11:9). In addition the tale of Hadad the Edomite is
given to explain how he became an adversary to Solomon.
Where did Hadad the Edomite come from?

The singular masculine noun satan (Strongs

7854), means opponent or adversary. The lexical noun
satan comes from the verb ‫ שתן‬to attack or oppose which is
54
I received the web imagery from a lecture by Seth Postell.

88
used figuratively meaning to accuse. This word may allude
back to Isaac's naming of a well sitna because the locals
quarreled with him over the land (Gen 26:21-22). Finally
when Isaac

It would appear Hadad the Edomite would quarrel with his

brother Solomon over his land and over his Empire. In
addition we may see that Isaac went through three stages
until he was given a well which other did not quarrel over.

‫ ַו ָּיִ֜ר יבּו ֹרֵ֣ע י ְגָ֗ר ר ִעם־ֹרֵ֥עי ִיְצָ֛ח ק ֵל אֹ֖מ ר ָ֣לנּו ַהָּ֑מ ִים‬WTT Genesis 26:20
‫ ַֽוַּיְחְּפ רּ֙ו ְּבֵ֣א ר ַאֶ֔ח ֶר ת ַו ָּיִ֖ר יבּו‬21 ‫ַוִּיְקָ֤ר א ֵֽׁשם־ַהְּבֵא֙ר ֵ֔ע ֶׂש ק ִּ֥כי ִֽהְת ַעְּׂש ֖ק ּו ִעּֽמֹו׃‬
‫ ַוַּיְעֵּ֣ת ק ִמָּׁ֗ש ם ַוַּיְח ֹּפ֙ר ְּבֵ֣א ר ַאֶ֔ח ֶר ת ְוֹ֥ל א ָר ֖ב ּו‬22 ‫ַּגם־ָעֶ֑ליָה ַוִּיְקָ֥ר א ְׁש ָ֖מ ּה ִׂש ְטָֽנה׃‬
‫ָעֶ֑ליָה ַוִּיְקָ֤ר א ְׁש ָמ ּ֙ה ְר ֹח֔ב ֹות ַו ֹּ֗י אֶמ ר ִּֽכי־ַעָּ֞ת ה ִהְר ִ֧ח יב ְיהָ֛וה ָ֖לנּו ּוָפִ֥ר ינּו ָבָֽאֶר ץ׃‬
(Gen 26:20 WTT)

The word ‫ ֵ֔ע ֶׂש ק‬only occurs in Genesis. The word ‫ִׂש ְטָֽנה‬
however is used one place elsewhere in Biblical literature
in Ezra.

‫ ּוְבַמ ְלכּו֙ת ֲאַחְׁשֵו֔ר ֹוׁש ִּבְת ִחַּ֖לת ַמ ְלכּו֑ת ֹו ָּכְת ֣ב ּו ִׂש ְטָ֔נ ה‬WTT Ezra 4:6
‫ַעל־ֹיְׁש ֵ֥בי ְיהּוָ֖ד ה ִוירּוָׁש ִָֽלם׃ ס‬
(Ezr 4:6 WTT)

In the case of Ezra the sitnah is a written accusation by the

people of the land against the people newly return from the
exile in Judah and Jerusalem. Thus here is the root ‫ שט''ן‬in

89
its meaning of accusation and especially in relation to land.
Thus perhaps our author is hinting that Hadad is accusing
Israel of illegitimately holding Edom's land as the people of
the land in the time of Isaac charged that the water Isaac
dug up was not his but theirs that is of trying to take their
water. Hadad made the accusation first to Pharaoh. The
rights of Solomon would perhaps go back to the promise
that the older (Esau-Hadad) would serve the younger
(Jacob-Solomon).

‫ ַו ֹּ֙יאֶמ ר ְיהָ֜ו ה ָ֗ל ּה ְׁש ֵ֤ני )ֹגִיים] (גֹוִי֙ם [ ְּבִבְטֵ֔נ ְך ּוְׁש ֵ֣ני‬WTT Genesis 25:23
‫ְלֻאִּ֔מ ים ִמ ֵּמַ֖ע ִיְך ִיָּפֵ֑ר דּו ּוְל ֹא֙ם ִמ ְלֹ֣א ם ֶֽיֱאָ֔מ ץ ְוַ֖ר ב ַיֲעֹ֥ב ד ָצִֽעיר׃‬
(Gen 25:23 WTT)

Some scholars argue that because the direct object marker

is missing in ‫ְו ַ֖ר ב ַיֲעֹ֥ב ד ָצִֽעיר‬. The text could also be possibly
translated "the older will be served by the younger".
Targum Jonathan expands a little on this reading:

"God said to her: two peoples are in your womb, and two
kingdoms shall separate out from your womb. Each
kingdom shall struggle against the other. The elder shall
serve the younger if the descendants of the younger keep
the Torah commandments" (Davidiy, 2015, p. 2).

Thus whilst Solomon was obeying Yahuah the accusations

of Hadad were unsuccessful but when Solomon turned

90
from Yahweh even as the right for his family to keep the
kingdom was proscribed so the voice of the thunderer
Hadad was heard more clearly. In the attack which Yahweh
was planning against Solomon's kingdom the disobedience
of Solomon played a fundamental part. Solomon's house
went from being the independent rulers of an empire from
the Euphrates to Egypt to be vassals to Egypt within five
years of the death of Solomon (1 Chr 12:1-8). The
instrumentation of this crash (adad in Arabic) were the two
nations Israel were commanded not to abhor, Egypt and
Edom (Deu 23:8)

Isaac rather than continue to quarrel gave up the well and

dug another. In this case there was no quarrel and he called
it Rehoboth the name alluding to the fact to that Yahweh
had made room for him. This word only occurs twice more
in biblical literature. One of those is these is Saul of
Rehovot the king who preceded Baal Hanan who we will
argue is David with his personal name. In this literature we
see rehovot means one who has made room (Gen

Also including the judgments given to disobedience of

Adam and Eve because of the nakhash which led to a word
of Yahweh Elohim. They were driven from their land of

91
Eden, and a war began between the seed of the women and
that of the serpent. The sins of David and Solomon led also
to prophetic words of Yahweh which effected their seed
and the land they were permitted to rule over. In the case of
the deception of Eve it led to word of Yahweh's curse of
the nakhash. The serpent moved from being the arum
mikol chayat to being the most arur mikol habehemah. In
addition the initial fall of Eve came from her seeing the tree
was good for food (tov lemaacal), pleasant for the eyes
(taavah55 hu meanaiyim) and pleasant to make one wise
(nechmad lehaskil). The key issue being the ability ladaat
tov verah56. The next stage in the process is that Adam and
Eve's eyes were opened and yedeu ki airumem57. Airumim
being from the same root as the arum of the snake.

The deliberate way the biblical literature has been put

together58 means even the names in a story are coordinated
with the narrative, with hundreds of literary plays one
words which can only be seen in the Hebrew text (Garsiel
M. , 1991). Since it is literature sometimes the drama itself
demands the author to make something obscure or to
55
The root of taavah, desire is used by the men of Ziph when Saul is
chasing David.
56
Hadad is described as with the term rah: ‫הרעה אשר הדד‬-‫ואת‬
57
The root airumim is the same as that for the arum of the snake.
58
But compare Haran (Haran, The Biblical Collection. Its
Consolidation to the End of the Second Temple Times and Changes of
Form to the End of the Middle Ages Vol I, 1996)

92
conceal aspects of the story with the reader or listener left
to find a solution to a riddle (hidut) or a dark saying
(Psalms 78;2, Proverb 1:2). The essential riddle of life is
recognized by the biblical writers and reflected in their
narratives and not more so than in the land of the East from
whence came Hadad the Edomite and Job (Job 33:14)
(Garsiel M. , 1990). Much of the literary text by its very
nature cannot be confirmed by external historical or
archaeological witnesses, it is at the end a work of
literature, part historical, part rhetorical, part figurative,
part mythical, part legal, part prophetical, part parable, and
part mystery. Although there are disjunctions and much
heterogeneity in the material essentially "the retrospective
act of canonization has created a unity among the disparate
texts that we as later readers can hardly ignore" (Alter R. ,
1992). Whether we call the material historical or literary it
is on all accounts a complex mixture of both.

We enter the story of Kings with King David

handing over the reign of power to his young son Solomon
the second child of the wife of Urijah the Hittite and
granddaughter of Ahitopel, Bat Sheva or Bat Shua59 and

59
Shua is connected to Adullam where David spent some time (Gen
38:1-2).

93
perhaps the tenth born of David (1 Chr. 2)60. David had
received the kingdom from Saul and Samuel and Saul from
Samuel although with much reticence (1 Sam 8). The
author depicts King Solomon's early reign as one of peace,
wisdom, glory and power (1 Kings 10:23) and relates back
to event in the books of Samuel and Judges (1 King 11:15).
During the first two chapters Solomon is anointed as
successor to King David. King David dies. Solomon
consolidates his position through the execution of three
opponents, Adoniyah son of Haggith his step brother and
next in line to throne after Absalom son of Maacah61 who
like Hadad's male relatives was killed by Joab son of
Zeruiah (David's nephew) and Amnon son of Ahinoam
(David's first born) who was killed by Absalom son of
Maacah (David's second born). Adoniyah had attempted to
usurp the throne which in normal circumstances would
have been his (1 Kings 2: 19-25, 1 Chr. 3), but he was out
maneuvered by Nathan the prophet and Bat Sheva

60
According to the both 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles, David had six sons
in Hebron Amnon of Ahinoam of Jezreel, Chileab (Daniel) of Abigail
of Carmel, Absalom of Maacah of Geshur, Adonijah of Haggith of (?),
Shephatiah of Abital, Ithream of Abital (2 Sam 3;2-4, 1 Chr 3:1-4)
61
Daughter of Talmai king of Geshur. Talmai was David's Father in
law as Pharaoh was Solomon's. Geshur was an Aramean kingdom east
of Maacah between Mount Hermon and Bashan. After Absalom killed
Amnon he sought refuge in Geshur (2 Sam 3:3, 13:37). Thus David's
second born son was an Aramean.

94
Solomon's mother (1 King 1). Joab62 had killed Abner son
of Ner and Amasa the son of Jether and ‫וישם דמי מלחמה‬
‫( בשלם‬1 Kings 2:5)63. Thus nephew of David his ‫שר הצבא‬
who appears in the tale of Hadad below died an enemy of
David and Solomon, and at the hand of Solomon (1 Kings
2) whose questionable origin Joab knew very well (1 Kings
11). In the tale of Adad He probably leaves Egypt
sometime after the death of Joab and before the marriage
with Pharaoh's daughter. Finally Shimei son of Gera from
the family of the house of Saul who considered that David
was a man of beliyal64 and a man of blood and was getting
his just deserts65 (2 Sam 3:16). In chapter three Solomon
marries Pharaoh's daughter (Egypt, a southern alliance66),
62
The son of David's sister, Zeruiah who upset David greatly and who
killed Abner leading David to hope for justice to be done to Joab. He
was the chief military commander David's army
63
Interesting that the author does not have David mention that Joab,
David's nephew, against David, his uncle's express command, killed
Absalom, his uncle, at the time the crown prince for Amnon was
already dead. And Solomon's elder half-brother.
64
This would have been a big insult to David who was angry with Joab
for shedding the blood of war in the time of peace covering his belt and
his shoes with it and who, according to the literature disliked the sons
of Beliyal intensively as can be seen in his Psalms and his oracle (1
Sam 23:6)
65
Shimei is from mishpakhat beit shaul to whom the kingdom had been
given initially. During the coup of Absalom, as David passed Bahurim
(low ground) on the road from Jerusalem to the Jordan River, Shimei
came out from the village cursing (meqalel) "tze tze eish hadamim
veeish habeliyal heshib aleika Yahweh kol damei beit shaul asher
malakta takhtav".
66
The literary background connections with Egypt are legion. First
Abraham took refuge there during a famine and return to Canaan rich

95
moabiyot (Eastern alliance)67, ammoniyot 68(Eastern
alliance), and adomiyot. This is a south eastern alliance and
it is clear in the Primary History that Solomon reigned over
the land David had conquered (kibush ‫ )כבוש‬down to the
border northern border of Midian at Ezion Geber, the
southern end of the land of Edom (1 Kgs 9:26, 2 Chr. 8:17).
Thus Midian is the first land in the south to lay outside the
region of David and Solomon's rule69. According to the
literary tradition both Saul and David had had encounters
with Edomites (1 Sam 21:7). The Edomites along with

in silver and gold (Gen 12:10). Then Abraham married Hagar the
Egyptian maid servant of Sarah (Gen 16:1). She is called ‫הגר המצרית‬
(Gen 21:9). Hagar produced Ishmael aroused the anger of Sarah and
she was sent by Abraham to the wilderness of Paran (Gen 21:5-8).
Whilst Hagar and Ishmael were living there she took a wife for Ishmael
from Egypt (Gen 21:21). We will see that Hadad will travel first to
Paran pick up some men and continue to Egypt. Finally in the life of
Jacob his first son by Rachel, Joseph is apparently sold to Ishmaelites
for 20 shekels and they sold him to Potiphar in Egypt (Gen 37:28, 36)
or he is sold to Potiphar Egypt by the Midianites (Gen 37:36). In
talking to the cup bearer he said he was "Kidnapped from the Hebrews"
(Gen 40: 15).
67
Hadad ben Bedad the fourth king of Edom struck (hamakeh) Midian
in the field of Moab (Gen 36:35). Assuming the author of Kings knew
this we see a close connection between Moab and Edom and Midian
with Edom at the head as a backdrop to the fact that Hadad will flee
from Edom south to Midian who may be under an Edomite ruler, but
we are not told this explicitly. Our tale will however bring the two
names, Hadad and Midian together again along with the verb root ‫נכ''ה‬
as used in the tale of Hadad. The morphology is different but the root is
the same. Hadad struck Midian (Gen 36:35) and Joab struck down
every male in Edom (1 Kings 11:15).
68
Hanun ben Nahash the Ammonite assembled an army against David.
69
And is the first place the author indicates Hadad spent time after
fleeing towards Egypt.

96
Moab (east), sons of Ammon (east), Edom (south east), the
kings of Zobah (north), and the Philistines (west) are
described as Saul's and the kingdom of Israel's enemies (1
Sam 14:47). Saul acted valiantly and delivered Israel from
those who plundered them (1 Sam 14:48). Doeg the
Edomite whom David knew very well was working with
Saul.70He overheard the conversation between Ahimelech
the priest and David. He then reported on David and
Ahimelech and finally when the servants of Saul were
unwilling to put to death the priest of Nob, Doeg the
Edomite was commanded. He slaughtered 85 of them. The
verb used to describe this is ‫( נכ''ה‬1 Sam 22:19) the same as
that used in the Hadad tale. Indeed Doeg the Edomite
struck men, women, children and infants and the cattle with
the sword (‫)לפי חרב‬. He is for some scholars acting as an
"archetypal villainous Edomite" (Bartlett J. , 1989). This is
reported to David by Abiathur a son of Ahimelech who
escaped (‫)ויברח אחרי דוד‬. The Biblical tradition assigns
Psalm 52 to this event but the Psalm does not seem to be
aware of the slaughter. Solomon makes a large offering to
Yahweh at Gibeon and Yahweh appeared to him. He was
offered anything he wanted. Solomon is described as ruling
70
When the plan of Saul to kill David was exposed he says to Jonathan
he is choosing David to his own shame and the shame of his mother's
nakedness. In a similar way Eve chose to eat from the tree of daat tov
ve rah. After doing this they discover they are naked and ashamed.

97
over all the kingdoms from the River from Tipsah a
passage through the Euphrates (1 Kings 4:24) to Gaza
(southern-most city of the Philistines) and over all the kings
west of the River, and he had peace all around on all sides
(1 Kings 4:24).

‫ ִּכי־֞ה ּוא ֹרֶ֣ד ה׀ ְּבָכל־ֵ֣ע ֶבר ַה ָּנָ֗ה ר ִמ ִּת ְפַס֙ח ְוַעד־ַעָּ֔ז ה‬WTT 1 Kings 5:4
‫ְּבָכל־ַמ ְלֵ֖כ י ֵ֣ע ֶבר ַה ָּנָ֑ה ר ְוָׁש ֗ל ֹום ָ֥הָיה ֛ל ֹו ִמ ָּכל־ֲעָבָ֖ר יו ִמָּסִֽביב׃‬

(1Ki 5:4 WTT)

Peace all around means with Tyre, Sidon, and the Aramean
kingdoms in the north, Ammon, Moab and Edom on the
East, Midian and Egypt on the south and south west.

In talking to Hiram King of Tyre (north-west) in his early

years the character Solomon says:

‫ְוַעָּ֕ת ה ֵהִ֙ניַח ְיהָ֧וה ֱאֹלַ֛הי ִ֖לי ִמָּסִ֑ב יב ֵ֣א ין ָׂש ָ֔ט ן ְוֵ֖א ין ֶּ֥פַגע ָֽר ע׃‬
(1Ki 5:18 WTT)

He notes that there is no adversary or ‫ שטן‬and no

occurrence of evil (‫)ֶּ֥פַגע ָֽר ע‬71. He is unaware of Hadad and
Rezion at this point in the narrative but of course our author
71
I believe this theme of satan regarding his place in the land goes
back to Isaac's naming a place Sitnah which comes from the same root
as satan.

98
is aware. By chapter 11 Solomon had turned from
Yahweh. He receives a new prophetic word indicating that
Yahweh would remove ten parts of the kingdom from his
son72. This is shown forth with the literary word "tear".
Yahweh says "tearing I will tear" ‫ קרוע אקרע‬the kingdom
from you and give it to your servant". This ties in with the
metaphor of the robe or mantel representing the kingdom.
Saul ripped Samuel's robe (‫ )מעיל‬and that became a simile
for the kingdom being ripped from him (1 Sam 15:27). In
addition when Jonathan's soul was knit with David and they
made a covenant, Jonathan took off his (‫ )מעיל‬and placed it
on David along with his weapons (1 Sam 18:4)73. In the
case of Solomon the word for robed is changed to ‫ שלמה‬that
is the same spelling as the name of Solomon. Yahweh
promised he would do it in the time of Solomon's son, the
son of an Ammonite. Then as though to empty Solomon's
words to Hiram of Tyre above the author writes "Yahweh
raised up a‫ שטן‬to Solomon". This is the story first and
foremost of Hadad.

Conclusion
We can conclude that with this reading of Hadad the Edomite
he may almost qualify as a Fugitive Hero. We can also

72
Von Rad notes about twelve cases where prophets are given and
which are then manifested in the book of Kings (Childs, 1979)
73
Compare Gen 41:42, and 1 Sam 17:38

99
understand this is but the beginning of the investigation. There
are still many areas regarding the names of the family
characters around him. He wife Mehetabel sister of Tahpenes or
the wife of Pharaoh. His son Genubat possibly Ben Hadad I, his
other name Tab-Rimmon and its possible links to Hadad-
Rimmon as a form of name, the Good Thunder. His father's
name possible Hezion king of Aram. There are still many things
to be investigated before any certainty can be had in regard to
Hadad the Edomite.

Appendixes
1 Worship of Adad in Israel
The combination of Adad and Ishtar has been investigated
by Weinfeld who argues that the worship of Molek in
Judah at the end of the eighth century (200 years after
Hadad) is actually the worship of Adad-Milki. Molek he
argued is actually melek- king but vocalized in a distorted
way with the vowel points of boshet shame. The worship
resulting from "the background of the massive Assyrian

100
and Aramean influence which can be recognized in other
ways" (Rainer, 1994, p. 192). Rainer cites Assyrian para
legal texts indicating similar practices in the Adad-Milki
cult where a child is 'burnt'(sarapu) in the fire on behalf
Adad and girls are handed over to the cult of Ishtar as
prostitutes (ibid p.192). Rainer adds to the evidence 1
Kings 17:31

‫ ְוָהַעִּ֛וים ָעׂ֥ש ּו ִנְבַ֖ח ז ְוֶאת־ַּת ְר ָּ֑ת ק ְוַהְסַפְר ִ֗ו ים ֹׂשְר ִ֤פים ֶא ת־ְּבֵניֶה֙ם ָּבֵ֔א ׁש‬31
‫ְלַאְד ַר ֶּ֥מֶלְך ַֽוֲע ַנֶּ֖מ ֶלְך )ֱאֹלַּה] (ֱאֹלֵ֥הי) [ְסָפִר ים] (ְסַפְר ָֽוִים[׃‬
(2Ki 17:31 WTT). Since there is no attestation for child
sacrifice in Mesopotamia these texts are read as indicating
a ritual handing over of child to a deity (Rainer, 1994, p.
192). Regarding the name Adrammelek, Eissfelt connects it
to Adad by understanding the resh as a misreading of a
dalet, giving Adadmelekh (Rainer, 1994, p. 342 n.45).
Annamelekh is seen as an assimilation of Anath-Melekh.
Thus the Melekh is Adad and Anat a youthful militant war
goddess is read as associated with Ishtar (Rainer, 1994, p.
342). Rainer sees further evidence of the cult of Adad Milki
in Amos 5:26 and Zephaniah 1:5.

‫ ְוֶאת־ַהִּמ ְׁשַּת ֲחִ֥וים ַעל־ַה ַּגּ֖ג ֹות ִלְצָ֣ב א ַהָּׁש ָ֑מ ִים ְוֶאת־ַהִּֽמְׁש ַּת ֲחִוי֙ם ַהִּנְׁש ָּבִ֣ע ים‬5
‫ַֽליהָ֔ו ה ְוַהִּנְׁש ָּבִ֖ע ים ְּבַמ ְלָּֽכם׃‬
(Zep 1:5 WTT)

101
In Zephaniah ‫ ְוַהִּנְׁש ָּבִ֖ע ים ְּבַמ ְלָּֽכם‬is read as not swearing by an
earthly king but by king Adad. This connects Adad with
Judah and Judah were neighbors with Edom. The star gods
of Amos

‫ ּוְנָׂש אֶ֗ת ם ֵ֚א ת ִסּ֣כ ּות ַמ ְלְּכֶ֔כ ם ְוֵ֖א ת ִּכּ֣יּון ַצְלֵמ יֶ֑כ ם ּכֹוַכ֙ב ֱאֹ֣ל ֵה יֶ֔כ ם ֲאֶׁ֥ש ר‬26
‫ֲעִׂש יֶ֖ת ם ָלֶֽכם׃‬
(Amo 5:26 WTT)

The star gods here are usually understood as Sakkut and

Kewan, Assyrian star deities, related to Saturn, but Rainer
points out 'Saturn is the only planet which had not been
connected with one of the great Babylonian and Syrian
gods; so it hardly plays any role in the religion…Thus there
is much to be said for Weinfeld's theory that the verse is
polemic against the procession of Adad-Milki and his
consort Ishtar queen of heaven" (Rainer, 1994, p. 343)
(Weinfeld, 1972). If this is accepted then the connection to
our tale of Hadad is taken directly to the wilderness in
which Israel wandered but which also contains parts of
Edom and Paran and the tradition in Amos takes the
connection to Hadad back to the time between the Exodus
and the wilderness wandering before entering the land of
Israel. This position may be perhaps be strengthened by the
fact the application of boshet to melekh adad as it is often

102
used on names containing Baal, as for example Ishbaal and
Ishbosheth (Garsiel M. , 2015) (Garsiel M. , 1991), and in
the Baal cycle Adad (Hadd) is one of the titles of Baal74
(ANE, 1958, p. 106).

2 The Name Hadad /Adad and Significance of Adad

In view of the extremely important role of names in biblical
literature it is worthwhile observing some of the functions
of the name Hadad (this is the form in the Baal saga) or
Adad in the ANE (Garsiel M. , 1991)75. Gesenius notes
that ‫ אדד‬is an unused root with a cognate in Arabic ‫اد‬
meaning to befall misfortune (Gesenius, 1979 [1857]). The
name refers to some popular idols of the Ancient Near East
and it is a theophoric element in many names. The Kurkh
Monolith of Shalmener III two or three generations after
our Hadad contains a report including the name Adad with
some striking parallels to the events surrounding Hadad's
escape from Edom. We may look at these below but we
observe in the treaty of the Assyrian Ashur Nirari V76 (755-
746) and Mati'ilu that Adad appears a number of times.
74
IIAB Section Vi line 18, his palace is raised, vii, "Baal's enemies take
to the woods, Hadd's foes to the sides of the mountains" (ANE, 1958,
p. 106)
75
We can see an example of this is this same chapter at verse 29
when Ahiyah the prophet take his cloak ‫ שלמה‬and rips into 12 pieces
and proclaims Yahweh will rip the kingdom from the hand of Solomon
‫שלמה‬.
76
He was a weak ruler (Langer, 1968, p. 33)

103
Among the curses Mati'ilu and his people will go through if
Mati'ilu sins against the treaty is the following: "May Adad
the canal inspector of heaven and earth, put an end to
Mati'ilu, his land and his people through hunger, want,
famine, so that they eat the flesh of their own sons and
daughters and it taste as good to them as the flesh of spring
lambs. May they be deprived of Adad's thunder so that rain
be denied them" (Pritchard, 1975, p. 50)77. In the same
treaty there is an Adad of Kurba-il and an Adad of Alep78
by whom Ashur Nirari adjures Mati'ilu. A number of divine
couples are mentioned one of which is Adad and Shala
(ibid p.50, p.102). The name was also used by a number of
Assyrian rulers in the north preceding our Hadad. For
example Shamshi Adad I (1748-1716) who left Assyria to
Babylon in the eponym of Ibni-Adad (Pritchard, 1975, p.
114) Five kings are named Shamshi-Adad. Also in the
Assyrian Kings lists we have a king among the sons of
nobody with the name Adad-salulu79, Eriba-Adad

77
The curses in this treaty are very similar to those in the loyalty oath
that guaranteed Ashurbanipal's succession (Cogan M. , 2008, p. 164).
78
Shalmaneser III ( 858-824) who fought against alliance of kings from
Aram and Canaan offered sacrifices to the god Adad of Aleppo (Cogan
M. , 2008, p. 14). A king bearing the name Adad may have been
present in the war with Shalmaneser III Hadad-ezer of Damascus, in
Akkadian Hadad-idri. Cogan suggests this may be Ben Hadad II the
opponent of Ahab but notes this identification is controversial (Cogan
M. , 2008, p. 18) .
79
No doubt connected to Shalal

104
. Adad-nirari I (1308-1276)80, of the middle Assyrian
empire81 whose empire reached the Euphrates in the time of
the clashes between the Egyptians and the Hittites (Langer,
1968). Finally one Adad-bel-ukin was the governor of the
inner city of Ashur and had two eponymies (Pritchard,
1975, p. 118). Idrimi the king of Alalakh in his famous
story describes himself as servant of Adad, Hepat and
Ishtar, but more first and foremost of Adad. At one point he
lived among the Hapiru and carried out two divinatory
practices, he released birds and looked into the entrails of
lambs "(and found) that after seven years Adad had become
favorable to me, so I built boats." (Pritchard, 1975, p. 97).
This appears to reflect the image of Adad as responsible for
the water supply as for example in canal inspector as in the
Ashur Nirari V treaty. Idrimi named his son Adad-Nirari.
He calls Adad "lord of heaven and the nether world"

80
Three kings bear this name.
81
These dates for the second millennium BCE are conventional and
approximate but cannot be relied upon because of the lack of absolute
dates in that period. They are not essential for us since we are taking a
literary approach to Hadad we use them only to give an approximate
idea of the positioning of the use of the name in relation to Hadad the
Edomite (Langer, 1968) (Rohl D. , 1995) (Thiele, 1977). Gertoux in his
book King David and Solomon Chronological, Historical and
Archaeological Evidence uses dates based on absolute astronomical
dates. Perhaps the key date by which we can measure all things is that
of Rehoboam's 5th years when Pharaoh Shishak raided the temple.
Most scholar date it to 925 BCE some to 927BCE. Gertoux dates it to
972 BCE.

105
(Pritchard, 1975, p. 99). Also Nabonidas, the last king of
Babylon (555-539) considered a usurper and who
succeeded Labashi-Marduk, and counted among the
Fugitive Heroes had a relationship with Adad. He at one
point left his city Babylon and traveled through Edom and
beyond to the city of Tema and other Arab cities including
Daddanu (Dedan?) and Jatribu. He left Babylon for ten
years. In his understanding upon the order of the Divine
Crescent, Sin of Harran, the gods and goddesses of heaven
"appointed Shamash, Ishtar. Adad and Nergal to watch
over my wellbeing" (Pritchard, 1975, p. 109). In his
theodicy Adad was the supplier of rain even during the
height of summer at the command of the Divine Crescent
Sin. Adad was the "dike warden of heaven and the nether
world" (Ibid. p.109). He enabled the people of Babylonia
and Upper Syria to supply him (Nabonidas) abundantly
four months each year, Simanu (Sivan), Du'uzi (Tammuz),
Abu (Av), Ululu (Elul). He understood that he had received
a dream and from the king of the gods predicting exactly
when he would receive his power back. That date was the
17th of Tashrit in the tenth year of his voluntary exile and he
was living in Tema at the time and sent messengers to
Babylon and they were received well. For Nabonidas, Adad
was one who carried out the commands of Sin the divine

106
crescent (Pritchard, 1975, pp. 108-113). Nabonidas
mother's name contained the theophoric element Adad. Her
stelae were found in Harran, center of the worship of Sin
along with her sons. According to the stelae she lived 104
years and bore the name Adad-guppi. She was devoted to
Sin, Ningla, Nusku and Sadarnunna or Sin, Shamash, Ishtar
and Adad82. Her stelae contain both lists. We see then Adad
is a god who was worshipped by the Edomites in the south
and the Arameans and Assyrians to the north of Israel. Our
story of Hadad the Edomi connects him both to the north
and the south.

3 Alternative literary Approaches

A Lord Raglan Myth, Tradition and Drama
Lord Raglan in his article "The Hero A Study in Tradition,
Myth and Drama" draws out 22 characteristics or variables
which he uses to compare 20 characters famous in the
history of world literature. His goal is to find the universal
82
Sin represented by the crescent moon, Shamash represented by the
sun, Ishtar represented by Venus and Adad. Albert maintains that

107
hero from abstracting common narrative features in the
stories. Among the tales are those of Oedipus, Jason,
Dionysius, Apollo, Zeus, Robin Hood, Arthur, Joseph,
Moses and Elijah. His twenty-two features are drawn from
his knowledge of many hero stories and are used to define
the hero each character being measured by the criteria.
These may be seen in Table 1

Table 1: Raglans Hero

1 Mother a royal 12 Marries a
virgin princess
2 Father a king 13 Becomes king
3 Father relative 14 Uneventful
of mother reign
4 Conception 15 Prescribes
unusual laws
5 Reputed son of 16 Loses favor
a god with gods or
men
6 Murder 17 Driven from
attempted at throne or city
birth
7 Whisked away 18 Mysterious
death
8 Under forster 19 Often on a hill

108
 parents in far
country
9 Childhood 20 Children do
unreported not take over
10 Return/goes to 21 Not buried
kingdom
11 Beats a king or 22 Tomb or
beast tombs

For Raglan the common characteristics of these figures

are drawn from the world of tradition and myth expressed
in drama. In his perspective these figures do not go back to
historical figures but the mythical gods. He seeks to
demonstrate: "That one cannot derive history from typo-
logically and predictably patterned pieces of lore such as
the tales Of Arthur or Robin Hood. Moreover, he sees the
origin of this hero pattern in ritual drama.

If we apply Raglan's model to the story of

Hadad we find based on the knowledge available in the MT
tradition that probably Hadad features 2, 7, 8, 9 and 20 that
is five out of twenty two are present with some certainty. If
we accept the reading of Aram in verse 25 and accept it as
referring to Hadad not Rezon then he does reign but not

109
over the land he left, but he reigns at the northern end of the
King's Highway over Aram and not over the southern end
over Edom. This being the case the reason for the author
connecting Hadad to Aram in the end is made explicable,
he did not succeed in Edom although he was an Edomite
but did succeed in Aram, a relative of his. We see the
family trees given in the Primary History. Isaac, father of
Edom, marries Rebekah Laban's sister, thus Laban is
Edom's uncle (Gen 24:14). Jacob marries Leah and Rachel
Laban's daughters. Thus Jacob marries his and Edom's
cousins. Thus at the least Hadad according to these literary
family traditions as Eliezer found hospitality and a wife for
Isaac among the Aremeans and Jacob found hospitality and
two wives among the Arameans, and they are considered
family for Abraham who sent Eliezer there and for
Rebekah who sent Jacob, so Hadad would have found a
hearing among them and perhaps a wife and children. An
additional support to reading the story this way comes from
the fact that Hadad would have reigned perhaps at the end
of the tenth century and early ninth century. He is
connected in the narrative to Rezon or Esrom (LXX) the
ruler of Damascus (1 King 11;23-25) and the rulers in
Aram from the ninth century onwards for at least three
kings are called Ben Hadad (1 King 15:18-21; 20-1-21, 2

110
Kings 8;7-15, 2 Kings 13:3-25). If this reading is correct it
may suggest that Hadad was his throne name and he grew
up with another name because Ben Hadad III is the son of
Hazael who had killed Ben Hadad II and taken the throne
of Damascus (2 Kings 8;7-15). This all being in the literary
tradition of the author of Kings.

Raglan's model assumes the heroes cannot be historical

because there is a pattern. This appears problematic
because he has listed 22 features and yet of all his Heroes
some he gives 9 points others 21. Thus they are very
different from one another and certainly the 22 features do
not as a whole represent a pattern. In addition some of the
characteristics are either/or. This makes the model
imprecise. For example he says the hero has a mysterious
death "often on a hill" which means some do not die on a
hill or the hero's children "if any". Some of them then do
not have children. The number of variables which are
uncertain within the 22 variables which are also not certain
takes away the explanatory force of the model. Scholars
have also noted his characters are often a poor fit for his
variables (Greenstein, 2005). Raglan himself does not
apply his model to Hadad the Edomite.

111
B Cyrus Gordon
Gordon did a number of important studies on the Ancient
near east looking at the similar features in the traditions
regarding the Greek Heros and the Hebrew stories. These
included his Before the Bible (Gordon, 1962). He argued
for the thesis that Greek and Hebrew Civilizations were
parallel structures built upon the same East Mediterranean
foundation. His investigation was to deal with the problem
that had faced scholars of the ancient near east for
centuries. They being "forced to grapple with the problem
of accounting for the parallels between Greek literature and
the Bible" (Gordon, 1962, p. 10). The questions being
raised if Greece borrow from Israel or Israel from Greece?
Were the parallels accidental? He noticed the attempts of
earlier scholars to explain the phenomenon. He points out
that V. Berard saw the link in the connection to the
Phoenicians. P. Jensen saw it in the distribution of the
Gilgamesh Epic. W. Baumgartner covered the history of
the problem (Gordon, 1962)83. He observes that Ugaritic
literature often parallel subsequent Greek and Hebrew
literature and his focus is on the "'Heroic Age' of Greece
and Israel (15th to 10th century BC)" not the later
Hellenistic age. He makes the important point that "if we

83
For Bibliography see Gordon.

112
want to understand the roots of our culture around the East
Medititeranean in the second millennium B.C. we shall
have to exercise out capacity to detect real sameness in
apparent difference, and real difference in apparent
sameness" (Gordon, 1962, p. 12). He illustrates his case
with a number of examples. 1. Exodus 17:8-13, Iliad
15:318-322, Odyssey 22:297-309, with the role of Moses
staff and Phoebus Appolo's aegis. "Divinely fashioned
staffs that serve as weapons to secure victory are common
in East Mediteranean myth and saga" (Gordon, 1962, p.
13). 2. Micah 7:18-20, Iliad I:312-317, casting uncleanness
into the sea. 3. Viewing the seea as a 'watery path" Iliad I:
312-317, Psalm 8:9. 4. In Social Institutions for example
manslaughter in both societies was avenged through blood
vengeance. The offender then was forced to flee and came
to be at the mercy of strangers far from home 92 Sam 14:5-
7, Iliad 16:571-574, Odyssey 15:271-27884.

84
We can see a parallel between Cain and the actions and words of
Theoclymemenus who says he killed a kinsman and explained "for it is
to be my lot to be a wanderer among men"(Odyssey 15: 271-278)

113
C Vladimir Propp
A very important study of the story and folklore is that of
Propp. In his approach he examined a series of stories to
see if the same chronology of narrative steps and the same
"tale roles" occurred in all. He did however give space to
the expectation that there would be some additions and
omissions in light of the fact that they were not all the same
story told repeatedly (King, 1987, p. 579) (Greenstein,
2005, pp. 19, n12) (Propp, 1968). He concluded that all
Russian fairy tales were structurally of the same type and
he did this by isolating the narrative plot elements (thirty
one functions) that moved the narrative from one point to
another and that they occurred invariably in the same order
even if some were omitted the order of others variables
remained constant (King, 1987, p. 578). J Robin King in his
study "The Joseph Story and Divine Politics: A
Comparative Study of a Biographic Formula from the
Ancient Near East" applied the method of Propp to a series
of stories from the Ancient near East including Biblical
story of Joseph, "to see if these stories are a part of a
subgenre in the ancient near east hero tale" (King, 1987, p.
579). King divides the ANE stories into what he calls three
convenient clusters. The most imaginative and literary
which he calls the Egyptian tale from the south west.

114
Secondly the ones he perceives as being the most
historically significant narratives: the Apology of Hattushili
from Anatolia, the story of Idrimi from Syria, Idrimi from
Iraq, Essarhaddon from Assyria and Nabonidas from
Babylon. In the middle he says both geographically and in
tone are the biblical stories.

D Booker: Seven Basic Plots

Christopher Booker in his insightful work The Seven Basic
Plots: Why we tell Stories seeks to demonstrate two things
he understood were clear from his research: 1 "there are
indeed a small number of plots which are so fundamental to
the way we tell stories that it is virtually impossible for any
story teller ever to entirely break away from them"
(Booker, 2004) In this respect he also accepts that some
stories contain more than on plot for example the Lord of
the Rings contains all seven plots and secondly some
stories fail to fully realize the basic plot (Booker, 2004, p.
6). Booker maintains that in each story we will find 1. A
hero or heroine, a central figure or figures with whom we
can identify. We are introduced usually by a formula of
sorts like "And it came to pass" or "Once upon a time".
This phrase is designed to take us out of our present time
into the realm of the story (Booker, 2004, p. 17). 2.
Something happens for example the White Rabbit passes

115
Alic in wonderland, Macbeth encounter the witches. For
Booker it is this event which gives the "Call" which leads
the character into a series of experiences or adventures
which transform their lives. 3. We can be sure there will be
conflict and uncertainty in the events. Thus in the story a
villain is a possibility, and supporters for the hero. 4.
Finally the story comes to a resolution (Booker, 2004, p.
18). Complete stories Booker indicates that is that are "not
just a fragmentary string of episodes and impressions, must
work up to a climax, where conflict and uncertainty are
usually at their most extreme" (Booker, 2004, p. 18). This
leads to a resolution. For Booker we see that the story had
lead the central figure either to a happy or a tragic ending
(Ibid p.18). Booker illustrates with two types of plots
indicated by Aristotle in his Poetics, the tragedy and the
comedy, The first the hero's situations beings by rising and
then turns downs to disaster and comedies which get more
and more complicate until the "reversal of fortunes" "Hero,
heroine or both together are liberated; and we and all the
world rejoice" (Booker, 2004, p. 18). Booker labels the
seven plots as follows: 1 Overcoming the Monster or the
Monster and the Thrilling Escape from Death, Stages:
Anticipation and Call, Dream, Frustration, Nightmare, the
thrilling escape from death and death of the monster

116
(Booker, 2004, p. 48) 2. Rags to riches, stages: Initial
wretchedness at home and call, out into the world, initial
success, the central crisis, independence and final ordeal,
final union, completion and fulfilment (Booker, 2004, pp.
65-66). 3 The Quest, Stages: The call, the journey, arrival
and frustration, final ordeals, the goal (Booker, 2004, pp.
105-106). 4. Voyage and Return, 5 Comedy. The plot
disguised, confusion, more confusion, dramatic turn and
resolution (Booker, 2004, p. 150)85. 6. Tragedy, Stages:
anticipation, dream, frustration, nightmare, and destruction
and death (Booker, 2004, pp. 156-157). 7 Rebirth, Hero/ine
falls under evil power, things appears to go well, evil
comes full force hero is in a state of living death, this
continues and it appears the evil power has triumphed,
miraculous redemption sometimes of heroine by hero, or if
the hero is imprisoned by a young woman or child (Booker,
2004, p. 204).

Bookers idea is inspirational and well researched. In the

stories he cites as illustrations he takes up a number of
biblical figures as illustrative including Adam and Eve,
Samson, David, the Book of Job, Exodus. He does not
however take up the issue of the relationship between

85
Some scholars have read the book of Esther as comedy, see JPS
commentary

117
history and fiction. In addition he does not mention the
story of Hadad the Edomite.

Bibliography
AEL. (1976). The Story of Sinuhe. In M. Lichtheim, Ancient
Egyptian Literature 2: The Middle Kingdom (pp. 222-35).
University of California Press.

Ahituv, S. (1992). Handbook of Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions

[Hebrew]. Jerusalem.

Alter, R. (1981). The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York : Basic

Books.

Alter, R. (1992). The World of Biblical Literature . HarperCollins.

Alter, R. (1999). The David Story: A translation and commentary

of 1 and 2 Samuel. New York: W.W. Norton and
Company.

Anderson, B. (2011). Brotherhood and Inheritiance A Canonical

Reading of the Easu and Edom Traditions. New York: T &
T Clark International.

ANE. (1958). The Ancient Near East Volume I An Anthology of

Texts and Pictures. (J. Pritchard, Ed.) Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

Axskjöld, C.-J. (1998). Aram as the Enemy Friend. Stockholm:

Almsqvist & Wiksell International.

Barnet, S. B. (1960). A Dictionary of Literary Terms. Boston: Little

Borwn and Company.

Bartlett, J. (1976). An Adversary against Solomon., Hadad the

Edomite. ZAW 88, 205-226.

118
Bartlett, J. (1989). Edom and the Edomites :JSOT 77. Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press.

Bartlett, J. (1992). Edom. In D. Freedman, The Anchor Bible

Dictionary Vol I (pp. 287-301). New York: Double Day.

Beitzel, B. (2009). The New Moody Atlas of the Bible. Chicago:

The Moody Bible Institute.

Bergsma, J. (2007). The Jubilee from Leviticus to Qumran .

Leiden: Brill.

Bimson, J. (1978). Redating the Exodus and Conquest.

Cambridge: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament.

Bimson, J. (2015). Shishak and Shoshenq: a chronological

cornerstone or stumbling-block?’ and ‘Ramesses III as
biblical Shishak? Some notes on the archaeological
evidence. In P. James, & P. . van der Veen, Solomon and
Shishak: Current Perspectives from Archaeology,
Epigraphy, History and Chronology. (pp. 3-9, 98-116).
Oxford: Archaeo Press.

Booker, C. (2004). The Seven Basic Plots Why We Tell Stories.

London: Continuum.

Brettler, M. (1994). How the Books of the Hebrew Bible Were

Chosen. In H. Minkoff, Approaches to the Bible (pp. 108-
113). Washington DC: Biblical Archaeology Review.

Brettler, M. (2016). An Interview with Menahem Haran. Oxford:

Oxford Biblical Studies Online. Retrieved April 9, 2016,
from
http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/resource/intervi
ew_6.xhtml

Burney, C. (1903). Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Book of

Kings. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

119
Campbell, J. (1968). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

Cannon, W. (1927). Israel and Edom the Oracle of Obadiah I, II.

Theology 15, 129-40, 191-202.

Cassuto, U. (2006 {194}). The Documentary Hypothesis.

Jerusalem: Shalem Press.

Childs, B. (1979). Introductions to the Old Testament as

Scripture . Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Clines, D. (1995). The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Sheffield:

Sheffield Academic Press.

Cogan, M. (2000). 1 Kings. New York: Anchor Bible .

Cogan, M. (2008). The Raging Torrent. Jerusalem: Carta.

Cohen, A. (1968). The Soncino Chumash. London: The Soncino

Press.

Davidiy, Y. (2015). Edom and Germany. Jerusalem: Israel.

Davidy, Y. (2015). Esau; Edomites Today. Jerusalem: Brit Am.

Devries, S. (1985). 1 Kings. Waco: Word .

Dicou, B. (1994). Edom Israel's Brother and Antagonist: The Role

of Edom in Biblical and Prophecy and Story. Sheffield:
Sheffield University Press.

Faulstich, E. (1986). History, Harmony, and the Hebrew Kings.

Spencer: Chronology Books.

Faulstich, E. (1990). Bible Chronology and the Scientific Method.

The Bible Chronologist.

Fausett, A. (1881-1910). Bible Encyclopedia and Dictionary.

Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

120
Feuer, A. (1985). Tehillim. New York: Masorah Publications.

Filiu, J. (2014). Gaza a History. (J. King, Trans.) London: Hurst

and Company.

Friedman, R. (1987). Who Wrote the Bible. San Francisco:

Harper.

Friedman, R. (1998). The Hidden Book of the Bible. New York:

Harper Collins.

Frisch. (1986). ‫ פרשת מלכות שלמה בספר מלכים‬,‫ע' פריש‬

‫אילן‬-‫ אוניברסיטת בר‬:‫גן‬-‫ רמת‬.)‫ (דוקטוראט‬.

Garrett, G. (2011). Egypt as a Place of Refuge. Mohr Siebeck.

Garsiel, M. (1990). The first Book of Samuel: A Literary Strudy of

comparitive Structures. Jerusalem: Rubin Mass.

Garsiel, M. (1991). Biblical Names a Literary Study of Midrashic

Derivations and Puns. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University.

Garsiel, M. (2009). The Valley of Elah Battle and the Duel of

David with Goliath: Between History and Artistic
Theological Historiography. In Homeland And Exile:
Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of
Bustenay Oded, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum
130 (pp. 391-426). Leiden: Brill. Retrieved from
http://www.meengle.com/_sites/academia/garsiel/~file
s/block/11135magal/PS_SVT_130_fCV_Sqc.pdf

Garsiel, M. (2015). Who is Eshbaal Son of Bed'a Whose Name is

Incised on a Jar from Khirbet Qeifa? New Strudies on
Jerusalem: Vol 21 (pp. 7-23). Ramat Gan: Ingeborg
Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies.

Gertoux, G. (1999). The Name of God Yehowah Which is

Pronounced as it is Written and Its Story I-EH-OW AH .
Lanham: Universty Press of America.

121
Gertoux, G. (2015, March 20). King David and Solomon
Chronological, Historical and Archaeologocal Evidence.
Retrieved march 20, 2017, from Academia:
file:///C:/Users/Windows8/Downloads/Kings_David_an
d_Solomon_Chronological_Hi.pdf

Gesenius. (1979 [1857]). Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon to the Old

Testament. Grand Rapids: Michigan.

Gilmour, G., & K., K. (2012). Pharaoh Sety II and Egyptian

Political Relations with Canaan at the End of the Late
Bronze Age. Israel Exploration Journal, 1-21.

Gordon, C. (1962). Before the Bible: The Common Background of

Greek and Hebrew Civilisations. London: Collins.

Greenstein, E. (1995). Autobiographies in Western Asia. In J.

Sasson, Civilisations in the Ancient Near East Vol 4 (pp.
2421-28, 2431-32). Macmillan.

Greenstein, E. (2005). The Fugitive Hero Narrative Pattern in

Mesopotamia. In J. Collins, L. T, & S. Olyan, Worship
Women and War, Essays in Honour of Susan Niditch (pp.
17-36). Providence: Brown Judaic Studies.

Hamilton, V. (1995). The Book of Genesis 18-50. Eerdmans:

Grand Rapids.

Haran, M. (1974). Problems of the Canonization of Scripture. In

H. Orlinsky, The Canon and the Masorah of the Hebrew
Bible (pp. 224-253). Ktav Publishing.

Haran, M. (1996). The Biblical Collection. Its Consolidation to the

End of the Second Temple Times and Changes of Form
to the End of the Middle Ages Vol I. Jerusalem: Mosad
Bialik.

Hendel, R. (1987). The Epic of the Patriarchs. scholars Press.

122
Hoeh, H. (1967, March 19). A Compendium of World History:
Ambassador College Thesis. Retrieved from Herbert W.
Armstrong:
http://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?
action=get_acthesis&InfoID=1351638780

Honeyman, A. (1948). The Evidence for Regnal Names among

the Hebrews. JBL 67, 23-25.

Hylton, A. (2015). Shemaiah the Nehemali: False Prophet or

Prince? Research Journal of Social Science and
Management (TISJ), 5(8), 130-139.

Hylton, A. (2016). Paul Against Other Academics on the Canon:

Who is Right? Jerusalem: Zion School.

Johnstone, W. (2000). Hope of Jubilee: The Last Word in the

Hebrew Bible. EQ 72.

Josephus. (93-94 CE). Jewish Antiquities ( Loeb edition ed.). (H.

THACKERAY, Ed.) Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Ken, S. (2007). Gender Studies: The Unmanning of Abimelch. In

G. Yee, Judges and Method : New Approaches in Biblical
Studies. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

King, J. (1987). The Joseph Story and Divine Politics: A

Comparative Study of a Biographic Formula from the
Ancient Near East . JBL 106, 577–94.

King, J. (1987). The Joseph Story and Divine Politics : A

Comparative Study of a Biographic Formula from the
Ancient Near East . JBL 106, 577-94.

Kitchen, K. (2003). On the Reliability of the Old Testament.

Michigan: William B. Eerdmans publishing.

Kitchen, K. A. (1986). The Third Intermediate Period In Egypt

(1100- 650BC. Warminster: Aris & Phillips.

123
Kitchen, K. M. (1962). Chronology of the Old Testament. In The
New Bible Dictionary (pp. 212-223). Grand Rapids:
Michigan.

Knoppers, G. (1993). Two Nations Under God: The

Deuteronomistic History of Solomon and the Dual
Monarchies. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Krasovec, J. (2010). The Transformation of Biblical Proper

Names. New York: T & T Clarke.

Kugel, J. (2007). How to Read the Bible. New York: Free Press.

Langer, W. (1968). An Encyclopedia of World History. Boston:

Houghton Mifflin Company.

Long, B. O. (1984). 1 Kings with an Introduction ot Historical

Literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Mason, R. (1997). Propaganda and Subversion in the Old

Testament. London : SPCK.

Mickelsen, A. (1963). Interpreting the Bible. Grand Rapids:

Michigan.

Montgomery, J., & Gehman, H. (1951). A Critical and Exegetical

Commentary on the Book of Kings. Edinburgh: T and T
Clark.

Moon, C. (1971). A Political History of Edom in the Light of

Recent Literary and Archaeological Research :Doctoral
Dissertation. Emory: Emory University.

Mowinckel, S. (1946a). Prophecy and Tradition. Oslo: Dybwad.

Mowinckel, S. (1961). The Name of the God of Moses. Hebrew

Union College Annual, 121-133.

Mowinckel, S. (2002 [1946]). The Spirit and the Word.

Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

124
Naaman, N. (2015). Judah and Edom in the Book of Kings and
Historical Reality. In R. Thelle, T. Stordalen, & M.
Richardson, New Perspectives on Old Testament
Prophecy and History (pp. 197-211). Leiden: Brill.

Niditch, S. (1987). Underdogs and Tricksters: A Prelude to

Biblical Folklore. San Francisco: Harper and Row.

NIDOTTE. (1997). New International Dictionary of Old

Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House.

NIESE, B. ( 1885-95). Flavius Josephus: Flavii Iosephi Opera,

Berolini 7 volumes. Berlin: Apud Weidmannos.

Noth, M. (1967 [1943]). The Deuteronomistic History. Sheffield:

JSOT Press.

Packer, J., Tenney, M., & White, W. (1995). Illustrated

Encyclopedia of Bible Facts. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Passing as a Man: Patriarchal Gender Studies. (2010). In In

Scripture: The First Stories of Jewish Secual Identities
(pp. 47-63). New York: Rowland and Littlefield.

Patel, N. (2010). On Periphrastic Genetive Contructions In

Biblical Hebrew. Hebrew Studies 51, 43-48.

Pfeifer, R. (1930). A Non-Israelite Source of the Book of Genesis.

ZAW 48, 66-73.

Postel, S. (2011). Adam is Israel: Genesis 1-3 as Introduction to

the Torah and the Tanakh . Eugene, OR: Pickwick.

Pritchard, J. (1975). The Ancient Near East Volume II. Princeton:

Princeston University Press.

Propp, V. (1968). The Morphology of the Folktale . Austin:

University of Texas Press.

125
Radmacher, E. (1982). Nelson Study Bible. Nashville: Thomas
Nelson.

Raglan, L. (1990). The Hero A Study in Tradition, Myth and

Drama. In Ouest of the Hero (pp. 87-175). Princeton:
Princeton University Press.

Rainer, A. (1994). A History of Israelite Religion in the Old

Testament Period: From the Beginnings to the End of
the Monarchy, Volume 1. John Knox Press.

Rainey, A., & Notley, R. (2006). The Sacred Bridge: Carta's Atlas
of the Biblical World. Jerusalem: Carta.

Rank, O. (1990). The Myth of the Birth of the Hero. In The Quest
of a Hero (pp. 1-86). Princeton: Princeton Universty
Press.

Records. (1906). Ancient Records of Egypt: Historical Documents

from the earliest times to the Persian Conquest
collected Edited Translated with commentary. (J.
Breasted, Ed., & J. Breasted, Trans.) Chicago: University
of Chicago.

Rendsburg, G. (2002). Israelite Hebrew in the Book of Kings.

Bethesda: CDL Press.

Robertson, D. (2001). The Biblical Ciphers Unsealed. St Paul:

Minnesota.

Rohl, D. (1995). A Test of Time. London: Randonm House.

Rohl, D. (1995). Pharaoh's and Kings: A Biblical Quest. New York:

Crown Publishers.

Rohl, D. (1998). Legend: The Genesis of Civilisation. London:

Random House.

126
Sailhammer, J. (1992). The Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-
Theological Commentary. Grand Rapids: 2008.

Schulmann, A. (1986 ). The Curious Case of Hadad the Edomite.

In L. Lasko, Egyptological Studies in Honour of R. A.
Parker (pp. 122-135). Hanover: University Press of New
England.

Scroggie, W. (1940). Know Your Bible. London: Pickering and

Inglis.

Shortland, A. (2005). Shishak, King of Egypt: The challenges of

Egyptian calendrical chronology. In The Bible and Radio
Carbon Dating (pp. 43-53).

Steiner, G. (2016). The Goddess and the Copper Snake:

Metallugy, Star-Lore, and Ritual in the Rock Art of
Southern Levant. IFIRAR Quaterly Vol 6, 31-47.
Retrieved March 16, 2017, from
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/4
5021882/The_Goddess_and_the_Copper_Snake.pdf?
AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1
489666821&Signature=G0ezrc5nPtda0HOWGXHUdaOo
6lI%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B
%20filename%3DTHE_GODDESS_AN

Sutherland, J. (2010). 50 Literature Ideas You Really Need To

Know. London: Quercus Publishin Plc.

Tenney, M. (1976). The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the

Bible. Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation.

Thiele, E. (1977). The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings.

Michigan: Zondervan.

Torr, C. (1896). Memphis and Mycenae: An examination of

Egyptian chronology and its application to the early
history of Greece. Cambridge.

127
TWOT. (1980). Theological Wordbook of the old Testament. (R.
Harris, Ed.) Chicago: Moody Press.

Van Den Hout, T. (1997). Apology of Hattishulli III. In W. Hallo, &

K. Lawson Younger, The Context of Scripture Vol 1 (pp.
199-203). Leiden.

Velikovsky, I. (1952). Ages in Chaos. Sidgewick and Jackson.

Von Rad, G. (n.d.). Old Testament Theology.

Weinfeld, M. (1972). The Worship of Molech and of the Queen

of Heaven and its Background. Ugarit Forschungen, 133-
154.

Weinfeld, M. (1993). The Promise of the Land: The Inheritance

of the Land of Canaan by Israelites. Berkely: University
of California Press.

Wood, B. (2001). Rohl's New Chronology. Bible and Spade.

Zakovitch, Y. (2000). "And You Shall Tell Your Children"...The

Concept of Exodus in the Bible. Jerusalem: Magnes
Press.

128