by
“It is of interest to note that from this point in
Israel’s history as the scriptures record it, Amalek is on the scene more
consistently than any other nation in attack against Israel for the next
300 years, first assisting Eglon, then in association with Midian (Judges
6:3), and then in
the days of
King Saul and David (1 Samuel 15 and 1 Samuel 30)”.
Dr. John Osgood
Introduction
That there is real uncertainty
regarding the ethnicity of the conspiratorial Haman in the Book of Esther is
apparent from the fact that he is designated amongst the various versions of
the story, now as an Agagite, now as an Amalekite, now as a Macedonian, and,
finally, as a Bougaean.
It is not inappropriate that the LXX
should describe him as “a Bougaean” (Βουγαîος)
because that word, Boogey-an, with one consonantal addition, becomes Boogeyman.
And, not only is Haman like a Boogeyman for the Jews, but
apparently they relish Boo-ing him during the Feast of Purim.
Moreover, the Amalekite (Agagite) race from which most think
that Haman could trace his descent, was thought to hover, like a dark Boogeyman,
over the history of Israel.
And, indeed, some of this is true.
Amalek was Israel’s first enemy after they had escaped from
Egypt.
This formidable foe had looked to deprive Israel of access
to drinking water.
For this, the race was condemned by God to annihilation
(Exodus 127:8-16):
The
Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. Moses said
to Joshua, ‘Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites.
Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands’.
So Joshua fought
the Amalekites as Moses had ordered, and Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the
top of the hill. As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were
winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning. When
Moses’ hands grew tired, they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on
it. Aaron and Hur held his hands up—one on one side, one on the other—so that
his hands remained steady till sunset. So Joshua overcame the
Amalekite army with the sword.
Then
the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write this on a scroll as something to
be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it, because I will completely
blot out the name of Amalek from under heaven’.
Moses built an
altar and called it The Lord is my Banner. He said, ‘Because
hands were lifted up against the throne of
the Lord, the Lord will be at war against the
Amalekites from generation to generation’.
And Amalek will continue to be Israel’s most persistent
enemy for centuries, as noted by Dr. John Osgood writing of the Judges period
(emphasis added):
http://creation.com/the-time-of-the-judges-the-archaeology-b-settlement-and-apostasy
It
is of interest to note that from this point in Israel’s history as the
scriptures record it, Amalek is on the scene more consistently than any
other nation in attack against Israel for the next 300 years, first
assisting Eglon, then in association with Midian (Judges
6:3), and then in
the days of King Saul and David (1 Samuel 15 and 1 Samuel 30).
Amalek and Benjamin
Most
famous is the war between Amalek and the Benjaminite king, Saul, meant to be
that war of total annihilation (I Samuel 15:2-3), the dreadful
haram (חֲרַמְ):
The Lord All-Powerful
says: ‘When the Israelites came out of Egypt, the Amalekites tried to stop them
from going to Canaan. I saw what the Amalekites did. Now go fight against
the Amalekites. You must completely destroy the Amalekites and everything that
belongs to them. Don’t let anything live; you must kill all the men and women
and all of their children and little babies. You must kill all of their cattle
and sheep and all of their camels and donkeys’.
Consequently, King Saul destroyed the
Amalekites, but not entirely, famously sparing their king, Agag, as well as
seizing everything else worth keeping (vv. 7-9).
The completion of the unfinished work,
so the story goes, would be left to the Jewish hero of the Book of Esther,
Mordecai – a Benjaminite descendant of Saul’s father, Kish, (Esther 2:5).
Thus we read:
Mordechai,
Esther, and her Father’s House
….
The contemporary scholar Yitzhak Berger sees in Mordechai’s
words not an emotional flourish but a political argument. Haman, we are told
was an Agagite, and Mordechai and Esther were from the tribe of Benjamin.
Six centuries earlier the Benjaminite King Saul spared Agag,
king of Amalek, against the express direction of God and the prophet Samuel,
and was stripped of his kingdom for this misplaced mercy.
So Mordechai wasn’t just making an odd rhetorical flourish,
he was, Berger writes, “redeeming the Benjaminite line from its association
with the inadequacies of Saul—particularly in fighting Amalek.” Moreover,
Esther and Mordechai’s ancestor Saul had been replaced by the more worthy
David; now Esther, who herself had replaced the unworthy Vashti, could flip the
script of her father’s Benjaminite house. Mordechai was reminding her that this
was an opportunity not only to save herself and her people but to salvage their
ancestor’s political legacy. ….
[End of quote]
There is a nice symmetry in a view such
as this, and it makes for a terrific story.
Mordecai and Haman are described in
Mordecai’s dream as like two great dragons (Esther 10:4-9, RSV Catholic
Edition):
And
Mor′decai said, ‘These things have come from God. For
I remember the dream that I had concerning these matters, and none of them has
failed to be fulfilled. The tiny spring which became a river, and
there was light and the sun and abundant water—the river is Esther, whom the
king married and made queen. The two dragons are Haman and myself. The
nations are those that gathered to destroy the name of the Jews. And
my nation, this is Israel, who cried out to God and were saved. The Lord has
saved his people; the Lord has delivered us from all these evils; God has done
great signs and wonders, which have not occurred among the nations’.
The trouble is, the hopeful parallel is
not really there – and Haman, once again, is the problem, the obstructive
Boogeyman.
Why?
Because, as even Jewish legends tell, Haman
was a Jew, known to Mordecai. “Ginzberg
furnishes substantial evidence that Mordecai and Haman were both Jews who knew
each other well …”: Eugene Kaellis:
Welcome
to the Jewish Independent
And I firmly believe this to have been
the case, and I hope to have proven it in articles such as:
Haman un-masked
On this shattering piece of traditional
information the whole wonderful tale of Haman and Mordecai perpetuating the feud
between Amalek and Benjamin falls flat on its face.
The fact is that David, after King
Saul’s abysmal failure, went on campaign against the Amalekites (I Samuel
30:1-20).
They cease to be a factor in the Bible
after that.
A new Benjamin (Netanyahu), however, ‘tilting
at windmills’, is trying to perpetuate the ancient feud with Amalek:
Netanyahu likes to recall Amalek
(2) Netanyahu
likes to recall Amalek
But
is Iran really “the same ancestral land of Haman”?
