There was a time when the biblical accounts of giants were interpreted and coloured by the traditions and supposed historic remains. More lately there is a tendency to interpret them in the liglit of the unreality that is now assigned to the extra-biblical traditions. These facts are a reason for scanning carefully the biblical evidence and confining ourselves very closely to it.
In our EV three ditt'erent words are translated giant. In Gn &* and Nu 13^ is used the word c'S'c: (in LXX and Gr. Enoch ol yl-yavTe^). See Nephilim. This word denotes beings analogous to the demigods of the Greek and Latin mythology. When applied to the giant inhabitants of Pal. (Nu 13^(, it should perhaps be regarded as a ligure of speech. The word used in Job 16" is gibbor (■'U:), a mighty man (KVm), a hero, an armed assailant, not a giant. The same word is used in the plur. in Gn 6*, appai-eptly as an equivalent for Nephilim, and is tr. in the Sept. yiyavTe^ ; but it is evidently the equivalent of the word ' heroes ' as used in mythological legends.
The true Heb. word for giant is diHerent from these. In 2 S 21'i'- '»• =»•- is the word raphah (nsn), tr'' giant, and in 1 Ch 20^- '• ' is the variant rapha' (n?";). From the same stem, in this variant form, comes the plnr. rSpludm (d"n?"!> also used for the 'shades,' see Kephaim), and this is the proper equivalent of our Eng. word 'giants.'
Raphah means to become limp, to be slack, to be loosened. It often describes the physical and moral condition of one who goes to pieces through fear or discouragement, one who is physically and spiritually relaxed through terror or panic (in Qal, Jer &-^ 49--' 5t)"; Hiihp., Jos 18», Pr IH' 24'°). Many regard the word rcphaim as the plur. of the gentilic adject, riphai, Rephaite ; but its use indicates that it is rather a common noun in the plur., and it will be so treated in this article.
1. Gi;oGKAPHlCAL DISTRIBUTION. — In David's time, the accounts say, there were rcphaim. that is to say, giant people, living in Gath, and they mention none elsewhere. The Goliath whom David slew was one of these (1 S 17 ef. a/.). So were Ishbi-benob, Saph (in 1 Ch 20'' Sippai), Goliath the Gittite (in 1 Ch 20^ Lahmi, the brother of Goliath the Gittite), and a man of stature with twenty-four fingers and toes (2 S 21'»---, 1 Ch 20^-»). See each of these names, in its place. Some of these men individually, and all four of them col- lectively, are said to have been born ' to the raphah (in 1 Ch 20"-^ raphn') in Gath.' Certainly raphah is here not a proper name. It is to be tr'' ' the giant.' II is to be understood either individu-
ally or collectively. If individually, then probably 'the giant' is the Goliath whom IJavid slew, and the four men here mentioned are his sons. If collectively, then the assertion is that the foui were of the breed of the giants that lived at Gath.
Some centuries earlier, just before the conquests by Moses and Joshua, the rephaim were more widely distributed. At that time, Og, the king of I5a.shan, was the only remaining representative ' of tho.se that were left of the rephaim ' K. of the Jordan (Dt 3"). W. of the .lordan the Anakim (wh. see) had their prin(^ipal seat, perliaps, at Hebron and its vicinity (Nu l;i--, Jos 14'2-"> 15'»- " 11-', Jg 1-°) ; but there were Anakim also in the mountain country of Israel as well as in the mountain country of Judah, and among the Phil. cities near the Mediterranean (Jos 1 1'-'- --). Further, there seem to have been rcphaim in tlie forest region near Mount Carmel (Jos 17"). There are traces, too, of giant occupation, either then or earlier, in such geograi>hical names as the valley of Kephaim (Jos 15* 18'" etc.), near Jerus., and ' the Avvim,' one of the cities of Benjamin (Jos 18-^). And it is presumable that they occupied yet other localities at this date.
Going back to earlier times, two passages are especially important. In Dt 2""- Moses is repre- sented as mentioning, for the encouragement of Israel against the Anakim, several giant peojjles that had been dispossessed by other ])eo|)les. In Gn 14 we have an account of the several jjeoples that were attacked by tlie four kings in their march southward, in tlie tl.aj's of Abraliam. The jieoples mentioned in these two passages are mainly the same, and they are so mentioned as to enable us to locate them geographically. The four kings ' smote Kephaim ' (Gn 14°), and this region must have been so called because there were replmim then living there, E. of the Jordan, well to the N., the region where Og afterwards reigned. Pro- ceeding S. they smote the Zuzim, apparently the same with the Zamzummim, who occupied terri- tory afterwards held by the Ammonites, and who are said to be rephr.iim (Gn 14', Dt 2-"). Still marching S., they reached the Emim, who are also said to be rcphaim., in the territory after- wards held by Moab (Gn 14', Dt 2"'-"). Yet farther S., in the country of Seir, they attacked the Horim, who were probably rephaim, though this is not expressly stated (Gn 14^, Dt 2'-- --).