Talk:Anak

message: The legendary Anakim were also known by different names, such as Reph'aim, Emim, and Zamzummim. Deut. 2:9. And these titles have no real ethnic affiliation--but seem to be foreign titles such as "giant", "Mumblers", or "Demi-gods".
The Anak seem to have grown from legend into Myth, with their connection to the Nephilim in Num. 13:33.
It should be noted, that this connection is likely a later tradition, as it isn't found in the earliest Greek manuscripts.
Certainly though, the Anakim were considered giants from the very beginning of their tradition in Jewish folk lore. And with later traditions reinforcing these beliefs, it is hard to find any accurate historical information on such an ancient Canaanite people.
The Anak or Rephaim, may in all reality have actually represented real men, warriors, and tall elites within a Canaanite population.
King Og of Bashan, was considered the last of the "giants", and he was an Amorite... A later tradition seems to re-affirm his giant status, with the mention of his sarcophagus (perhaps a basalt slab) 9 cubits long. Such a connection between giants and sarcophagi can even be found today among Muslim nations. In Syria there are still alleged graves or tombs of "giants" and sacred holy men.
http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/16560_giants.html
Some of these "giants" are supposedly as tall as 25 feet, according to tradition.
King Og seems to have had similar recognition among the Israelites at one time.
So, my conclusion is:
There probably were some very tall and strong warriors ( AKA Goliaths) among different ranks of Canaanite, Amorite, and Philistine--perhaps there were elites; tall specially trained guards, 6 and 7 footers, or an occasional 8-9 footer among them. Certainly these men would be held with deep admiration and fear by a lowly group of undernourished nomadic heardsmen ( AKA Israelites c. 1200bc)who probably averaged only 5'2 or 5'4.
The Anak themselves had a legendary founder, Araba, who founded a city which is present day Hebron or Kirjat-Arba. In Numbers 13, there is mention of Hebron and the valley of Eshcol, as being a land of giants. These Canaanite men were said to be taller on average then the Israelites, and the Anakim tribes of Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai are specificaly recognized-- for they made the 12 spies of Moses, feel like locusts in their presence. [The comparison of locusts, was of course, not to be taken literal, but was meant to convey that the spies did feel small].
--The difficulty is seperating the myth from the fact. It seems evident, based on the casual description of the Anakim, that these were a real tribe that lived within the hills of Judah, but later tied to the Nephilim mythology in Gen. 6.
It's worth noting that the Dead Sea scrolls and Greek Septuagint do not include the gloss, "The sons of Anak come of the Nephilim" in regards to Num. 13:33. It seems this connection was made by later scribes.--71.222.48.14 07:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The Anak name has been suggested as representing the Mycenaean "Wanakas", or "chiefs", and this could be a later understanding of the name, perhaps after mycenaean or Philistine influence in the 12th or 11th century BC.
But infact the Anak name is truly much older than this. There is made mentionm in the Egyptian Execration texts c. 1800 BC, of the three foreign rulers, Akirum, Erum, and Abi-Yamimu of "ly-Anaq" within Palestine. "ly-Anaq" seems to translate as "people of Anaq" or "tribe of Anaq". Interestingly enough the "sons of Anak" mentioned by the Hebrews, were also three rulers; Sheshi, Ahiman, and Talmai in the area of Hebron.
Yet, what is of the utmost relevance is the Hebrew spelling of the name, which is, "bny Onq" translating to, "sons of Onq". This ancient name displays the "Ayin" "nun" and "Qup" which translates to "wisdom, regeneration, and life", all the characteristics of the Egyptian "Ankh" cult.
The Anakim of the bible were already present during the time of the "patriarchs", and perhaps even before that. Such a timeline tallies well with the "ly Anaq" people of palestine c. 1900-1800 BC. It would thus seem that this aboriginal Canaanite sub-cult had adopted the worship of the goddess Anuqet, Anuqis, or perhaps Onka, but foremost embraced the Egyptian values of the "Ankh". Evidently Egyptian religious and cultural practice had heavily influenced the Canaanite and Amorite aboriginals of the land. And that they were a tall people is asserted in ancient sources. --71.215.157.202 07:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: 

message: Someone please restore the page. Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.76.123 (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly I wouldn't trust Graves any farther than I could have thrown him in 1955 and I wasn't even born then.  I've found numerous mistakes in his references to the Bible and total lack of support for some of his proposed interpretations in archaeology.  You should probably kill this unless and until you can find an article on ASOR or some other peer-reviewed archaeological journal that supports what you say.  4.249.63.134 (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Would you like to explain your understanding of WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV?  Also, have you considered that someone who tends to be interested in certain articles is likely to be watching similar articles?  One of the advantages to having an account is a tool called a watchlist, which tells me of any edit that occurs on any page I put on that watchlist.  Ian.thomson (talk) 00:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok then, so what is your obsession with pushing your un-sourced and chauvinistic POV that Anak was a man?81.103.121.144 (talk) 01:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Stopping you from pushing your personal interpretation on the article is not the same as pushing another interpretation.  I've provided two refs to Anak traditionally being considered male right after "forefather of the Anakites"  and .  Again, read the guidelines WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:NPOV.  Ian.thomson (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not traditional, but they are protestant sources I will give you that. Not sure if they are peer reviewed though.81.103.121.144 (talk) 01:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They're old Bible dictionaries, not scholarly journals.  Also, Jewish Encyclopedia includes a number of references to Anak as male.  Ian.thomson (talk) 01:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Jewish Encyclopedia includes many protestant ideas as it was written after the reform movement and does not reflect rabbinical tradition.81.103.121.144 (talk) 16:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The first section of the Jewish Encyclopedia article is "In Rabbinical and Hellenistic Literature."  That section includes part of a 13th century (pre-Reformation, pre-Protestant) Midrash that describes Anak as a father.  You appear to be dismissing the source without actually examining it.  The Talmud (the source of Rabbinical tradition) does not identify Anak as female, and it was written by a society that identified people patrilineally, not matrilineally.  Also, Judaism is not limited to Rabbinic Judaism.  Ian.thomson (talk) 22:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HELP! Vandalism 

message: Removing the wikilink brackets from Anak also removes the bolding. Was that intentional? --Pawyilee (talk) 13:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  As metaphor