Peter Pett's Commentary on the Bible
Genesis 25:1-12
The Death of Abraham and His Dispositions (Genesis 25:1 a)
The first tablet contains Abraham's final disposition of his estate (Genesis 25:1). This is described as ‘the family history of Ishmael, the son of Abraham, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's maid bore to Abraham' (Genesis 25:12) and would be maintained by him as the new senior member of the family. In the nature of what he was it is brief and only contains essential detail. (This may be the heading of the following tablet, but that is more probably described as ‘the family history of Isaac, the son of Abraham' (Genesis 25:19 a).
It begins with Abraham's remarriage and further children, and briefly describes his administration of his estate and death and burial. It suggests a happy state of affairs between Ishmael and Isaac.
‘And Abraham took another wife and her name was Keturah. And she bore him Zimran and Jokshan, and Medan and Midian, and Ishbak and Shuah. And Jokshan begat Sheba and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim. And the sons of Midian, Ephah and Epher, and Hanoch and Abidah, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah.'
We are not told whether Abraham took Keturah to wife before or after the death of Sarah but the fact that she is called a concubine (Genesis 25:6) may suggest the former. By a concubine is meant a slave wife, one who is not considered of sufficient standing to be a full wife. But he may also have taken her as a comfort after the death of Sarah. However, she clearly does not obtain full status. That is passed on to Rebekah.
Contrary to his fears (Genesis 17:17) he proves fruitful. He was not the last man of years to surprise himself. And this fruitfulness eventually results in twelve ‘children' (compare for this Genesis 22:20 and Genesis 25:13 and the twelve children of Israel).
In the simplest scenario some of these are named after neighbouring tribes and those with whom he had trading relationships.
But the picture may well be more complicated than this. These may be intended also to represent twelve sub-tribes. Twelve ‘tribes' may well have been looked on in the larger family (and possibly in wider circles) as denoting a twelve tribe grouping, thus a complete tribal grouping.
We must not just look on this tablet as a postscript. It is, of course, in the compilation a postscript to the main story but to its author it would have seemed an important part of the record of Abraham's life. The bearing of sons was something of which the ancients were proud and it demonstrated Abraham's life and vigour even in his later years. It was something of which a loyal son could be proud.
The names in the genealogy also refer us to the regions of Southern Palestine and North West Arabia. As noted earlier tribal groups would arise by birth, inter-marriage, amalgamation and accumulation and this genealogy might suggest that Abraham's sons had important leadership roles in these tribes (compare Genesis 25:16). We especially note that the ‘sons' of Dedan, whose names are plural in form, were, as the forms suggest, probably sub-tribes. And Dedan is a well know tribal grouping in Arabia, as is Sheba. Comparison should be made with Genesis 10.
We thus find here the possible connection of sons of Abraham with Midianites, Medanites (both closely associated elsewhere with Ishmaelites - Genesis 37:28 with Genesis 37:36; Judges 8:24), Sabaeans (from Sheba) and Dedanites among others. The result would be that through his sons his influence has become wide and effective. As we have seen earlier (on Genesis 14) he was an effective fighter, and he has passed these skills on to his sons making them welcome anywhere.
In Genesis 10 a Sheba and Dedan descend from Raamah, through Cush, son of Ham, clearly representing Arabian connections via North Africa. It is quite possibly with these that Abraham's sons connect in ‘the land of the East'. In Genesis 10:28 a Sheba (Havilah is also connected with both) is descended from Joktan who is connected with Eber, who is the forefather of Abraham. The inter-relationship of these tribes is clearly complicated. Names are not, of course, necessarily proof of direct connection but the mention of Midian, Medan, Sheba and Dedan, well known in later Biblical records, would seem more than a coincidence, especially as connected with Ishmael and the fact that they are specifically said to have moved to the land of the East.
“And Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac.”
This is his ‘last will and testament', made while he is still alive, and confirms Isaac as sole heir over the family tribe and its wealth.
‘But to the sons of the concubines whom Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts. And he sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward to the east country.'
Abraham deals fairly with all his sons and provides generously for them. But he wisely ensures the succession of Isaac without trouble by ensuring that they establish themselves elsewhere. While he is still alive he sends them away eastward (from Beersheba) ‘to the East country'.
‘And these are the days of the years of Abraham's life which he lived, a hundred and seventy five years. And Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people.'
The one hundred and seventy five years is made up of seventy five years prior to his arrival in Canaan (see on 12:4) and one hundred years in the land. Both are probably symbolic round numbers denoting a goodly time and suggesting a completeness in each sphere of his life. (See on chapter 5 and 12:4). To live a long life was seen as evidence of a man's worthiness and Abraham was clearly worthy.
“And was gathered to his people.” Simply denoting burial. He went the way of all his family to the shadowy world of the grave. No clear teaching on an afterlife is evident in the patriarchal history, nor in Israel's early history. They concentrated on God's purposes in this world and left the future in God's hands. This may well have been a reaction to the ideas in religions round about them which they rejected.
‘And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre, the field which Abraham purchased from the children of Heth. There was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife.'
Isaac and Ishmael come together to bury their father. This suggests that they kept in close contact, for burials could not be delayed in a hot country. The general impression from hints in the narratives is that their relationship was friendly.
Stress is laid on the fact that Abraham is buried in what was his own territory. Possession of the land had begun. The basic facts in the account in chapter 23 were clearly familiar to the author.
‘And it happened after the death of Abraham that God blessed Isaac his son, and Isaac dwelt by Beer-lahai-roi.'
This brief sentence speaks volumes. It demonstrates that Isaac prospered under God's hand. It also shows that he went with his family tribe to live within easy contact of Ishmael (see on 24:62). The use of ‘God' instead of ‘Yahweh' may reflect Ishmael's hand.
‘This is the family history of Ishmael, Abraham's son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's handmaid, bore to Abraham.'
This give us good reason to believe that this record was made by Ishmael as the senior male in the family, and that this is the colophon to the tablet (see article, " "). We have already had cause to suggest record keeping by Ishmael (see on 21:1-21). It would serve to reinforce his good relationship with Isaac and accurately depicts the inheritance position and the influence of the wider family. That Ishmael had close connection with the sons of Keturah comes out later in that Midianites and Medanites can be referred to as Ishmaelites (Judges 8:24; Genesis 37:27 with Genesis 37:36).
The main early record in Genesis was clearly put together from ancient ‘covenant' tablets, and traces of colophons are found throughout. Certain material was necessarily added by the original compiler to connect them and it is clearly not always possible to determine what was his work and what was in the original tablets, and what was omitted to ensure a reasonably smooth flow of the narrative. But perusal of the record does suggest that on the whole the records were incorporated as they were with connecting links but with little alteration. (Alternately this phrase may be seen as the colophon to the following tablet).