Bible Synapse
Was the Edomite chief Korah a son of Esau or of Eliphaz?
Hard question · Genealogies · raised by 1 of the lists sceptics circulate
See the passages joined in the interactive mapThe passages
Aholibamah, Esau’s wife, “bare to Esau Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah”.
And these were the sons of Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife: and she bare to Esau Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah.
The chiefs descended from Eliphaz, Esau’s firstborn: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz, “Duke Korah, duke Gatam, and duke Amalek”.
These were dukes of the sons of Esau: the sons of Eliphaz the firstborn son of Esau; duke Teman, duke Omar, duke Zepho, duke Kenaz, Duke Korah, duke Gatam, and duke Amalek: these are the dukes that came of Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these were the sons of Adah.
The chiefs descended from Aholibamah: “duke Jeush, duke Jaalam, duke Korah”.
And these are the sons of Aholibamah Esau’s wife; duke Jeush, duke Jaalam, duke Korah: these were the dukes that came of Aholibamah the daughter of Anah, Esau’s wife.
Eliphaz’s sons are Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam and Kenaz, and Amalek by his concubine Timna.
And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons of Adah Esau’s wife.
The objection
Genesis 36:5, 14 and 18 say that Korah was a son of Esau by his wife Aholibamah. But in the list of Edom’s chiefs “Duke Korah” appears among “the dukes that came of Eliphaz” (36:16), Esau’s son by Adah. Critics ask whose son Korah was.
The answer
Korah was Esau’s son by Aholibamah. Genesis says so three times (36:5, 14, 18), and 1 Chronicles 1:35 agrees. The difficulty is a single name in 36:16. Eliphaz’s sons are listed twice elsewhere, in Genesis 36:11–12 and in 1 Chronicles 1:36: Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, Kenaz and Amalek (Chronicles also names Timna, Amalek’s mother), with no Korah. The list of chiefs from Eliphaz in 36:15–16 gives those same six names, with Korah added among them.
The likeliest explanation is that a copyist added the name. “Duke Korah” closes the very next list (36:18), and a scribe’s eye could easily pick it up from there. The Samaritan Pentateuch, an ancient and independent copy of the five books of Moses in Hebrew, does not have Korah in 36:16, and Benjamin Kennicott, Adam Clarke, and Keil and Delitzsch all judged that the name was probably not in the original text. If so, the slip belongs to the copying only. The original writing, which is held to be without error, named Korah only as Aholibamah’s son.
Other answers Christians give
A second Korah
John Gill allowed that the Korah of 36:16 might be a grandson of Eliphaz, a chief of Eliphaz’s line who bore the same name as his great-uncle. Names were often repeated within these Edomite and Horite families (there are two men called Anah and two called Dishon in this chapter). Then there were two chiefs called Korah, one from each branch of Esau’s family.
Still open
Whether 36:16 has gained a name in copying or names a second Korah cannot be settled from the texts we have. On either view, the Korah who was Esau’s son was the son of Aholibamah.
From the classic commentators
It is clear, therefore, that some transcriber has improperly inserted duke Korah in Genesis 36:16; from which interpolation both the Samaritan text and the Samaritan version are free.Adam Clarke, Commentary, on Genesis 36:16 (1810–1826), quoting Benjamin Kennicott