Was Job a King of Edom?

Term: Septuagint: the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, produced in stages beginning in the third century BC and abbreviated LXX.

Term: Masoretic Text: the traditional Hebrew text of the Old Testament, which most English Bibles follow.

Term: Jobab: a Hebrew name borne by several men in the Bible, including a king of Edom named in Genesis 36:33.

Was Job a King of Edom?

Possibly, but no one can prove it. The Hebrew book of Job never calls Job a king. The Greek Septuagint adds a note after Job 42:17 that says Job’s earlier name was Jobab, that he descended from Esau, and that he ruled Edom. That note is an ancient tradition. It is not part of the Hebrew ending, and it comes with real problems.

What the Septuagint adds after Job 42:17

The Hebrew text ends with Job dying old and full of days. The Greek text adds a line saying Job will rise again with those whom the Lord raises up. It then adds a short biography, which it credits to a Syriac book. Brenton’s 1851 English translation of the Septuagint gives these details:

Job lived in the land of Ausis, on the borders of Idumea (the Greek name for Edom) and Arabia.

His name before was Jobab.

He took an Arabian wife and had a son named Ennon.

His father was Zare, one of the sons of Esau. His mother was Bosorrha. That made him fifth from Abraham.

The note lists the kings who reigned in Edom and says Job ruled that country as well. It names Balac son of Beor first, then “Jobab, who is called Job,” then Asom, then Adad son of Barad.

It closes by naming Job’s friends as rulers: Eliphaz king of the Thaemanites, Baldad sovereign of the Sauchaeans, and Sophar king of the Minaeans.

This matches the chain in the popular claim: Job is Jobab, a descendant of Esau, and a king of Edom. The Greek text says all three.

The Genesis 36 connection

Genesis 36:31 to 39 lists the kings who reigned in Edom before any king reigned over Israel. Verse 33 reads “Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah.” The Greek note follows the same order as that list: Bela son of Beor, Jobab, Husham, and Hadad son of Bedad. The spellings differ in Greek, but the sequence matches.

That match cuts two ways. It shows the note’s author knew Genesis 36. It also means the note may read Genesis 36 into Job. One commentary on the Greek text suggests the translator drew on Genesis 36:31 to 35, and points out that the mother’s name Bosorrha echoes the city of Bozrah in verse 33. If so, the note interprets Genesis and does not confirm it from an independent source.

What supports reading Job as a king

Job 29 shows him sitting at the city gate. Princes and nobles fall silent when he speaks (Job 29:7 to 10). In the Hebrew text, verse 25 compares him to a king among his troops.

Job 1:3 calls him the greatest of all the people of the East. The NETS translation of the Greek renders this as “well-born,” which points toward rank and lineage more than wealth. That is a reading, not a proof.

The setting fits Edom. Eliphaz is a Temanite, and Eliphaz and Teman are both Edomite names in Genesis 36. Lamentations 4:21 places Uz alongside Edom.

The main Greek text of Job 2:11 already gives Eliphaz and Sophar the title king and calls Baldad a ruler. This appears in the body of the book, not only in the added note.

Problems with the claim

The Hebrew is silent. The Masoretic Text has no such ending. The note says it comes from a Syriac book, and no one has identified that book. As far as I know, no early Hebrew manuscript carries it.

The date is uncertain. The Septuagint was produced over several centuries. The Pentateuch came first, in the third century BC. Greek Job is later and harder to date. The Greek manuscripts we have that carry the book date to the fourth century AD and later.

Greek Job is a free translation. It runs about one-sixth shorter than the Hebrew, and the NETS introduction calls it among the least literal translations in the Septuagint. Additions to a text like this call for caution.

The cities differ. Genesis gives each Edomite king a different city, and Jobab’s city is Bozrah. Job 1:1 places Job in the land of Uz.

The genealogy conflicts with Genesis. The note calls Zare a son of Esau, which makes Job fifth from Abraham. Genesis 36:13 lists Zerah as a son of Reuel, who was Esau’s son, and Genesis 36:33 calls Jobab a son of Zerah. That would make Jobab sixth from Abraham.

The names are not identical in Hebrew. Job is Iyyov and Jobab is Yobab. Jobab was also a common name. Genesis 10:29 gives a Jobab son of Joktan, and Joshua 11:1 gives a Jobab king of Madon.

The bottom line

Job may have been a king of Edom, and the Septuagint tradition says he was. The Hebrew text does not say it. Present it as a tradition with a plausible setting and real gaps, and not as a proven identity.

The strongest support for Job’s rank comes from Job 29, where princes go quiet in his presence. The strongest evidence against comes from the missing Hebrew support and the genealogy conflict. A careful reader can hold the tradition as a possibility and still say the case is open.

Sources

Brenton, Septuagint translation, Job 42 (1851, public domain): ebible.org/eng-Brenton/JOB42.htm

A New English Translation of the Septuagint, Job, translator’s introduction by Claude E. Cox (Oxford, 2009): ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/28-iob-nets.pdf

Scripture references: Genesis 10:29, Genesis 36:13 and 31 to 39, Joshua 11:1, Job 1:1 to 3, Job 2:11, Job 29, Lamentations 4:21.