FWIW, this book is a good example of how the inter-relationship of a variety of texts can be discussed and "on-topic" for BH.SE. (Whatever one thinks of its conclusions!) The opening couple chapters are very helpful in terms of theory and approach.

amazon.com/Biblical-Interpretation-Ancient-Clarendon-Paperbacks/…

^^^^ The (modern) classic on this topic.

@Davïd @PaulVargas I agree with Paul that a "systematic interpretation" is okay on the site (it is not the same as systematic theology).

What Davïd sees as an "anachronistic framework" (if I understand him correctly), I view as a framework that develops out of the Scriptures themselves, which were not yet completed when early Judaism was attempting its exegesis (and failing, since Jesus points out they were missing the point on many texts), and still being developed as more Scripture is understood as a united whole after the completion of its progressive revelation.

So while I do think the question is not worded well, assuming too much of a "framework" to begin with (which should be left to answers), the linking of Edom in the texts makes the question valid in principle for the site. It would be best for the OP to reword it without as much emphasis on framework (which could be alluded to simply in his link to my answer that apparently solicited the question to begin with).

That's all I have time to weigh in for an opinion on that at the moment.

@JonEricson I suspect that there was a small change in the style sheet of Stack Overflow.