Esau and the Roman Empire

[GerardMajella]

In reading the Old Testament, I understand that many of the Jewish sages consider the Roman Empire to be comprised of the descendants of Esau, Jacob’s brother.

By the Roman Empire, do the Jewish sages mean the Holy Roman Catholic Church, or secular Rome?

What is their basis and rationale for labeling Esau’s descendants as coming from the Roman Empire?

Do the Jewish religious authorities of today consider the Holy Roman Catholic Church to be descendants of Esau?

Is the Esau allegation or charge just a defense mechanism by the Jewish sages to point the finger at any perceived threat to Judaism?

With the Church in literally hundreds, if not thousands of countries besides Rome, I am not quite sure how this concept about Esau is connected. While the Church is centered in Rome, it is also located all over the world with billions of adherents.

I also don’t understand how the Roman Catholic Church could be considered a descendant of Esau, when Jesus Christ, of the House of David, was its founder.

I have read elsewhere that Esau’s descendants could very well be the Palestinians, as they originated in Jordan. I have also read that the Palestinians could also be considered descendants of Ishmael.

Any religious scholars out there that want to enlighten me on these matters? It’s all quite confusing. Thank you in advance.

 

[Hesychios]

In reading the Old Testament, I understand that many of the Jewish sages consider the Roman Empire to be comprised of the descendants of Esau, Jacob’s brother.

Where do you get that? Is it from some commentary?

I never heard of it, but I am not doubting you.

Esau was ‘attributed’ with being the father of the nation of Edom. These attributions are legendary, so I don’t think we need to accept them unquestioningly.

King Herod the Great was of the Idumaeans/Edomites, who were converted to Judaism as a group. Perhaps it was the association of Herod with the Romans which caused people to see a connection, but it could only be symbolic.

Besides, everyone knows the Romans were descendants of Troy

 

[Hesychios]

I have read elsewhere that Esau’s descendants could very well be the Palestinians, as they originated in Jordan. I have also read that the Palestinians could also be considered descendants of Ishmael.

The fact is the modern Palestinians are descendants from the Jews, the Greeks and the Arabs (plus the Edomite and Moabite people and numerous others who were brought in as individuals over the centuries). Most of them could probably claim with some credibility that they had Christian ancestors, which would have been from all of these groups. This doesn’t even address the issue of the Crusaders and Christian pilgrims who settled there and never left.

The Christian Palestinians and the Muslim Palestinians are the same people, they are all descended from the local residents under the rule of the Roman empire, which was a very poly-ethnic bunch and almost entirely Christian by the time of the first Arab invasion and conquest 638AD].

 

[LionHeart777]

Besides, everyone knows the Romans were descendants of Troy

:tiphat: Good one!

P.S. Thanks for your response to my P.M. the other day.

 

[GerardMajella]

Where do you get that? Is it from some commentary?

I was delving into a Hebrew-English edition of a Torah commentary - Stone Edition of the Chumash by Art Scroll. I try to compare the Jewish commentary to the Catholic to better understand the disparities, etc.

Basically, it mentioned that Esau was, as you state, the ancestor of the Edomites. The commentary stated that many of the Jewish Sages consider Esau to be affiliated with the Roman Empire.

I found some semblance of an answer to my questions here at this link:

askville.amazon.com/story-Jacob-Esau-illustrate-relationship-Judaism-Christianity/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=6480043

"By way of background, let me share some analysis by the scholar and biblical editor W. Gunther Plaut in “The Torah: A Modern Commentary” (p.238).

*“…Although the Bible relates many uncomplimentary incidents about Jacob, it records on the whole praiseworthy accounts of Esau. Nevertheless, Jacob-Israel became the chosen, Esau-Edom the rejected. Because of this, traditional interpreters felt compelled to whitewash Jacob’s character and to blacken the name of Esau. After the Roman conquest of Judea (1st Century BCE), “Edom” came to signify Rome, oppression, and evil. Not only was this a case of prejudicial stereotyping, it was also a misreading of the biblical intent. For, Esau emerges from the text as a generally admirable man…”

Edom, the land where Esau settled, was associated with Rome for 2 reasons: to further blacken the image of Esau and to enable discussion of Rome metaphorically without risking life and limb.

Does Esau really equate to Rome?*

*No.

As for Isaac’s blessings of his twin sons Jacob and Esau, Jacob stole Esau’s blessing as firstborn. Esau’s blessing, which he begged his father for, was definitely a secondary blessing—one that made clear the need for Esau to serve his younger brother Jacob.

If one were to buy into the associations between Edom and Rome, then one should recognize that this was the Rome that conquered Judea. This was the Rome that slaughtered a significant percentage of the extant Jewish population. And, this was the Rome that killed Christians for sport, the Rome that crucified Jesus. This is NOT the Rome of the Vatican, which came later. Christianity’s first center in the Roman Empire was Byzantium, not Rome. So, I see analogies of Esau to Edom to Rome to the Vatican as historically flawed. The analogy of Jacob to Israel to modern day Israel is legitimate, but in and of itself doesn’t say anything. If Jacob does not live up to his obligations, the future of the Jews is at stake."*

 

[Hesychios]

I was delving into a Hebrew-English edition of a Torah commentary - Stone Edition of the Chumash by Art Scroll. I try to compare the Jewish commentary to the Catholic to better understand the disparities, etc.

Basically, it mentioned that Esau was, as you state, the ancestor of the Edomites. The commentary stated that many of the Jewish Sages consider Esau to be affiliated with the Roman Empire.

I find this all very interesting.

*So, I see analogies of Esau to Edom to Rome to the Vatican as historically flawed *

Yes, that about puts it right.

Basically I think the Jewish people used Edom as a code for the imperial Rome in the same way Christians used Babylon to refer to the same thing. A despised oppressive and dangerous government.

In a sense, Edom, with Roman help, took control of the Jewish nation in Palestine when Herod the Great (a very dangerous and cruel man himself) was raised to power. He was a fascinating character. No doubt many resented him deeply and in his person the power structure flipped, Edom symbolically went from being the subjugated people to the subjugators (but not really, it was mostly just Herod and his family). Herod may also have trusted people from his own Idumaeans much more and may have used them more liberally in power positions around the province. If so, people would have quickly noticed.

So then, one could probably abuse the reputation and character of Idumaeans as a people (symbolically representing the Roman rule) without actually being accused of criticizing the Romans, which could cost one’s life after a nasty court appearance.

The whole ‘Vatican’ connection added to this equation is sheer nonsense.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

. . .

In a sense, Edom, with Roman help, took control of the Jewish nation in Palestine when Herod the Great (a very dangerous and cruel man himself) was raised to power. He was a fascinating character. No doubt many resented him deeply and in his person the power structure flipped, Edom symbolically went from being the subjugated people to the subjugators (but not really, it was mostly just Herod and his family). Herod may also have trusted people from his own Idumaeans much more and may have used them more liberally in power positions around the province. If so, people would have quickly noticed. . . …

Note the prophecy of the Messiah by Balaam.

17 I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not nigh: a star shall come forth out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel; it shall crush the forehead* of Moab, and break down all the sons of Sheth. 18 Edom shall be dispossessed, Seir also, his enemies, shall be dispossessed, while Israel does valiantly.

Numbers 24:17-18 promises not only the Messiah but the downfall of Edom. That is what really set king Herod off.

 

[Hesychios]

Note the prophecy of the Messiah by Balaam. Numbers 24:17-18 promises not only the Messiah but the downfall of Edom. That is what really set king Herod off.

Probably.

But Herod was a Jew, at least his family were converts. Perhaps there was some ethnic pride or an inferiority complex there.

But what I was going to say is that we western people are all former something-elses, we probably all have ancestors who were enemies of Christ. The number of Christians today who have Roman ancestry must be staggeringly high, in the hundreds of millions. We (figuratively - our people) put the nails in His hands.

But we are Christians, and I should think we are happy about that, glad the message of Christ triumphed over our peoples.

For Herod, being a Jew meant that his ancestors may have been enemies of the Hebrews but he was on the side of God, part of the Chosen People. He may have had an underlying psychological need to show he was “more Jewish than the Jews”. His public works projects are still notable today, especially the rebuilding of the temple.

I still suspect him of tribalism though, he probably trusted his Idumaean-Jewish subjects more than his ‘supra’-Jewish subjects.