In Genesis 36:2–3, Esau’s wives differ from those mentioned in Genesis 26:34 and 28:9—why the discrepancy?

I. Overview of the Question

Genesis presents Esau’s wives under different names in various passages. In Genesis 26:34 we read:

“When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite.”

Later, Genesis 28:9 says:

“So Esau went to Ishmael and married Mahalath, the sister of Nebaioth and daughter of Ishmael son of Abraham, in addition to the wives he already had.”

Yet, in Genesis 36:2–3, we see different names:

“Esau took his wives from the daughters of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite; Oholibamah daughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite; and Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.”

Many question why there appear to be discrepancies between these three verses and whether it indicates a contradiction. A careful look at naming customs, genealogical references, and ancient practices provides a consistent explanation.

II. The Specific Names in Genesis 26, 28, and 36

1. Genesis 26:34 mentions:

• Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite

• Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite

2. Genesis 28:9 adds another wife:

• Mahalath daughter of Ishmael (sister of Nebaioth)

3. Genesis 36:2–3 names three wives differently:

• Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite

• Oholibamah daughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite

• Basemath daughter of Ishmael (sister of Nebaioth)

At first glance, readers see “Adah” and “Oholibamah” instead of “Judith” and “Basemath” (the Hittite), and “Basemath” (the Ishmaelite) instead of “Mahalath.” Recognizing multiple names, alternate name forms, or different genealogical titles in biblical narratives helps us resolve these perceived differences.

III. Common Ancient Near Eastern Naming Conventions

1. Multiple Names or Epithets

In ancient times, it was not unusual for a person to be known by more than one name. For instance, an individual could have a birth name, a familial name, a name conferred due to marriage or location, or even a new name given under certain religious or life circumstances.

2. Family References and Title Changes

Sometimes a person in Scripture is referred to by her father’s name; other times, by her grandfather’s or tribal name. One biblical figure may be identified one way in genealogical lists to highlight a certain lineage, and another way elsewhere to emphasize a different ancestral line.

3. Use of Descriptive Nicknames

Names could carry descriptive meanings that were interchanged with given names. For instance, “Mahalath” could also be known by another name referencing her lineage or a personal attribute.

These conventions help explain why Esau’s wives might be listed by different names or paternal references from one chapter to another. Such variations were part of everyday life in the ancient Near East and do not signal an error or contradiction.

IV. Harmonizing the Accounts

1. Adah and Basemath (the Hittite)

• Genesis 36:2 speaks of “Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite.”

• Genesis 26:34 speaks of “Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite.”

Many interpreters conclude these two references point to the same woman, sometimes known as “Basemath” and at other times called “Adah.” The Hittite father, Elon, is the consistent detail making it clear they refer to one person with two names.

2. Judith and Oholibamah

• Genesis 26:34: “Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite.”

• Genesis 36:2: “Oholibamah daughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite.”

Several scholars suggest “Judith” could be another name or form of “Oholibamah.” Some propose that “Beeri” is an alternative name for “Anah,” or that “Beeri” and “Anah” may have been used interchangeably to identify the same family lineage. In some biblical genealogies, an individual is connected to both father and grandfather, leading to slightly different descriptions.

3. Mahalath and Basemath (the Ishmaelite)

• Genesis 28:9: “Mahalath … daughter of Ishmael.”

• Genesis 36:3: “Basemath daughter of Ishmael.”

The woman from Ishmael’s line is named “Mahalath” in one passage and “Basemath” in another. This again fits the multiple-name pattern. The linkage to Ishmael and Nebaioth in both references (Genesis 28:9; 36:3) confirms it is the same individual.

4. Conclusion on Name Variations

These differences align with the recognized practice of multiple names in Scripture (e.g., Jacob also being known as Israel in Genesis 32:28). Because the genealogies still point to the same paternal lines, these references are not contradictory but complementary. They reflect a culture where individuals were often referenced by more than one name or through different genealogical angles.

V. Teaching Points and Historical Consistency

1. Reliability of the Text

Ancient manuscript evidence—such as the Dead Sea Scrolls—preserves these variations without attempting to “smooth” them out, reflecting the meticulous care of scribes and an honest transmission of genealogical details. The name differences stand as they are, showing no attempt to hide or revise them. This transparent preservation supports the historical reliability of Scripture.

2. Cultural Context

Archaeological findings from ancient Near Eastern cultures show that people frequently used dual names, often one in a native language and another in a secondary or diplomatic language. Scripture’s mention of multiple names for the same person reflects a real cultural pattern known to historians and archaeologists.

3. Scriptural Harmony

While readers of a modern mindset might wish for a single, unchanging name in every passage, the biblical writers often highlight names with specific contexts or genealogical emphasis. In the grand narrative of Genesis, these details reveal marriage alliances (Esau with Hittites and Ishmaelites) that had deep implications for later family dynamics. The biblical text remains internally consistent when understood through the lens of ancient practices and naming conventions.

VI. Practical Observations

1. Scripture’s Integrity

The inclusion of these details, even when they appear challenging at first glance, underscores Scripture’s authenticity. The Bible does not shy away from complex genealogies or multiple names. It all bears witness to an overarching historical account that is consistent when carefully examined.

2. Importance of Context

Studying the historical and cultural background in which the Bible was written is crucial. Names, genealogies, and family line references often carried cultural significance that modern readers must recapture to grasp the text’s coherence fully.

3. Unity in Diversity

Just as today a person might be known by a nickname among friends, a formal name in legal documents, or a married name after a wedding, so also the biblical figures had multiple designations. This does not undermine the truthfulness of Scripture but rather validates the normal human realities involved in the text’s composition.

VII. Conclusion

The seeming discrepancy in Esau’s wives’ names between Genesis 26:34, 28:9, and 36:2–3 is resolved by recognizing the ancient Near Eastern custom of using multiple names or titles. Judith can be identified as Oholibamah, Basemath the Hittite also as Adah, and Mahalath the Ishmaelite as Basemath. These variations are consistent with ancient naming practices and do not represent contradictions in Scripture. Instead, they attest to the rich cultural context in which Genesis was written and preserved.

As with other genealogical details in the Bible, these differences demonstrate Scripture’s careful documentation of family lines without smoothing out natural cultural complexities. They also invite us to study these texts within their historical and linguistic settings. Far from undermining confidence in the biblical record, these passages affirm its authenticity and reliability when read in context.