This article offers the first-ever comprehensive philological and historical commentary on possible historical allusions to the Idumeans in the following Pseudepigrapha: Pseudo-Aristeas, Judith, Jubilees, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Apocalypse of Enoch, 1 Esdras, and 4 Ezra. This study argues that references to the Idumeans in the Pseudepigrapha (mostly hidden under the figure of Esau or sons of Esau) are of a very general character and as such are of little use to modern historians. Most passages are only literary expressions of the Judeans’ long-standing tradition of hostility towards the Edomites/Idumeans. Only in a few cases may we speak about general echoes of particular historical events. In 1 Esd. 4.50 and Jub. 37.1–38.14, an advanced Idumean settlement is reflected west of Arabah and south of Judea. Based on the archaeology, this settlement may have started as early as in the eighth century BCE and over time led to the emergence of a new province called Idumea in the Hellenistic period. The second-century BCE Maccabean–Idumean conflict is also echoed in several Pseudepigrapha. In general, the book of Judith reflects the strategic role of mountain passes and the use of lightly armed troops in Maccabean times. In turn, Jub. 37.1–38.14 and the T. Jud. 9.1–4 were written from a specific historical angle created by the Hasmonean conquest of Idumea, but their use of topography and chronology is so simplified that they cannot be employed by modern historians for the reconstruction of the course of the Hasmonean–Idumean conflict. Instead, both books express the ideology of territorial rights, disguised as patriarchal history. Finally, 1 Esd. 5.29 and 8.66 appear to express the ambivalent situation of the Idumeans after conversion: though they became part of the Judean community, the notion of their ethnic distinctiveness and inferiority survived.

Search results

Idumea and Idumeans in the Light of the Pseudepigrapha *

The Babylonian Gap: The Archaeological Reality

Search results

Idumea and Idumeans in the Light of the Pseudepigrapha *

The Babylonian Gap: The Archaeological Reality