Anakim in Kiriath-arba

“There we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, descended from the giants. In our eyes, we seemed like grasshoppers, and so we were in their eyes.” Numbers 13:13

Commenting on the earliest reference to the Anakim from Numbers where the Israelite spies claim to have seen “giants, the sons of Anak” Rashi says “הנפילים (lit., the fallen ones) — Anakim who were descendants of Shemchazai and Azael who fell from heaven in the generation of Enosh (cf. Targum Jonathan on Genesis 6:4 and Rashi on Niddah 61a s. v. בני אחיה).”¹ Rashi outright states not only are the Anakim related to the Nephilim, but they are descendants explicitly of Shemhazai and Azael who “fell from heaven”; that makes them angelic. We actually know these spies weren’t lying based on the line from Joshua confirming the Anakim in the land “Now therefore give me this mountain, whereof the LORD spoke in that day; for thou heardest in that day how the Anakim were there, and cities great and fortified”²

Rashi further states “Anak: [The name עִנָק is given] because the sun was draped around the neck מַעֲנִיקִים because of their height. — [Sotah 34b]”³ We covered this in our discussion on the Nephilim in Genesis, and the illusions this imagery has to idol worship in the generation of Enosh. However, we must be clear that this is in reference to the Anakim, who because of their height have the sun draped around their neck. Height here could mean “stature”, but they were large none-the-less.

We have more from Rabbinic literature on this “sun around their necks” from Bereshit Rabbah where the sages say: “Anakim – the Rabbis and Rabbi Aḥa, the Rabbis say: They would wear numerous necklaces upon necklaces [anakim]. *This is an indication of their wealth – anak is one of the words for necklace. Rabbi Aḥa said: It was as though they wore the sun as a necklace, *They lifted up their heads arrogantly towards the sun. and said: ‘[Go away and] let the rain fall upon us.’”⁴ We really see that among all the other groups, the Anakim are not just giants, or powerful warriors, but are almost wealthy nobility, differing from the more war-like culture of the other giant groups.

Adding to this theory's strength we have Ibn Ezra who says “Behold, the sons of Anak were originally from the family of the sons of gods. Thus we see that the descendants of the nephilim lived on after the flood.”⁵ Ibn Ezra ties them right back to the sons of gods, really honing in on the idolatry imagery.

We have an entire description of this lineage replete with negative imagery from Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer “Rabbi Joshua said: The angels are flaming fire, as it is said, "His servants are a flaming fire" (Ps. 104:4), and fire came with the coition of flesh and blood, but did not burn the body; but when they fell from heaven, from their holy place, their strength and stature (became) like that of the sons of men, and their frame was (made of) clods of dust, as it is said, "My flesh is clothed with worms and clods of dust" (Job 7:5).”⁶

“Rabbi Zadok said: From them were born the giants (Anakim), who walked with pride in their heart, and who stretched forth their hand to all (kinds of) robbery and violence, and shedding of blood, as it is said, "And there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak" (Num. 13:33); and it says, "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days" (Gen. 6:4).”⁷

“Rabbi Levi said: They bare their sons and increased and multiplied like a great reptile, six children at each birth. In that very hour they stood on their feet, and spoke the holy language, and danced before them like sheep, as it is said, "They cast their young like sheep, and their children danced" (Job 21:11).”⁸

Helping affirm that the Anakim are giants and they are Rephaim is a line from Deuteronomy “The Emim dwelt there formerly, a great and numerous people, and tall [in stature], as the Anakim; They also are considered Rephaim, as the Anakim; but the Moabites call them Emim.”⁹

Later in the text there is a line that uses the term “THOU SHALT FURNISH HIM LIBERALLY. Ha’anek ta’anik (thou shalt furnish him liberally) means treat him gloriously. Ta’anik (thou shalt furnish him) is related to the word anakim (chains) *Ornamental chains. in And chains about thy neck (Prov. 1:9). *According to this interpretation, ha’anek ta’anik (thou shalt furnish him liberally) literally means thou shalt put ornament on him. Hence I.E.’s interpretation. On the other hand, the meaning of ta’anik is to be derived from its context. *In other words, ta’anik (thou shalt furnish him) is not related to the word anakim (chains) in And chains about thy neck (Prov. 1:9). In this case, the word has no brother. *It is not found again in Scripture. Its meaning is to be derived from its context.”¹⁰ From Ibn Ezra we can see lines that don’t appear at first related to the Anakim actually do harken back to these people.

While a location for the previous six groups all came from our war with Amraphel, the Anakim do not appear listed there and thus lack a specific location. Possibly because they were in Egypt at the time, well past the boundary where Amraphel was campaigning. However, we actually are given a location for Anak and his sons from Joshua “And Joshua came at that time, and cut off the Anakim from the hill-country, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the hill-country of Judah, and from all the hill-country of Israel;”¹¹ Here the Anakim were all around Canaan, specifically in the more hilly regions, but particularly with what appears like a capital at Hebron.

The text goes on to explain how Joshua completely wiped out the Anakim, but with the implication they are expelled from the land rather than completed killed “Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities.There was none of the Anakim left in the land of the children of Israel; only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod, did some remain.”¹² We see that while they may have been all over, centralized around Hebron, they are now only remnants in the Philistine cities.

Interestingly though, further in Joshua, there are more lines regarding the Anakim and Hebron “Now the name of Hebron beforetime was Kiriath-arba, which Arba was the greatest man among the Anakim. And the land had rest from war.”¹³ Who is this Arba? From Ibn Ezra “The identification of Arba with Abraham is homiletical, (Bereshit Rabbah 14:6). as Abraham was not of that race. When Sarah died Abraham was elsewhere; hence Scripture states, and Abraham came.”¹⁴ What he appears to be saying is that Abraham was among the Anakim, but not genetically an Anakim, but did indeed dwell in Hebron prior to their expulsion. This makes sense. If Abraham was in Hebron, and the Anakim survived until the era of Joshua’s expulsion, then Abraham had to have been a resident of their city.

However, what about this alternative name “Arba” for Abraham? First, we must remember his name was originally Ab-ram, without the extra ‘h’ - later added to signify his covenant with Hashem. The name appears to come from some inversion of the name, but from a later Rashi commentary on Job the mystery actually deepens  “Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite of the family of Ram, as it is stated (Josh. 14:15): “the greatest man among the Anakim.” This is Abraham.”¹⁵ Based on the identification of Joshua, Rashi goes all the way to claim that Elihu, descendant from some tribe, or clan name the Buzites, was part of the “family of Ram”. He goes as far to claim Ram is Ab-ram, which could be a modifier of the term “Father Ram” as a familiar designation. Is this “family of Ram” almost like a Levite priest class of Avraham? Are they Israelites? Did they go to Egypt with the rest of Jacob’s family? It is a strange mystery of the Torah, but one that is sadly irrelevant to the Anakim.

Let us turn our attention to contemporary sources from the period. Helpfully we actually have historical records of the Anakim mentioned in Egyptian Execration texts from the Middle Kingdom circa 2055-1650 BCE, as a political enemy for Egypt located within Canaan under the name “ly Anaq”, or people of Anaq. There were three rulers of this tribe named Erum, Abiyamimu, and Akirum coincidentally, or not, mirroring both the three sons of Anak: Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai; as well as the three cities in Philistia controlled by the Anakim: Gaza, Gath, Ashdod.¹⁶

Actually looking into the names of Anak’s sons might give us an interesting lead. Both Egyptologists and Archeologists have proposed that the name Sheshai is tentatively linked to a Second Intermediate Period ruler named “Maaibre Sheshi”.¹⁷¹⁸ This Sheshi ruled sometime between 1750 and 1650 BCE and not only was some mere ruler, but actually a ruler of parts of Egypt with theories linking him to the important Canaanite Kings over Egypt called the Hyksos. There could be some type of link between the Hyksos, and the sons of Anak.

The name Talmai might be related to the hieroglyphic inscription where a “Tanmahu” might have swapped the L for a N. This name is seen on the wall of the tomb of Aimenepthah I and is reportedly more of a tribal representation than a specific individual. This would make each son of Anak a tribe unto himself, potentially somehow related to the Hyksos Canaanite groups.

Little can be said about the other two names, but they do appear to have Hebrew and Aramaic variants - likewise associated definitions - that hint for a Canaanite origin like their brother, potential Hyksos ruler Sheshi. However, given the strange milieu that the Hyksos arrived into Egypt under, we really don’t understand their genetic, or cultural background all that well due to the melting pot of the Nile Delta in this period. The collapse of the Cretians certainly contributed, as we will discuss in the Book of Ham with the arrival of the Caphtorites in the area.

The hypothesis that the name “Anak” is derived from the Greek title for a ruler “wanax” is entirely plausible, especially given their philistine cities' territory which were co-settled by Aegean tribes.¹⁹ Within Greek mythology we are told of a king of Anactoria (Miletus) named Anax - eerily similar to the generic title Wanax and the name Anak.²⁰

Like the title Wanax, Anax simply means tribal chief, or military leader of a small group, but he serves an important role as founder of Anactoria, the original name of the city Miletus, with a much closer sounding name to Anak than Anax. According to Pausanius, this Anax is the son of Gaia (Earth) and the father of someone named Asterius, himself the later king.²¹ Coincidentally one of the Giants in Greek mythology is also named Asterius, potentially giving us an interpretation for the Anactorians as a sort of descendant giant people.²²

Given the various etymological interpretations we can glean from the Anakim in its near eastern context - even more so than the other groups we have discussed - it’s fairly probable this was a real group. The challenge comes when defining their ‘giant’ size, or if perhaps this aspect of their stature was exaggerated by the spies? Did the spies lie enter into the Torah? Unlikely, it would seem odd for such an occurrence, but without a better archeological understanding of the Hyksos it would be impossible to really pull at this thread.

One important conclusion this allows us to draw is that if the Emim and Zuzim were Anakim then the interpretation of these groups ‘identical’ nature, simply varying based on the nations they dwelled in and which names they were given, would imply both former groups were also Hyksos? Now, the term “Hyksos” is loaded, as really the Hyksos were a specific dynasty, or group out of Egypt composed of Canaanite nobility, and royalty. However, the role and function of the Emim and Zuzim, as well as their broadly Canaanite background, would lead us to believe they function in Ammon and Moab in the same way they functioned in Philistia, and Egypt; a pseudo ruler class that adopted cultural qualities of their subjects, not all unlike the previously discussed Hurrians/Mitanni

.

1. Rashi Badmidbar 13:33:1

2. Joshua 14:13

3. Rashi Badmidbar 13:33:3

4. Bereshit Rabbah 26:7

5. Ibn Ezra on Genesis 6:4:2

6. Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 22:5

7. Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 22:6

8. Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 22:8

9. Deuteronomy 2:10-11

10. Ibn Ezra on Deuteronomy 15:14:1

11. Joshua 11:21-22

12. Joshua 11:21-22

13. Joshua 14:15

14. Ibn Ezra on Genesis 23:2:1

15. Rashi on Job 32:2:2

16. Wyatt, Nicolas (2001). Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East. A&C Black.

17. Kempinski, Aharon (1983). Syrien und Palästina (Kanaan) in der letzten Phase der Mittelbronze IIB - Zeit (1650 - 1570 v. Chr.). Ägypten und Altes Testament, Bd. 4 (in German). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 69–74.

18. Redford, Donald (1992). Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton: Princeton University Press, p. 257.

19. Niesiołowski-Spanò, Łukasz (1 January 2020). "The Levites, *ra-wo, λᾶός / λαοί – A new proposal for lexical and historical relationship". Biblica. 101 (3): 444–452. 

20. "These Anakim seem to have come from Greece, as members of the Sea-peoples' confederation which caused the Egyptians so much trouble in the fourteenth century B.C." Robert Graves. The Greek Myths, 88.3. New York: 1955.

21. Pausanias, 1.35.6

22. Barber, E. J. (1991). Prehistoric textiles : the development of cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages with special reference to the Aegean. United Kingdom: Princeton University Press. p. 381