The Betrayal of Edom: Remarks on a claimed tradition

B.E.J.H. Becking

doi:10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286

The Betrayal of Edom: Remarks on a claimed tradition

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Biblical and post-Biblical texts refer to the tradition of the betrayal of Edom. During theconquest the brother-nation of Edom would have betrayed Judah by choosing sides with the Babylonians. Historical and archaeological evidence for this ‘fact’ is absent or not convincing. It is argued that the occupation of Southern Judah by the Edomites in late Babylonian and/or Persian times would have been the source of this claimed tradition.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-4
Number of pages	4
Journal	HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies
Volume	72
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286
Publication status	Published - 30 Sept 2016

Keywords

Edom
Claimed tradition

Access to Document

10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286

betrayalFinal published version, 1.7 MB

Cite this

@article{d2e4a89dddb64963a7e8c602917dbb10,

title = "The Betrayal of Edom: Remarks on a claimed tradition",

abstract = "Biblical and post-Biblical texts refer to the tradition of the betrayal of Edom. During theconquest the brother-nation of Edom would have betrayed Judah by choosing sides with the Babylonians. Historical and archaeological evidence for this {\textquoteleft}fact{\textquoteright} is absent or not convincing. It is argued that the occupation of Southern Judah by the Edomites in late Babylonian and/or Persian times would have been the source of this claimed tradition.",

keywords = "Edom, Claimed tradition",

author = "B.E.J.H. Becking",

year = "2016",

month = sep,

day = "30",

doi = "10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286",

language = "English",

volume = "72",

pages = "1--4",

journal = "HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies",

issn = "0259-9422",

publisher = "AOSIS (Pty) Ltd",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Betrayal of Edom: Remarks on a claimed tradition

AU - Becking, B.E.J.H.

PY - 2016/9/30

Y1 - 2016/9/30

N2 - Biblical and post-Biblical texts refer to the tradition of the betrayal of Edom. During theconquest the brother-nation of Edom would have betrayed Judah by choosing sides with the Babylonians. Historical and archaeological evidence for this ‘fact’ is absent or not convincing. It is argued that the occupation of Southern Judah by the Edomites in late Babylonian and/or Persian times would have been the source of this claimed tradition.

AB - Biblical and post-Biblical texts refer to the tradition of the betrayal of Edom. During theconquest the brother-nation of Edom would have betrayed Judah by choosing sides with the Babylonians. Historical and archaeological evidence for this ‘fact’ is absent or not convincing. It is argued that the occupation of Southern Judah by the Edomites in late Babylonian and/or Persian times would have been the source of this claimed tradition.

KW - Edom

KW - Claimed tradition

U2 - 10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286

DO - 10.4102/hts.v72i4.3286

M3 - Article

SN - 0259-9422

VL - 72

SP - 1

EP - 4

JO - HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies

JF - HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies

IS - 4

ER -

The Betrayal of Edom: Remarks on a claimed tradition

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this