Amalek (/ˈæməlɛk/;[1]Biblical Hebrew:עֲמָלֵק,romanized: ʿĂmālēq) was a nation described in theHebrew Bible as a staunch enemy of theIsraelites. The name "Amalek" can refer to the nation's founder, a grandson ofEsau; his descendants, theAmalekites; or the territories of Amalek, which they inhabited.
According to theTorah, there is a commandment to exterminate the memory of Amalek. However, most Jewish commentators maintain that this commandment is no longer applicable today - either because it could only be fulfilled during the period when there was a king in Israel, or because the biblical Amalek no longer exists, or because the commandment is understood as symbolic, representing the elimination of evil in the world or as a call for God to carry out this act.
Most scholars regard the origin of the term, "Amalek" to be unknown[2] but in some rabbinical interpretations, it is etymologized asam lak, 'a people who lick (blood)'.[3]
Richard C. Steiner has suggested that the name is derived from theEgyptian term*ꜥꜣm rqj "hostile Asiatic", possibly referring toShasu tribesmen from aroundEdom.[4]
According to the Bible, Amalek was the son ofEliphaz (himself the son ofEsau, ancestor of theEdomites and the brother ofIsrael) and Eliphaz'sconcubine Timna. Timna was aHorite and sister ofLotan.[5] According to amidrash, Timna was a princess who tried toconvert. However, she was rejected byAbraham,Isaac andJacob. She replied she would rather be a handmaiden to the dregs of Israel than be a mistress of another gentile nation. To punishthe Patriarchs for their attitudes, God caused Timna to give birth to Amalek, whose descendants would cause Israel much distress. Amalek was also the product of an incestuous union since Eliphaz was Timna's stepfather according to1 Chronicles 1:36,[6] after he committed adultery with the wife of Seir the Horite, who was Timna's biological father.[7][8] First-century Roman Jewish scholar and historianJosephus refers to Amalek as a "bastard" (Koine Greek:νόθος);[9] the Hebrew equivalent,mamzer, is a specific category of persons born from a forbidden relationship.
Amalek is described in Genesis 36:16[10] as the "chief of Amalek" among the "chiefs of the sons of Esau", from which it is surmised that he ruled a clan or territory named after him. In the oracle ofBalaam, Amalek was called the "first of the nations".[11] One modern scholar believes this attests to Amalek's high antiquity,[12] while traditional commentatorRashi states: "He came before all of them to make war with Israel".[13] TheAmalekites (/ˈæməlɛkaɪts/)[14] were claimed to be Amalek's descendants through the genealogy of Esau.[15]
According to the Hebrew Bible, the Amalekites inhabited theNegev andSinai Peninsula.[16] They appear to have lived anomadic or seminomadic lifestyle along the fringes of southernCanaan's agricultural zone.[17] This is probably based on the association of this tribal group with the steppe region of ancient Israel and the area ofKadesh (Genesis 14:7).
As a people, the Amalekites are identified throughout the Bible as a recurrent enemy of the Israelites:[15]
In theMishneh Torah,Maimonides derived three commandments, two positive and one negative, related to references to Amalek in theTorah:
| # | Type | Commandment | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 59 | Negative | Not to forget the wicked deeds which Amalek perpetrated against us[46] | "Do not forget" (Deut. 25:19) |
| 188 | Positive | To exterminate the seed of Amalek[47] | "You shall blot out the memory of Amalek" (Deut. 25:19) |
| 189 | Positive | To constantly remember what Amalek did to us[48] | "Remember what Amalek did to you" (Deut. 25:17) |
Many rabbinic authorities such asMaimonides ruled that the commandment only applies to a Jewish king or an organized community, and cannot be performed by an individual.[49] According toRashi, the Amalekites were sorcerers who could transform themselves to resemble animals, in order to avoid capture. Thus, in1 Samuel 15:3, it was considered necessary to destroy the livestock when destroying Amalek.[50] According toHaggahot Maimuniyyot, the commandment only applies to theMessianic Age and not present times; medieval authorities widely support this limitation.[51] According to the Midrash, every nation on Earth has a guardian angel overseeing its destiny, except for two: Israel rejected archangelMichael as its guardian, in favor of God himself. The other is Amalek, whose guardian angel is the foremost angel of evil,Satan. The final war will be fought between the children of God and the children of Satan, between good and evil. This is possibly why the 188th commandment exists: to wipe out Amalek completely, male and female, young and old, sparing none, since evil has no future. However, one obscure prophecy states that all nations will eventually worship God alone, which raises the question of how there can be aThird Temple when Amalek is annihilated. The Midrash state there is no quandary, given the last Amalekite is a convert to Judaism.[52]
Maimonides elaborates that when the Jewish people wage war against Amalek, they must request the Amalekites to accept theSeven Laws of Noah and pay a tax to the Jewish kingdom. If they refuse, they are to be executed.[53]
The Zohar interprets the concept of Amalek differently: not as a distinct ethnic nation, but as the evil inclination (yetzer hara) present in every person, which must be eradicated and this interpretation became widespread amongSephardi Jewish commentators.[54]
Other Talmudic commentators argued that the calls to spare no Amalekite or "blot out their memory" were metaphorical[55] and did not require the actual killing of Amalekites.Samson Raphael Hirsch said that the command was to destroy "the remembrance of Amalek" rather than actual Amalekites.[56]Yehudah Aryeh Leib Alter interpreted the command as thoroughly hating Amalek without performing any physical action.[57]Yisrael Meir Kagan said that God would perform the elimination of Amalek and that Jews only need to remember what Amalek did to them.[58]
Isaac S.D. Sassoon believes that theḥerem commands existed to prevent the Jewish community from being endangered but believes people should think twice before literally following them.[59] Nathan Lopes Cardozo argues that the Torah's ethically questionable laws were intentional since they were a result of God working with an underdeveloped world. He believes that God appointed theChazal to help humanity evolve in their understanding of the Torah.[60]
TheologianCharles Ellicott explains that the Amalekites were subject toḥerem in theBook of Samuel forincapacitation due to their 'accursed' nature and the threat they posed to the commonwealth of surrounding nations.[33]Matthew Henry considers theḥerem to be defensive warfare since the Amalekites were invaders.[61]John Gill describes theḥerem as thelaw of retaliation being carried out.[62]
According to Christian Hofreiter, almost all Christian authorities and theologians have historically interpreted theḥerem passages literally. He states that "there is practically no historical evidence that anyone in theGreat Church" viewed them as being purely an allegory. In particular,Augustine,Thomas Aquinas andJohn Calvin have defended a literal reading of these passages at length.Origen is sometimes cited as having viewed theḥerem passages allegorically; Hofreiter argues that although Origen prioritized a spiritual interpretation of the Bible, he did not deny that theherem passages described historical events.[63]
Some commentators have discussed the ethics of the commandment to exterminate all the Amalekites, including children, and the presumption ofcollective punishment.[64][65][66][67] It has also been described asgenocidal, according togenocide scholars likeNorman Naimark.[68][69][70][37]
Gili Kugler of theUniversity of Haifa argues that the biblical condemnation of Amalek is reflective of the Israelites' fears of national destruction or a recurring historical evil, thus providing an answer to the problem of evil. It also reflected the Israelites' attempts to consolidate their ethnic identity since Amalek was acknowledged to be related to Israel but nonetheless, represented the "unwelcome brother and the rejected son". Kugler also argued that the Israelites perceived Amalek to be a reflection of themselves, containing everything that they hated, which they sought to eradicate. The emphasis of Amalek's destruction in the Book of Samuel additionally highlighted the leadership qualities of Saul and David.[37]
According to Ada Taggar-Cohen ofDoshisha University,ḥerem commands were not uncommon in the ancient Near East. These commands had a dual purpose: convey to an enemy that the aggressor's deity was on their side, and that the enemy deserved the deity's wrath as punishment for their "sins". They also allowed kings to pursue militarist policies without accepting moral responsibility.[71] C. L. Crouch ofRadboud University considers theḥerem commands to be an exceptional component to Israelite and Judahite warfare. They were erratically applied, even in the early stages of national and ethnic identity formation, and were an extreme means to eradicate the threat of chaos, views shared byAssyrian rulers such asEsarhaddon andAssurbanipal.[72]
Paul Copan argues that theḥerem commands were hyperbolic since the passages containmerisms such as "man and woman"[73] and Near Easterners valued "bravado and exaggeration" when reporting warfare.[74][75] Kluger believes this is an earnest attempt to absolve the Israelites, and their God, of moral responsibility. Nonetheless, she argues Copan's interpretation still "normalizes mass violence" and "hostility towards targeted groups".[37] However, scholars such asJohn H. Walton andKenneth Kitchen also concluded that such language in the Hebrew Bible was hyperbolic, based on comparisons to the language of other literary cultures.[76][77]
Egyptian and Assyrian monumental inscriptions and records lack any reference to Amalek or the Amalekites, even though both recorded various tribes and peoples of the Levant. This led archaeologistHugo Winckler to conclude that the Amalekites and the Biblical stories about them were ahistorical.[78] Although archaeological research has improved knowledge about nomadic Arabs, no specific findings definitively link to Amalek.[17]
However, some scholars propose a connection between Amalekites and certain fortified settlements in theNegev highlands, such asTel Masos nearBeer-sheba, which is possibly equivalent to ancientHormah.[79][80] If true,Saul's campaigns against the Amalekites may have been motivated by a strategic desire to control of copper production at Tel Masos, a valuable resource for the early Israelites and their theology and rituals.[81]
Further archaeological evidence from sites in the Negev likeTell el-Qudeirat and Horvat Haluqim, dating to the late 11th to early 10th century BC, could corroborate with the Biblical Israelite-Amalekite confrontations during the reigns of Saul andDavid. Hendrik J. Bruins ofBen Gurion University of the Negev discovered that their inhabitants weresemi-nomadicagro-pastoralists who lived in tents, rode camels, traded copper, and worshipped gods atmasseboth shrines. Oval fortresses were built during the relevant timeframe. Still, other scholars attribute these settlements to theEdomites orSimeonites.[82]
.jpg)
InGenesis 14:7, the "field of the Amalekites" is mentioned, but the person who is named Amalek was not born yet.
Some commentators claim that this passage is a reference to the territory which was later inhabited by the Amalekites.[83]C. Knight elaborates this concept by making a comparison: one might say "Caesar went into France", though Gaul only later became known as France.[84]
John Gill believes the Amalekites ofGenesis 14:7 were equivalent to the Hamite-Arabian Amalekites described by Muslim scholars. He argues the Amalekites were always allied with the Canaanites who descended from Ham, were conquered by theShemiteChedorlaomer, existed before the Edomite Amalekites thus affirmingNumbers 24:20, and that the Edomites never rescued these Amalekites from Saul's campaigns due to inter-tribal feuds.[85]
By the 19th century, many Western theologians believed that the nation of Amalek could have flourished before the time of Abraham.Matthew George Easton theorized that the Amalekites were not the descendants of Amalek by taking aliteral approach toGenesis 14:7.[86] However, the modern biblical scholar Gerald L. Mattingly usestextual analysis to glean that the use ofAmalekite inGenesis 14:7 is actually ananachronism,[17] and in the early 19th century,Richard Watson enumerated several speculative reasons for the existence of a "more ancient Amalek" than Abraham.[87]
In hisexegesis ofNumbers 24:20, concerning Balaam's utterance: "Amalek was the first one of the nations, but his end afterward will be even his perishing", Richard Watson attempts to associate this passage to the "first one of the nations" that developedpost-Flood.[87] According toSamuel Cox, the Amalekites were the "first" in their hostility toward the Israelites.[88]
Amalek is the archetypal enemy of the Jews and the symbol of evil inJewish religion andfolklore.[89]Nur Masalha, Elliot Horowitz, and Josef Stern suggest that the Amalekites represent an "eternally irreconciliable enemy" that wants to murder Jews. In post-biblical times, Jews associated contemporary enemies with Amalek or Haman and, occasionally, believed pre-emptive violence is acceptable against such enemies.[90] Groups identified with Amalek include theRomans,Nazis,Stalinists,Islamic State,[91] and bellicose Iranian leaders such asMahmoud Ahmadinejad.[92][93] More metaphorically, to someHasidicrabbis (particularly theBaal Shem Tov), Amalek representsatheism or thecynical rejection of God, which leads tounethical hedonism. This is sometimes known as the "Amalekite doctrine".[94] In contemporary times, religious Jews associate Amalek withviolent antisemites,[90][95]nihilism andJewish doubt in God.[94]
During thePurim festival, theBook of Esther is read in commemoration of the salvation of Jewish people fromHaman, who plotted to kill allJews in Persian Empire. It is customary for the audience to make noise and shout whenever "Haman" is mentioned, in order to desecrate his name, based onExodus 17:14. It is also customary to reciteDeuteronomy 25:17–18 on theShabbat before Purim. This was because Haman was considered to be an Amalekite, although this label is potentially symbolic, rather than literal.[96][95][97] Some Iranophilic Jews interpreted Haman's Amalekite background as being anathema to both Jews and 'pure-blooded Iranians'.[98]
In the past, some Jews associated Amalek with theRoman Empire andmedieval Christians.[99]
Most contemporary rabbis now say that Amalek no longer exists as a unified nation, based on the argument thatSennacherib deported and mixed the nations, so it is now impossible to determine who is an Amalekite.[100] Hence, the command to kill Amalekites no longer holds in Jewish law. Instead, the behaviour Jewish tradition says was a characteristic of Amalek still exists and needs to be destroyed. This can be by removing certain negative character traits in an individual.[101] Since the Holocaust, the phrase as it appears inDeuteronomy 25:17 is used as a call to witness. It appears on a banner at Israel's memorial to the Holocaust,Yad Vashem, and Yad Vashem archives include letters between European Jews during the Holocaust in which they plead with one another to bear witness should they survive. It is also inscribed, atThe Hague, on a memorial to Dutch Jews murdered during the Holocaust.[55]`
Early Church fathers such asJustin Martyr,Irenaeus andCyprian consider the defeat of Amalek inExodus 17:8–13 to be reminiscent ofJesus defeating the powers of thedevil at thecross. Origen sees the battle as an allegory of theLaw mysteriously invokingChrist, who recruits strong people (i.e.Christians) to defeat the demonic Strong Man, as described inEphesians 6:12.[102]
John Gill believes that Amalek is a type ofantichrist that 'raises his hand against the throne of God, his tabernacle and his saints'. He believes the phrase "from generation to generation" inExodus 17:16 specifically refers to theMessianic Age, where Amalek and other antichristian states are exterminated by theLamb.[103] Likewise, Charles Ellicott notes that the Amalekites were collectively called 'the sinners' in1 Samuel 15:18, which was only used elsewhere for theSodomites inGenesis 13:13.[33]
Carl Friedrich Keil andFranz Delitzsch state that the Amalekites were extinct by the second half of Hezekiah's reign.[104]
ProfessorPhilip Jenkins notes that Christian extremists have historically labelled enemies such as Native Americans, Protestants, Catholics and Tutsis as Amalekites to justify their genocides.[105] Jews and victims of the Crusades were also called Amalekites. Because of this, modern Christian scholars have re-examined the Biblical narratives that inspired these atrocities using philology, literary analysis, archaeology and historical evidence.[37]
Islamic commentators[who?] believe that the Amalekites were an ancient Arabian tribe. ThemonotheisticIshmaelites evangelized to them inMecca and later, they supplanted their population. However, the paganism of the Amalekites and other Arabian tribes negatively influenced the Ishmaelites, including their approach to theKaaba.[106]
Ibn Khaldūn believed that God orderedSaul, the king of Israel, to depose the Amalekites, which causedHaman's hostility to the Jews in theBook of Esther.[98]
Adam J. Silverstein observes that most scholars who lived in the medieval Muslim world ignored the Book of Esther or they modified the details of it, despite their familiarity with thePersian Jewish community. This was caused by their attempt to reconcile the Biblical Esther with theQuranic Haman, who was the antagonist of theExodus narrative, and Persian mythological historical traditions. Notable exceptions includeIbn Khaldūn, who affirmed the Amalekite origins of Haman and hisantisemitic vendetta.[98]
Many have identified Hitler as anAmalekite.[107][108][109] According to the Hebrew Bible, Amalek lived inCanaan: "Amalek dwells in the south land" (Numbers 13:29). The Israelites were instructed to kill all those who dwelled in Canaan: "thou shalt save alive nothing that breathes" (Deuteronomy 19:16) otherwise "I shall do to you, as I thought to do to them" (Numbers 33:56). Amalek and Israel were archenemies, their enmity originating from theBattle of Refidim, where the Amalekites targeted and killed weak Israelites. As a result, God decreed Amalek to be obliterated "from beneath the heavens" (Deuteronomy 25:19). The Hebrew Bible connects "Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite" (Esther 3:1), the genocidal antagonist of theBook of Esther, toAgag, king of Amalek, whom the Israelites failed to kill (I Samuel 15:9). According to these verses Hitler may be seen as a result of this failure. However, Hitler could also be seen as a "symbolic" Amalekite.[110][92]
In 1898, when the German Kaiser Wilhelm visited Jerusalem, all Jews wanted to see him pass. Other Rabbis asked why the revered RabbiYosef Chaim Sonnenfeld refused - especially as it would have given him the rare opportunity of reciting the blessing on seeing a major non-Jewish leader.[111] Rabbi Sonnenfeld stated that he had a tradition from theVilna Gaon that descendants of Amalek were in Germany and so it would be wrong to praise the Kaiser.[112]
The idea of linking Germany with Amalek is based on a word in the Talmud (Megilla 6b).[113] This word was interpreted by Vilna Gaon to mean the area of current Germany (although at his time there was no such country -Germany only became a nation with that name in 1871). This was identified as a nation including descendents of Amalek who would cause massive harm to Jews - as was the case during the Nazi era.
In theIsrael–Palestine conflict, some Israeli politicians have compared Palestinians to Amalek, stated that the Palestinians are the Amalekites[114][115] or accused Arabs of exhibiting "behavior" that is "typical" of Amalekites.[99]Yasser Arafat was called "the Amalek andHitler of our generation" by 200 rabbis.[99] Many in theGush Emunim movement see Arabs as the "Amalek of today".[116] According to few rabbis from the radical wing of theNational Religious camp, Amalek is any nation that preventsJews from settling in theLand of Israel, which includes thePalestinians, as they refuse to leave their ancestral homeland.[117]
Baruch Goldstein, whokilled 29 Palestinians at the Cave of Patriarchs, compared Palestinians to Amalekites, seeing both as desert-dwelling "predators" of the Jewish people.[118] Goldstein's mass shooting itself happened shortly after the reading of the Amalek narrative onShabbat Zachor prior to Purim in 1994.[119][120]Meir Kahane tended to see all enemies of Israel as modern-day Amalek, while other Jewish scholars see this as a distortion of the Torah.[120]
During theGaza warBenjamin Netanyahu said: "You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember".[121] At an argument to theInternational Court of Justice (ICJ) aboutallegations of genocide in the 2023 Israeli attack on Gaza,South Africa presented the comments as inciting genocide against the Palestinian people. Netanyahu denied that was his intention, stating the South African accusation reflected a "deep historical ignorance" since he was referring toHamas.[122][123]
Multiple members of the IsraeliKnesset, includingAvihai Boaron,Amihai Eliyahu,Tally Gotliv, andBezalel Smotrich, have invoked the commandment to wipe out the memory of Amalek in reference to the war in Gaza.[124][125][126]
In response to the accusations in the ICJ case, theIsrael Democracy Institute issued a legal opinion stating that the references to Amalek in the context of the war were misunderstood. According to the opinion, the commandment to annihilate Amalek has effectively been erased fromJewish law; moreover, the indictment misquoted Netanyahu - he did not refer to the commandment to annihilate Amalek, but rather to the commandment to remember what Amalek did. In addition, statements made by Israeli speakers were directed against members of Hamas, not against the Palestinian population of Gaza as a whole.[127]
There have been examples of secular Zionists also using the Amalek metaphor.[119] For example,Ariel Porat, the president ofTel Aviv University, cited the example of Amalek to justify Israel's attack on Gaza.[119]
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
Hirsch, Emil; Seligsohn, M.; Schechter, Solomon (1904)."HAMAN THE AGAGITE". InSinger, Isidore; et al. (eds.).The Jewish Encyclopedia. Vol. 6. New York: Funk & Wagnalls. p. 189–190. Retrieved 13 February 2017{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of January 2026 (link)
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
