# Amalek

Amalek (/ˈæməlɛk/; Biblical Hebrew: עֲמָלֵק‎, romanized: ʿĂmālēq) is described in the Hebrew Bible as the enemy nation of the Israelites. The name "Amalek" can refer to the descendants of Amalek, the grandson of Esau, or anyone who lived in their territories in Canaan, or North African descendants of Ham, the son of Noah.

## Etymology

Most scholars regard the origin of the term, "Amalek" to be unknown but in some rabbinical interpretations, it is etymologized as am lak, 'a people who lick (blood)'.
Richard C. Steiner has suggested that the name is derived from the Egyptian term *ꜥꜣm rqj "hostile Asiatic", possibly referring to Shasu tribesmen from around Edom.

## In the Hebrew Bible

According to the Hebrew Bible, Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (himself the son of Esau, ancestor of the Edomites and the brother of Israel) and Eliphaz's concubine Timna. Timna was a Horite and sister of Lotan. According to a midrash, Timna was a princess who tried to convert. However, she was rejected by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. She replied she would rather be a handmaiden to the dregs of Israel than be a mistress of another gentile nation. To punish the 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 to 1 Chronicles 1:36, after he committed adultery with the wife of Seir the Horite, who was Timna's biological father. First-century Roman Jewish scholar and historian Josephus refers to Amalek as a "bastard" (Koinē Greek: νόθος); the Hebrew equivalent, mamzer, is a specific category of persons born from a forbidden relationship.

### Amalekites

Amalek is described in Genesis 36:16 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 of Balaam, Amalek was called the "first of the nations". One modern scholar believes this attests to Amalek's high antiquity, while traditional commentator Rashi states: "He came before all of them to make war with Israel". The Amalekites (/ˈæməlɛkaɪts/) were claimed to be Amalek's descendants through the genealogy of Esau.
According to the Hebrew Bible, the Amalekites inhabited the Negev and Sinai Peninsula. They appear to have lived a nomadic or seminomadic lifestyle along the fringes of southern Canaan's agricultural zone. This is probably based on the association of this tribal group with the steppe region of ancient Israel and the area of Kadesh (Genesis 14:7).
As a people, the Amalekites are identified throughout the Hebrew Bible as a recurrent enemy of the Israelites:
* In Exodus 17:8–16 during the Exodus, the Amalekites ambush the Israelites encamped at Rephidim, but are defeated. Moses orders Joshua to lead the Israelites into battle, while Moses, Aaron and Hur watch from a nearby hill. When Moses' hands holding his staff are raised, the Israelites prevail, but when his hands are lowered, the Israelites falter. He sits with his hands held up by Aaron and Hur until sunset, securing the Israelite victory.
* In Deuteronomy 25:17–19, The Israelites are specifically commanded to "blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven" once they have taken possession of the Promised Land in retribution for "what Amalek did to [them] on the way as [they] were coming out of Egypt", a reference to the Amalekite ambush on the Israelites at Rephidim. Earlier, in Deuteronomy 7:1–16 and Deuteronomy 25:16–18, they are commanded to utterly destroy all the inhabitants of the idolatrous cities in the promised land and their livestock; scripture purports that King Saul ultimately loses favor with Yahweh for failing to kill King Agag and the best livestock of the Amalekites in 1 Samuel 15 in defiance of these commandments.
* In Numbers 14:45, the Amalekites and Canaanites kill a group of Israelites that tried to enter the hill country of the Amorites without Moses's permission.
* In Judges 3:13, Amalek, and their Moabite and Ammonite allies, defeat Israel so that the Moabites could oppress them. Judges 10:11–13 confirms Amalek as being one of the many oppressors of Israel.
* In Judges 6:1–6, Amalek, and their Midianite allies, destroy Israelite farms "as far as Gaza", inducing a famine. They also help the Midianites wage wars against Israel, according to Judges 6:32–34 and Judges 7:11–13.
* In 1 Samuel 15:1–9, Samuel identifies Amalek as the enemy of Israelites, saying "Thus says the Lord of hosts: I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt," a reference to Exodus. God then commands Saul to destroy the Amalekites, by killing man, woman, infant and suckling. This massacre is believed to be a retelling of the raids in 1 Samuel 14:48, although it additionally specifies that it occurred in the "city of Amalek", which was believed to be the "principal place of arms" or the "metropolis" of Amalek. In 1 Samuel 15:33, Samuel identifies King Agag of Amalek as an enemy and killer, saying "As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women."
* In 1 Samuel 27:8–9, David and his men conduct raids against the Amalekites and their Geshurite and Gezirite allies. He kills every man and woman but takes sheep, cattle, donkey, camels, and clothing. These Amalekites were theorized to be refugees who fled from Saul or a separate Amalekite faction that dwelt to the south of Israel. Gili Kluger believes these narratives were anti-Saul propaganda, designed to make him appear weak compared to David, since no losses were attributed to David.
* According to 1 Samuel 30:1–2, the Amalekites invaded the Negev and Ziklag in the Judean/Philistine border area towards the end of the reign of King Saul, burning Ziklag and taking its citizens away into captivity. David led a successful mission against the Amalekites to recover "all that the Amalekites had carried away".
* In 2 Samuel 1:5–10, an Amalekite tells David that he found Saul leaning on his spear after the battle of Gilboa. The Amalekite claims he euthanized Saul, at Saul's request, and removed his crown. David gives orders to his men to kill the Amalekite for killing the anointed king, believing him to be guilty by admission.
* In 1 Chronicles 4:43, the Simeonites kill the remaining survivors of Amalek and live in their settlements.
* In Psalm 83:7, Amalek joins Israel's other historic enemies in annihilating Israel. Their attempts are thwarted by God. Although most scholars believe the passage refers to a real historical event, they are unsure which event it should be identified with. One likely answer is that it occurred during the rise of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, the 9th to 7th centuries BC.

## Interpretation
### Judaism

In the Mishneh Torah, Maimonides derived three commandments, two positive and one negative, related to references to Amalek in the Torah:
| # | Type | Commandment | Source |
| 59 | Negative | Not to forget the wicked deeds which Amalek perpetrated against us | "Do not forget" (Deut. 25:19) |
| 188 | Positive | To exterminate the seed of Amalek | "You shall blot out the memory of Amalek" (Deut. 25:19) |
| 189 | Positive | To constantly remember what Amalek did to us | "Remember what Amalek did to you" (Deut. 25:17) |
Many rabbinic authorities such as Maimonides ruled that the commandment only applies to a Jewish king or an organized community, and cannot be performed by an individual. According to Rashi, the Amalekites were sorcerers who could transform themselves to resemble animals, in order to avoid capture. Thus, in 1 Samuel 15:3, it was considered necessary to destroy the livestock when destroying Amalek. According to Haggahot Maimuniyyot, the commandment only applies to the Messianic Age and not present times; medieval authorities widely support this limitation. According to the Midrash, every nation on Earth has a guardian angel overseeing its destiny, except for two: Israel rejected archangel Michael 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 a Third Temple when Amalek is wiped out. The Midrash state there is no quandary, given the last Amalekite is a convert to Judaism.
Maimonides elaborates that when the Jewish people wage war against Amalek, they must request the Amalekites to accept the Seven Laws of Noah and pay a tax to the Jewish kingdom. If they refuse, they are to be executed.
Other Talmudic commentators argued that the calls to spare no Amalekite or "blot out their memory" were metaphorical 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. Yehudah Aryeh Leib Alter interpreted the command as thoroughly hating Amalek without performing any physical action. Yisrael Meir Kagan said that God would perform the elimination of Amalek and that Jews only need to remember what Amalek did to them.
Isaac S.D. Sassoon believes that the ḥerem commands existed to prevent the Jewish community from being endangered but believes people should think twice before literally following them. Nathan Lopes Cardazo 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 the Chazal to help humanity evolve in their understanding of the Torah.

### Christianity

Theologian Charles Ellicott explains that the Amalekites were subject to ḥerem in the Book of Samuel for incapacitation due to their 'accursed' nature and the threat they posed to the commonwealth of surrounding nations. Matthew Henry considers the ḥerem to be defensive warfare since the Amalekites were invaders. John Gill describes the ḥerem as the law of retaliation being carried out.
According to Christian Hofreiter, almost all Christian authorities and theologians have historically interpreted the ḥerem passages literally. He states that "there is practically no historical evidence that anyone in the Great Church" viewed them as being purely an allegory. In particular, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin have defended a literal reading of these passages at length. Origen is sometimes cited as having viewed the ḥerem passages allegorically; Hofreiter argues that although Origen prioritized a spiritual interpretation of the Bible, he did not deny that the herem passages described historical events.
Paul Copan argues that the ḥerem commands were hyperbolic since the passages contain merisms such as "man and woman" and Near Easterners valued "bravado and exaggeration" when reporting warfare. 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".

### Islam

Ibn Khaldūn believed that God ordered Saul, the king of Israel, to depose the Amalekites, which caused Haman's hostility to the Jews in the Book of Esther.

### Modern academia

Some commentators have discussed the ethics of the commandment to exterminate all the Amalekites, including children, and the presumption of collective punishment. It has also been described as genocidal, according to genocide scholars like Norman Naimark.
Kluger believes that the context of the extermination verses can be explained by the fact that the Israelites see the Amalekites as their "unwelcome brother" and they also see the Amalekites as the "rejected son", possessing all of the negative qualities that the Israelites inherently saw within themselves, which Kluger sees as a form of self-hatred. However, she notes that the Hebrew Bible is surprisingly neutral when it describes the Amalekites and she also notes that the texts do not provide an adequate explanation on why they were singled out for complete annihilation, compared to the Egyptians and the Canaanites for example.
Ada Taggar-Cohen observes that ḥerem commands were not uncommon in the ancient Near East. Their purpose was to show the enemy that the deity was on the aggressor's side and the enemy deserved the said deity's wrath as punishment for their "sins". It also allowed kings to pursue militarist policies without taking any moral responsibility for them.
C. L. Crouch considers the ḥerem commands to be an exceptional component to Israelite and Judahite warfare since they were erratically applied, even in the early stages of national and ethnic identity formation. They were an extreme means to eradicate the threat of chaos. Similar attitudes were held by Assyrian rulers such as Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal.

## Historicity

No reference to Amalek or the Amalekites has been found in surviving Egyptian and Assyrian monumental inscriptions and records, even though both groups recorded various tribes and peoples of the Levant in the relevant time period(s). Therefore, Hugo Winckler concluded that there were no Amalekites and that the Biblical stories concerning them were entirely ahistorical and mythological. Although archaeological research has improved knowledge about nomadic Arabs, no specific artifact or site has been linked to Amalek with certainty.
It is possible that some of the fortified settlements in the Negev highlands and Tel Masos, which is near Beer-sheba and possibly equivalent to Hormah, have Amalekite connections. If this hypothesis is correct, it is likely that Saul's anti-Amalekite campaigns were motivated by a strategic desire to wrest control of copper production at Tel Masos. Copper was valuable to the early Israelites and their theology and ritual.
Archaeological evidence from the Tell el-Qudeirat fortress and Horvat Haluqim in the Negev, dated to the late 11th to early 10th century BC, could corroborate with the Biblical Israelite-Amalekite confrontations, during the reigns of Saul and David. Bruins discovered that their inhabitants were semi-nomadic agro-pastoralists. They lived in tents, rode camels, participated in the copper trade and worshipped gods at masseboth shrines. Oval fortresses were built during the relevant timeframe. However, other scholars argue that these settlements were inhabited by Edomites or Simeonites.

### Alternative theories of origin

In Genesis 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. C. Knight elaborates this concept by making a comparison: one might say "Caesar went into France", though Gaul only later became known as France.
John Gill believes the Amalekites of Genesis 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 the Shemite Chedorlaomer, existed before the Edomite Amalekites thus affirming Numbers 24:20, and that the Edomites never rescued these Amalekites from Saul's campaigns due to inter-tribal feuds.
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 a literal approach to Genesis 14:7. However, the modern biblical scholar Gerald L. Mattingly uses textual analysis to glean that the use of Amalekite in Genesis 14:7 is actually an anachronism, and in the early 19th century, Richard Watson enumerated several speculative reasons for the existence of a "more ancient Amalek" than Abraham.
In his exegesis of Numbers 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 developed post-Flood. According to Samuel Cox, the Amalekites were the "first" in their hostility toward the Israelites.

## Abrahamic traditions
### Jewish traditions

Amalek is the archetypal enemy of the Jews and the symbol of evil in Jewish religion and folklore. 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. Groups identified with Amalek include the Romans, Nazis, Stalinists, Islamic State,Hamas and bellicose Iranian leaders such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. More metaphorically, to some Hasidic rabbis (particularly the Baal Shem Tov), Amalek represents atheism or the cynical rejection of God, which leads to unethical hedonism. This is sometimes known as the "Amalekite doctrine". In contemporary times, religious Jews associate Amalek with violent antisemites, nihilism and Jewish doubt in God.
During the Purim festival, the Book of Esther is read in commemoration of the salvation of Jewish people from Haman, who plotted to kill all Jews 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 on Exodus 17:14. It is also customary to recite Deuteronomy 25:17–18 on the Shabbat before Purim. This was because Haman was considered to be an Amalekite although this label is more likely to be symbolic rather than literal. Some Iranophilic Jews interpreted Haman's Amalekite background as being anathema to both Jews and 'pure-blooded Iranians'.

### Christian traditions

Early Church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Cyprian consider the defeat of Amalek in Exodus 17:8–13 to be reminiscent of Jesus defeating the powers of the devil at the cross. Origen sees the battle as an allegory of the Law mysteriously invoking Christ, who recruits strong people (i.e. Christians) to defeat the demonic Strong Man, as described in Ephesians 6:12.
John Gill believes that Amalek is a type of antichrist that 'raises his hand against the throne of God, his tabernacle and his saints'. He believes the phrase "from generation to generation" in Exodus 17:16 specifically refers to the Messianic Age, where Amalek and other antichristian states are exterminated by the Lamb. Likewise, Charles Ellicott notes that the Amalekites were collectively called 'the sinners' in 1 Samuel 15:18, which was only used elsewhere for the Sodomites in Genesis 13:13.
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch state that the Amalekites were extinct by the second half of Hezekiah's reign.
Professor Philip Jenkins notes that Christian extremists have historically labelled enemies such as Native Americans, Protestants, Catholics and Tutsis as Amalekites to justify their genocides. 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.

### Islamic traditions

Islamic commentators believe that the Amalekites were an ancient Arabian tribe. The monotheistic Ishmaelites evangelized to them in Mecca and later, they supplanted their population. However, the paganism of the Amalekites and other Arabian tribes negatively influenced the Ishmaelites, including their approach to the Kaaba.
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 the Persian Jewish community. This was caused by their attempt to reconcile the Biblical Esther with the Quranic Haman, who was the antagonist of the Exodus narrative, and Persian mythological historical traditions. Notable exceptions include Ibn Khaldūn, who affirmed the Amalekite origins of Haman and his antisemitic vendetta.

## Modern usage

Rabbis generally agree that Amalekites no longer exist, based on the argument that Sennacherib deported and mixed the nations, so it is no longer possible to determine who is an Amalekite.
Since the Holocaust, the phrase as it appears in Deuteronomy 25:17 is used as a call to witness. Yad Vashem, Israel's memorial to the Holocaust, features the phrase on a banner, and in letters between European Jews during the Holocaust, they plead with each other to "bear witness".

### In modern Israel

In the Israel–Palestine conflict, some Israeli politicians and extremists have compared Palestinians to Amalek, stated that the Palestinians are the Amalekites or accused Arabs of exhibiting "behavior" that is "typical" of Amalekites. Yasser Arafat was called "the Amalek and Hitler of our generation" by 200 rabbis. Many in the Gush Emunim movement see Arabs as the "Amalek of today". One reason includes the belief that Amalek is any nation that prevents Jews from settling in the Land of Israel, which includes the Palestinians. During the 2014 Gaza war, a leading yeshiva identified Palestinians as the descendants of the ancient Amalekites and Philistines. Genealogically, Arabs are not related to Amalekites and prior to the Arab–Israeli conflict, some Jews associated Amalek with the Roman Empire and medieval Christians.
During the 2023–24 Israel–Hamas war (beginning in October 2023), Benjamin Netanyahu said that the Israeli government was "committed to completely eliminating this evil from the world", and he also stated: "You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember". At an argument to the International Court of Justice about allegations 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 to Hamas, not Palestinians as a whole.