Published by the Jewish Bible Association · Jerusalem
ISSN 0792-3910Subscribe
Jewish Bible Quarterly
The only Jewish-sponsored English-language journal devoted exclusively to the Bible · Est. 1972
← Back to Vol. 46:2 contents
Vol. 46:2 · April – June 2018

Nations and Super-Nations of Canaan

Reuven Chaim Klein
pp. 73–85·13 pages
Download PDF
Abstract

A comparative study of the Bible's various lists of Canaanite nations — the genealogy of Canaan's sons in Genesis 10, the ten nations promised to Abraham in Genesis 15, and the recurring six- and seven-nation lists in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Joshua, and I Kings — that catalogues the discrepancies in number, name, and order among them. Drawing chiefly on traditional Jewish exegesis rather than academic scholarship, the article surveys rabbinic and medieval attempts to identify obscure nations like the Hivites and the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites, and concludes by examining the idea, developed by Rashi, Mizrahi, and Ibn Ezra among others, that the term Canaanite functioned in the Bible both as the name of a specific nation and as an inclusive super-nation term covering all the peoples of the land.

The Bible refers to the Holy Land many times as “the Land of Canaan”. However, in some instances, the Bible associates the land with more than just “Canaan”, but with multiple nations that lived there. Throughout the Bible, there are various lists of those Canaanite nations who occupied the Holy Land before the Israelites took hold of it. In this study, we will offer a critical analysis of those lists, comparing them to each other and to the genealogical list of Canaan’s sons. We will point out various discrepancies between how many nations are listed, the names given in those different sources, and their order.1

The most complete discussions on this topic thus far have ignored the plethora of traditional Jewish sources that resolve some of these issues.2 Thus, our study focuses more on traditional Jewish sources, rather than on academic scholarship. Many of the suppositions already found in the works of Jewish commentators from the Medieval and Renaissance periods have been independently offered by academia as well. Our survey serves to pinpoint the earliest sources for some of those ideas and the contexts in which they were first proposed.

Canaanites in Genesis

In the Bible’s genealogical tables, Canaan – who is described as a son of Noah’s son Ham – has eleven sons, the progenitors of eleven nations: Sidon (Sidonians),3 Heth (Hittites), Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites,4 Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites (Gen. 10:15–18, I Chron. 1:13–16).5 These eleven sons plus Canaan himself make up the twelve tribes of Canaan. However, these genealogical lists are the only place in the Bible where these twelve are mentioned together.

The Bible closes its description of the Canaanite families with the phrase, and afterward were the families of the Canaanite spread abroad (Gen. 10:18).6 The meaning of this phrase is somewhat obscure, and the classical commentators offer different explanations. Hizkuni and R. Yosef Bekhor-Schor7 explain that the family of one of Canaan’s eleven sons split into two, thus creating the otherwise unmentioned family of the Perizzites. This resulted in twelve Canaanite tribes (this time, excluding Canaan himself) which were later overrun by the twelve Israelite tribes. Interestingly, Radak8 cites an anonymous exegete who viewed the passage He set the borders of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel (Deut. 32:8) as a reference to the borders of the twelve tribes of Canaan that correspond to the twelve sons of Jacob.

When God promises Abraham that his descendants9 will inherit the Holy Land, the Bible specifies ten nations which occupied that land: the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaim, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites, and Jebusites (Gen. 15:19–21). Besides the changes in ordering, two major differences arise when comparing this list to the genealogy of Canaan’s sons: Firstly, the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Perizzites, Rephaim, and Girgashites are new to this list, as they do not appear in the earlier list. Secondly, the Sidonians, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites appear as names of Canaan’s sons, but are not listed amongst the ten nations of the Holy Land in Abraham’s time. There are only five nations whose names appear in both lists: Hittites, Amorites, Jebusites, Girgashites, and Canaanites.

Some proffer that the names of the Canaanite nations told to Abraham simply reflect the list of peoples with whom he and his family will have to contend in the near future. These scholars essentially argue that the listing of those nations serves as a literary device to foreshadow episodes to come in the Bible. Indeed, most appearances of Canaanites in the Book of Genesis are from the five nations found in both lists. For example, when Abraham first arrives in the Holy Land, the Bible reports, and the Canaanite was then in the land (Gen. 12:6). A few verses later, the Bible reiterates this point but adds another nation, and the Canaanites and the Perizzites dwelt then in the land (Gen. 13:7). Similarly, Jacob complains to his sons who destroyed Shechem that they sullied his good name amongst the Canaanites and the Perizzites (Gen. 34:30).

Moreover, Abraham befriends the Amorite brothers, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre (Gen. 14:13) and he interacts with the Hittites at Hebron, ultimately buying a burial site from Ephron, son of Zohar, the Hittite (Gen. 23:3-20). Similarly, Abraham’s grandson Jacob claims to have captured Shechem from the Amorites (Gen. 48:22) and Rebecca expressly rejects the idea that her son Jacob should marry Hittite women (Gen. 27:46), though his brother Esau actually does so (Gen. 26:34; 36:2).

Thus, the Bible tells that Abraham was promised the lands of the Perizzites, Hittites, Amorites, and Canaanites because in the Book of Genesis he and his family compete and interact with those nations. However, this does not completely solve the issues at hand. Firstly, this only accounts for four of the ten nations mentioned in God’s promise to Abraham. Secondly, the Abrahamic family’s dealings with the local people in the Holy Land are not limited to those five nations listed in both the record of Canaan’s sons and the promise to Abraham. In two cases, they interact with Hivites: Shechem, son of Hamor, the Hivite, abducts and rapes Jacob’s daughter Dinah (Gen. 34:2), and Esau marries Oholibamah, daughter of Anah, daughter of Zibeon, the Hivite (Gen. 36:2).10 The Hivites are mentioned amongst the sons of Canaan, but are absent from the list of nations whose land God promises Abraham. Thirdly, if the list of nations that God promised Abraham is correlated to the Canaanite nations which the Abrahamic family would soon encounter, then why are the Girgashites and Jebusites listed, if they otherwise never appear in the Pentateuch (except in lists of Canaanite nations). Lastly, this approach does not account for the nations that are listed amongst Canaan’s sons, but do not appear in the list of nations given to Abraham and vice versa.

Who Were the Hivites?

Why does Genesis 15 omit the Hivites when listing the nations whose land God promised Abraham? Bereishit Rabbah §44:23 ostensibly explains that the Bible mentions the Rephaim instead of the Hivites because the two names are synonyms for the same people. By explaining that the Hivites and Rephaim are the same, this midrash answers why Genesis 15 omits the Hivites, as well as why the genealogical table of Genesis 10 omits the Rephaim. Nahmanides11 expands on this midrashic assertion by explaining that Canaan’s son – the Hivites’ progenitor – was named Hivvi, but his descendants later developed into the nation known as the Rephaim.12

This identification of the Hivites with the Rephaim is not unanimously accepted.13 When Radak14 cites this midrashic explanation, he belays some skepticism by prefacing it with the word “maybe”. Moreover, this midrash does not answer why elsewhere (when mentioning God’s original promise to Abraham), the Bible omits the Hivites (Neh. 9:8) and does not replace them with the Rephaim.

Furthermore, Og, king of Bashan, is described as the last remnant15 of the Rephaim (Deut. 3:11).16 If the Hivites are indeed the same people as the Rephaim, then after the defeat of Og, one would expect that the Bible never again mention the Hivites, yet, in practice, the Hivites do appear in later passages: in lists of peoples that the Israelites had to contend with in the Holy Land (Josh. 11:3, Jud. 3:3), when the Hivite inhabitants of Gibeon made a pact with the Israelites under false pretenses (Josh. 9:7), when a Hivite king is proposed to replace Abimelekh in Shechem (Jud. 9:28),17 and even in a description of King David’s census (II Sam. 24:7). How can the Hivites be the Rephaim if the Rephaim were, by then, extinct?

R. Nissim Gaon (990–1062) proposes that Nehemiah 9 did not mention that God promised Abraham the land of the Hivites because in Abraham’s very lifetime Jacob was born and Jacob himself would conquer the Hivites, when his sons crushed the Hivite inhabitants of Shechem. Therefore, because their (at least partial) defeat was relatively imminent, God did not promise to Abraham that his future descendants would receive the land of the Hivites.18 While the reasoning behind this answer is somewhat difficult to understand, R. Nissim definitely accounts for the omission of the Hivites from both Genesis 15 and Nehemiah 9. Nevertheless, he does not attempt to justify the omission of the Rephaim from Genesis 10 and their presence in the list of Genesis 15.

R. Jacob Solnik (d. 1643) also rejects the midrashic identification of the Hivites with the Rephaim. Instead, he proposes another answer to the issues at hand. He argues that God did not mention the Hivites when promising to Abraham the nations of Canaan because He knew that some Hivites (i.e. the inhabitants of Gibeon in the time of Joshua) would bind the Israelites to a peace treaty under false pretenses, thus barring the Israelites from battling with them. This is why Genesis 15 and Nehemiah 9 omit the Hivites. However, God nonetheless wanted to specify that Abraham’s descendants would conquer the lands of ten nations (possibly due to the numerological significance of the number ten). To that effect, He specified the otherwise unmentioned nation of the Rephaim, whose land the Israelites conquered when they defeated Og. Even though the Rephaim were not technically Canaanites (and their land was outside of the Holy Land proper), God mentions them in His vision to Abraham in order to reach the number ten. This explains why Genesis 10 does not list the Rephaim amongst Canaan’s sons, yet the Rephaim do appear in the list of Genesis 15.19

Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites

As noted previously, the Bible mentions the Kenites, Kenizzites, and Kadmonites (KK&K) in Gen. 15, but they never again appear in any other list of Canaanite nations. Who are these three nations and why are they never mentioned again?

Bereishit Rabbah §44:23 explains that although God initially promised Abraham that his descendants will possess the lands of ten nations, He only allowed the Israelites in the time of Moses and Joshua to conquer the lands of seven nations. The lands of the remaining three nations (KK&K) will only be conquered in Messianic times.

Then, this midrash offers several views as to the identities of those three nations: One opinion states that KK&K refer to Arabians, Nebatians, and Shalamites (lands east of Israel). Another opinion contends that they are the peoples of Damascus, Asia Minor, and Apamya20 (lands north of Israel). A third opinion explains that they are from Asia Minor, Turkey, and Carthage (lands north and southwest of Israel). The fourth opinion argues that KK&K refer to the lands of Ammon, Edom, and Moab (lands directly east and south of Israel).21 These opinions are also cited in the Jerusalem Talmud22 with minor variations.

According to this view, KK&K are not necessarily Canaanite nations, but are other nations farther away from the Holy Land. This explains why KK&K are not mentioned in Genesis 10 which lists the sons of Canaan.

Ibn Ezra23 takes a slightly different approach. He writes that KK&K are the same as three other sons of Canaan which are listed in Genesis 10. Similarly, Nahmanides24 explains that all ten names in Genesis 10 correspond to the ten nations which were promised to Abraham in Genesis 15. However, he notes, their names evidently changed through the generations so that by Abraham’s time, their names are quite different. The names given in Genesis 10 reflect the original names which Canaan gave his sons, while the names in Genesis 15 reflect their new names. Nahmanides further suggests that some of these nations actually adopted the names of the places where they settled. Alternatively, he proposes that those mentioned in Genesis 10, but not in Genesis 15, were once independent nations that were nearly wiped out and only specific families of theirs remained. Thus, for example, the Arkites and Sinites may have been entire nations of whom later only specific families remained (e.g., Kenites and Kenizzites). According to this approach, KK&K are, in fact, mentioned in Genesis 10, albeit under different names. Nonetheless, Ibn Ezra and Nahmanides do not specify exactly which sons of Canaan in Genesis 10 refer to KK&K.

Similarly, R. Elijah Kramer of Vilna (1720–1797) writes that ten nations lived in what is considered the Holy Land proper, plus an additional two nations which dwelled to the Holy Land’s immediate north and south.25 That is, the Sinites lived south of the Holy Land (in the Sinai area) and the Sidonians lived to the north26 (near the modern-day Lebanese city Sidon).27 Then, R. Kramer reconciles the list of nations in Genesis 15 with the list of Canaan’s sons by explaining that the Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites are the same as the KK&K, respectively.28

Other Lists of Canaanites

When God first reveals Himself to Moses at the burning bush, He tells Moses that He will take the Israelites out of their Egyptian bondage to the Holy Land. In that context, the Holy Land is twice described as the land of six nations, the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite (Ex. 3:8; 17). That exact list of nations appears again when God commands Moses about the laws of Passover for future generations, except that the Perizzites are omitted (Ex. 13:5). Afterwards, the six nations are listed in a somewhat different order: Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Ex. 23:23). The original six-nation list appears again in the aftermath of the Golden Calf, but this time, the order is only slightly changed: the Amorites precede the Hittites (Ex. 33:2). The original formula appears again in that story, except that this time, the Amorites are listed first (Ex. 34:11).

The list of six nations appears again in Deuteronomy and in Joshua, but those times the order of the first three nations is again changed: Hittite, Amorite, and Canaanite (Deut. 20:17, Josh. 9:1; 12:8). The full list of seven nations only appears in Deuteronomy 7:1. That list follows the same order as the lists in Deuteronomy and Joshua, with the insertion of the Girgashites between the Hittites and the Amorites. In Judges 3:5, the original six-nation list makes a final comeback.29

The last appearance of the Canaanite nations is in I Kings 9:20. In that context, the Bible reports that King Solomon conscripted the descendants of the five remaining Canaanite nations: Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. The order of nations in this list follows the order of Exodus 23:23; 33:2; and 34:11, save for the conspicuous absence of the Canaanites (and, as usual, the Girgashites).

In expounding on Exodus 13:5, Mekhilta notes that although only five nations are mentioned, seven are actually meant.30 For some reason, the Bible explicitly mentions five nations, but implicitly includes the Perizzites and Girgashites as well. Why are those two nations not named explicitly? Moreover, in all but one of the above-cited sources, the Girgashites do not appear amongst the nations of Canaan. In expounding Exodus 3:17, Midrash Sekhel Tov writes that the Girgashites are omitted because they are included in the other six nations. But why are the Girgashites, in particular, excluded from being mentioned explicitly?

R. Hafetz ben Yatzliah Gaon (an 11th century Babylonian sage) writes that the Bible does not list the Girgashites because they are a disgraceful people.31 Similarly, Ibn Ezra32 and R. Bahaya (1255–1340)33 write that the Girgashites are not mentioned explicitly because they are the smallest of the nations that occupied the Holy Land. R. Judah Lowe (Maharal, 1520–1609), expands on this approach. He explains that both the Girgashites and the Perizzites go unmentioned because they were both unimportant nations, so they are both absent from Exodus 13:5.34

As mentioned above, Mekhilta explains that even though Exodus 13:5 only lists five Canaanite nations, that verse is exegetically interpreted to include all seven Canaanite nations. This is the reading of the midrash endorsed by Maharal and others.35 However, Nahmanides36 explains that Mekhilta means something else. According to his reading, Mekhilta means that whenever the Bible calls the Holy Land the land flowing with milk and honey, this refers only to the lands of the five Canaanite nations listed in Exodus 13:5, while the lands of the other two Canaanite nations – that is, the Perizzites and Girgashites – are not.37 With this in mind, Nahmanides38 explains why the Girgashites are typically absent from lists of Canaanite nations in Exodus. It is because the Girgashites’ land is not “flowing with milk and honey” like the rest of the Holy Land.39

There is, however, a slight flaw with all of these approaches. We have mentioned that most lists of Canaanite nations in Exodus contain six nations, they leave out the Girgashites. If, as the above commentaries suppose, the Girgashites are omitted because their land does not flow with milk and honey or because they are an unimportant nation, then the Perizzites should also be left out of those lists, yet they are only absent from Exodus 13:5 and not from the other lists.

Canaanites as a Super-Nation

In explaining Exodus 13:5, Rashi writes that the Bible only mentions five nations because the other two (i.e. the Perizzites and Girgashites) are included in the term “Canaanite”, which was itself also the name of a nation. Rashi’s stance is further developed by the super-commentator R. Elijah Mizrahi (1450–1526).40 He explains that the term “Canaanite” has two meanings: It is both a super-nation that includes other Canaanite nations, and is itself the name of a Canaanite nation. Based on this double usage of the term Canaanite, Mizrahi explains that Exodus 13:5 refers to the Holy Land as the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites. . . , but then in Exodus 13:11 refers to the Land as simply the land of the Canaanites. In the former case, “Canaanite” is used as a simple nation, so it is mentioned alongside other such nations that occupied the Holy Land. However, in the latter instance, “Canaanite” refers to the super-nation of Canaanites, so it alone is used and includes all the other families.

To prove the possibility of two meanings for the term “Canaanite”, Mizrahi notes that Deuteronomy 7:1 lists seven nations (Hittite, Girgashite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite) and then explicitly notes that these are seven nations. Why did the Bible need to specify that seven nations are listed, if one can simply count the different nations listed are realize that they are seven? Mizrahi explains that because one could have possibly interpreted the “Canaanites” mentioned in this list as an inclusive super-nation that includes other nations, the Bible specified that there are only seven nations under discussion and the term “Canaanite” in this context means the Canaanite nation, as opposed to the Canaanite super-nation.41 Based on this premise, Mizrahi explains that the term “Canaanite” can refer to any of the nations who were descendants of Canaan. With this in mind, Mizrahi resolves every instance in the Bible which lists some nations and omits another/others by arguing that the term “Canaanite” always appears in those lists and can be understood as a general term which includes the missing nation(s).

Similarly, Ibn Ezra42 also assumes that the term “Canaanite” can be used more inclusively. He assumes that the descendants of all of Canaan’s eleven sons are considered Canaanites and occupied the Holy Land.43 Therefore, when discussing Exodus 3:8, Ibn Ezra felt the need to justify why the Bible only lists six nations in that passage, even though Canaan had eleven sons. To that effect, Ibn Ezra writes that the term “the Canaanites” in that passage is a general term which refers to all the different nations that occupied the Holy Land. Since that term includes the rest, the Bible only mentioned six nations by name and the rest are subsume under the umbrella name “Canaanites”. Ibn Ezra argues that the nations included in the term “the Canaanites” – as opposed to listed separately – are smaller, less significant nations. Therefore, the Bible generally lists the five or six largest Canaanite nations (depending on whether the Girgashites are mentioned) and includes the rest in “the Canaanites.” Ibn Ezra explains that Exodus 13:5 only lists five nations because the Torah elsewhere lists the six largest Canaanite nations, so there was no need to repeat that list again. Instead, an abbreviated list of four nations, plus the inclusive term “Canaanites”, is employed.

Maimonides’ son, R. Abraham Maimuni, also writes that the term “Canaanite” includes all seven Canaanite nations. However, he takes the idea a step further and argues that the terms Hittite and Amorite can also appear as super-nations and not just simple nations. He proposes that the term “Hittite” sometimes includes the “Hivites”. Additionally, Maimuni submits that the term “Amorite” can sometimes refer to all seven Canaanite nations simply because the Amorites were the strongest and fiercest of them all,44 as described in Sifrei (citing Amos 2:10 to that effect).45

Footnotes

  1. Our discussion centers on the Masoretic Text of the Bible—the version traditionally treated as the “Gold Standard” amongst Jews. For a treatment of this topic in non-MT texts of the Bible, see R. Thornhill, “Six or Seven Nations: A Pointer to the Lucianic Text in the Heptateuch, with Special Reference to the Old Latin Version”, The Journal of Theological Studies, New Series vol. 10:2 (1959), pp. 233–246. ↩

  2. See R. North, “The Hivites”, Biblica vol. 54:1 (1973), pp. 43-62 and T. Ishida, “The Structure and Historical Implications of the Lists of Pre-Israelite Nations”, Biblica vol. 60:4 (1979), pp. 461-490. ↩

  3. According to Targum (to I Chron. 1:13), Canaan’s eldest son was not named Sidon. Rather, his name was Bothneas/Bothniam or Cothneas/Cothniam, but he founded the city Sidon. ↩

  4. Targum Yerushalmi identifies the Hivites as the people of Tripoli. ↩

  5. There are several ancient sources which attempt to identify these last five nations. Bereishit Rabbah §37:6 and Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, Book I Ch. 6) explain that the Arkites possessed Arce, a city at the northwest foot of Mount Lebanon. Josephus writes that nothing is known about the Sinites. However, the Midrash, as well as Targum Onkelos and Pseudo-Jonathan translate Sinites as Antusites. Targum Yerushalmi identifies Sinites as Kafrusites, while Targum Neofiti translates Sinites as Artosites. The Midrash and Josephus write that Arvadites possessed the island Aradus on the Phoenician coast. Targum Yerushalmi identifies the Arvadites as the inhabitants of Antiaradus, a city on the mainland opposite said island. Pseudo-Jonathan translates Arvadites as Lotsites. Y. K. Mekonnen, Ethiopia: The Land, Its People, History, and Culture (2013) pp. 320–321 cites a tradition from Amharic-speaking historians that Canaan’s son Arvadite, known as “Arwadi”, settled in Ethiopia. The Midrash, Pseudo-Jonathan, and Targum Yerushlami render Zemarites as Hemetz, or variations thereof. The Midrash identifies the place of the Hamathites as Epiphania, which Josephus writes was the Macedonian name for Amathe. The Targumim identify the Hamathites as the inhabitants of Antioch. R. Ishtori ha-Parhi (1280–1366), the foremost Rabbinic topographer of the Medieval period, cites (Kaftor Va-Fereh, end of ch. 10) other ways of identifying these nations in the name of R. Saadia Gaon. See also A. Kaplan, The Living Torah (Maznaim Publishing, 1981), pg. 28 and S. Kasher, Peshuto shel Miqra vol. 2 (Jerusalem, 1968), pp. 151–152. ↩

  6. In a somewhat cryptic statement, Rashi (there) explains these families mentioned were the ones that were later dispersed. R. Danon in Beer ba-Sadeh (to Gen. 10:18) explains that Rashi’s intent was to exclude the possibility that the Canaanite families about whom the Bible reports their dispersal were other families besides the ones mentioned in the list of Canaan’s sons. One might have thought that besides Canaan’s eleven sons listed in the Bible, Canaan himself fathered more sons later in his life and their families are alluded to in the end of the description of Canaan’s progeny. To preclude such an understanding, Rashi points out that the families who were said to have dispersed are the very same families listed earlier in that passage. ↩

  7. To Gen. 10:18 and Deut. 32:8. ↩

  8. To I Chron. 1:13. ↩

  9. Abraham was told that the time has not yet arrived for his takeover of the Holy Land for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet full (Gen. 15:16). Hizkuni explains that in this context, God specifically mentions the Amorites and none of the other nations of Canaan because Abraham was then living in Amorite territory. R. Bahaya explains that the Bible specifically mentioned the Amorites because they were known as the toughest of the Canaanite nations (see below). R. David Pardo (Maskil le-David to Gen. 15:16) argues that the Amorites’ divine mandate over the Holy Land would expire first because they were the first people whom the Israelites would successfully battle and conquer (in the time of Moses, even before Joshua’s conquests). This indicates that the sins of the Amorites must have reached critical mass before the sins of the other Canaanite nations. As a result, when God tells Abraham that the time has not yet arrived for his takeover of the Holy Land, He says that even the Amorites had not yet lost their right to the Holy Land. ↩

  10. However, some sources assert that Oholibamah is identical to Esau’s wife Judith, daughter of Beeri, the Hittite, which suggests that she was really a Hittite, not a Hivite. See R. C. Klein, “Esau’s Wives”, Jewish Bible Quarterly vol. 42:4 (2014), pp. 211–220. ↩

  11. To Deut. 2:23. ↩

  12. Deut. 2:23 mentions a nation called the Avvites. Rashi and other commentators explain that the Avvites are Phillistines. However, Bereishit Rabbah §26:7 identifies the Avvities with the Rephaim. Nahmanides (to Deut. 2:23) accepts the Midrash’s opinion and adds that the Hivites and Avvites are also the same people (because the letter het of Hivites and ayin of Avvites are interchangeable due to their phonetic similarity). ↩

  13. For example, Targum Onkelos, pseudo-Jonathan, and Neofiti (to Gen. 15:18) translate Rephaim as Gibborim (commonly understood to mean “giants”, see Gen. 6:4). ↩

  14. To Gen. 15:20. ↩

  15. The Rephaim were first devastated by a coalition of four Mesopotamian kings (Gen. 14:5), and later by the Ammonites (Deut. 2:19–22). See also Sforno to Deut. 3:10. ↩

  16. This begs the question: If Og was indeed of the Rephaim, then why is he elsewhere known as an Amorite (Deut. 3:8, see also Radak to Josh. 24:12)? One cannot argue that the Rephaim and Amorites are the same people because Gen. 15 lists both the Rephaim and Amorites, as if they were separate peoples. Mizrahi (to Gen. 15:19) answers that although Og himself was personally an Amorite, he was king over the Rephaim. This contention is contradicted by Nahmanides (to Deut. 3:11) who writes that Og was personally from the Rephaim, but he reigned as king over the Amorites. It is also, of course, at odds with the many midrashic sources that identify Og as a pre-Deluge giant. Maharal (Gur Aryeh to Gen 15:19) answers that there are two kinds of Amorites: There were Amorites in the trans-Jordan region over whom Sihon and Og reigned, and there were Amorites in the Holy Land proper. The former type of Amorites were also known as Rephaim, while the latter are known only as Amorites. Thus, the name Amorite denotes both a nation and a super-nation. Consequently, he answers that Og was a member of the nation of Rephaim, itself a subset of the Amorite super-nation. It is unclear whether Maharal’s approach is compatible with the Midrashic assertion that the Rephaim and Hivites are one and the same. ↩

  17. In that episode, Gaal Ben-Ebed (a gentile rabble-rouser, see Rashi to Jud. 9:26) questions Abimelekh’s right to rule Shechem by arguing that the fact that Abimelekh’s father Jerubaal/Gideon ruled Shechem is irrelevant because by that logic, rule of the city should be transferred to the descendants of Hamor, the Hivite ruler of the city in the time of Jacob. See R. Isaiah of Trani’s commentary to Jud. 9:28. ↩

  18. E. Kupfer (ed.), Teshuvot u-Psakim me-et Hakhmei Ashkenaz ve-tzarfat (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1973), pg. 118. ↩

  19. Nahalat Yaakov to Gen. 15:19. ↩

  20. In most editions of the Midrash, this last place is given as Aspamya (Spain). However, R. David Luria (1798–1855) in his commentary to Bereishit Rabbah points out that Spain is too far away from the Holy Land to fit the context. Instead, he proposes emending the Midrash to read: Apamya, a Syrian city. ↩

  21. Rashi (to Gen. 15:19) seems to explain that the Kenites are Edomites, Kenizzites are Moabites, and Kadmonites are Ammonites. Hizkuni (there) explains that the Kenites are Ammonites, Kenizzites are Moabites, and Kadmonites are Edomites. However, the Midrash itself explains that the Kenites are Ammonites, Kenizzites are Edomites, and Kadmonites are Moabites. ↩

  22. JT Shviit 6:1 and Kiddushin 1:8. ↩

  23. To Gen. 15:19. ↩

  24. To Gen. 10:15. ↩

  25. Rashi (to Levit. 18:3) writes that the nations whom the Israelites conquered were the most depraved peoples. R. Jacob Solnik in Nahalat Yaakov (there) explains that the Israelites never conquered the entire area known as “the Land of Canaan”, rather they only conquered the area which belonged to the seven most depraved nations. He explains that for this reason the Bible finds it necessary to give a detailed account of the borders of the area that the Israelites were destined to conquer (e.g., Num. 34:2ff) and did not suffice with saying that will simply conquer the Land of Canaan, whose borders were quite well-known in the ancient world. ↩

  26. There seems to be a difference of opinion about whether or not the Holy Land includes Sidon. That controversy depends on how one interprets the passage in which Jacob blesses Zebulun that the border of his territory should reach Sidon (Gen. 49:13). Rashi (there) and Radak (to Jud. 18:7) explain that this means their border should reach until Sidon, but not include Sidon. On the other hand, J. Klugmann (ed.), Peirush ha-Rokeah al ha-Torah vol. 1 (Bene Barak, 2001), pg. 121 writes that Zebulun’s portion was especially choice because it included Sidon, which was the land that Canaan bequeathed his eldest son squarely because it was especially choice. See also Jud. 1:31 which criticizes the tribe of Asher for not conquering the inhabitants of Sidon. ↩

  27. See Malbim to Gen. 10:18 who argues that the Canaanite families mentioned in Gen. 10 but not in Gen. 15 were exiled by foreigners from their original places in the Holy Land and resettled in the area of Sidon. ↩

  28. Aderet Eliyahu to Numbers 22:5, 3rd edition. ↩

  29. However, the cantillation of that passage places a full-stop after the word “the Canaanites”, so the other five nations seem to be a separate clause. Accordingly, it would seem that the word “Canaanite” there is meant as a general term for all Canaanite nations (i.e. the Canaanite “super-nation”), while the second clause details five specific examples of such nations. Accordingly, the list of Judges 3:5 is the same as the list of I Kings. 9:20 (discussed below). ↩

  30. Mekhilta to Exodus 13:5 and Midrash Tanhuma (Bo §12). See below for an alternate rendering of the Mekhilta’s position. ↩

  31. See M. Zucker (ed.), Sefer ha-Mitzvoth le-Rabbeinu Hafez ben Yatzliah (New York, 1961), pg. 52. ↩

  32. To Exodus 3:8; 23:23. ↩

  33. To Deuteronomy 20:7. ↩

  34. Gur Aryeh to Exodus 13:5 and Deuteronomy 18:2. ↩

  35. See also Sifrei to Deuteronomy 26:9 (with Raabad’s commentary there). ↩

  36. To Exodus 13:5 and Deuteronomy 18:2. ↩

  37. In the lists of Exodus 3:8; 3:17; 13:5; and 33:2, the Canaanites precede the Amorites, while in Exodus 23:23; 34:11, and Deuteronomy 20:17, the Amorites precede the Canaanites. Two contemporary scholars offer approaches for resolving this apparent inconsistency. R. Haim Kanievski (Taama de-Kra to Ex. 3:8) resolves this discrepancy by noting that all cases in which the Canaanites precede the Amorites, the nations are listed in the context of calling the Holy Land, the land flowing with milk and honey. In that context, the Canaanite territory stands out as especially significant because TB Megillah 6a teaches that the main place in the Holy Land which flowed of milk and honey was Sipporis (Kitron), which belonged to the tribe of Zebulun and where the Canaanites are said to have lived (Jud. 1:30). On the other hand, whenever the Amorites are listed before the Canaanites, the context is usually the Israelites’ conquest or anticipated conquest of the Holy Land, whereby they first encountered the Amorites (Sihon and Og) before they encountered the Canaanites. Partially basing himself on the words of Abarbanel (Ex. 24), R. Moshe Tzuriel offers (Otzarot ha-Torah, Tzitzim u-Frahim to Ex. 3:8) a way of reconciling why the Bible sometimes lists the Amorites before the Canaanites and sometimes vice versa. Before the Golden Calf, God Himself was going to battle on behalf of the Israelites, so He would have first defeated the Amorites who were the strongest nation and then the rest would simply fall into place. However, after the Israelites sinned at the Golden Calf, they lost His direct intervention and instead had to rely on angelic emissaries which are not as overtly miraculous. As a result, they would first need to defeat the weaker Canaanites before being able to move on to the stronger Amorites. This is why in Exodus 23:23 the Amorites are before the Canaanites, while in Exodus 33:2 they are after the Canaanites. Nonetheless, this does not explain why in Exodus 34:11 and Deuteronomy 20:17, the Amorites precede the Canaanites, if those passages reflect the post-Golden Calf reality. See also Aderet Eliyahu (Jerusalem: Ahavat Shalom, 1997), pp. 142–143, written by R. Eliyahu ha-Tzarfati (1715–1805), Chief Rabbi of Fez, Morocco. ↩

  38. To Exodus 3:8. ↩

  39. See also the commentary of the Medieval scholar R. Efrayim of Regensburg (to Ex. 33:2). ↩

  40. Mizrahi to Genesis 15:19. ↩

  41. See Beer ba-Sadeh (there) who explains Mizrahi thusly. ↩

  42. Ibn Ezra to Genesis 15:20. ↩

  43. Mizrahi (cited above) also assumes that the term “Canaanite” can refer to the nations descending from any of Canaan’s eleven sons. However, R. Jacob Solnik (Nahalat Yaakov to Gen. 15:19) disagrees with this contention and argues that there were only seven nations of Canaan that occupied the Holy Land. The other descendants of Canaan settled outside of the established borders of the Holy Land and are not included in the general term “Canaan”. See also Nahalat Yaakov to Exodus 13:5 and Deuteronomy 18:2. ↩

  44. S. Sasson (ed.), Pirush Rabbeinu Avraham ben ha-Rambam al Bereishit ve-Shemot (London, 1958), pp. 124–126. ↩

  45. To Deuteronomy 11:23. ↩

About the Author
Reuven Chaim Klein

Rabbi Reuven Chaim (Rudolph) Klein is the author of Lashon HaKodesh: History, Holiness, & Hebrew (Mosaica Press, 2014). He is currently a fellow at the Kollel of Yeshivas Mir in Jerusalem and lives with his family in Beitar Illit, Israel.

Cite this article
Chicago

Reuven Chaim Klein. "Nations and Super-Nations of Canaan." Jewish Bible Quarterly 46, no. 2 (April – June 2018): 73–85.

MLA

Reuven Chaim Klein. "Nations and Super-Nations of Canaan." Jewish Bible Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2, 2018, pp. 73–85.

Next →
The Religious Significance of Bavel in the Book of Jeremiah
↩ Full table of contents — Vol. 46:2