Matthew Henry on Genesis 36:20-30
In the midst of this genealogy of the Edomites here is inserted the genealogy of the Horites, those Canaanites, or Hittites (compare Gen 26:34), that were the natives of Mount Seir. Mention is made of them, Gen 14:6, and of their interest in Mount Seir, before the Edomites took possession of it, Deu 2:12, Deu 2:22. This comes in here, not only to give light to the story, but to be a standing reflection upon the Edomites for intermarrying with them, by which, it is probable, they learned their way, and corrupted themselves. Esau having sold his birthright, and lost his blessing, and entered into alliance with the Hittites, his posterity and the sons of Seir are here reckoned together. Note, T…
Read the whole note in the consoleJamieson-Fausset-Brown on Genesis 36:24
This was that Anah that found the mules in the wilderness--The word "mules" is, in several ancient versions, rendered "water springs"; and this discovery of some remarkable fountain was sufficient, among a wandering or pastoral people, to entitle him to such a distinguishing notice.
Adam Clarke on Genesis 36:24
This was that Anah that found the mules in the wilderness - The words את הימם eth kaiyemim, here translated mules, has given rise to a great variety of conjectures and discordant opinions. St. Jerome, who renders it aquas calidas, warm springs, or hot baths, says there are as many opinions concerning it as there are commentators.
The Septuagint has τον Ιαμειν, which seems to be the name of a man; but this is expressed in a great variety of ways in different MSS. of that version.
The Syriac renders it mayé, waters; the author of this version having read in the Hebrew copy from which he translated. מים mayim, waters, for ימם yemim, the two first letters being transposed.
Onkelos translates th…
Read the whole note in the consoleJohn Gill on Genesis 36:25
And the children of Anah were these,....
Dishon, the name of one of his uncles. Genesis 36:21,
and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah; Aben Ezra thinks this is not the same Anah that was mentioned in the beginning of this verse; since, if he was the same, there was no need to mention him again, but that he is the same that is mentioned in Genesis 36:2; but if he is not the same that is spoken of in this verse and Genesis 36:24, it is difficult to account for the mention of him at all in this place: that he is the same as in Genesis 36:2 seems to be right, though it is attended with this difficulty, that the Anah and Aholibamah there are represented as of the Hivites, whereas here they are rec…
