AMALEKITES, an ancient tribe, or collection of tribes, in the south and south-east of Palestine, often mentioned in the Old Testament as foes of the Israelites. They were regarded as a branch of the Edomites (Gen. xxxvi. 12, see Edom), and appear to have numbered among their divisions the Kenites. When the Israelites were journeying from Egypt to the land of Canaan, the Amalekites are said to have taken advantage of their weak condition to harry the stragglers in the rear, and as a judgment for their hostility it was ordained that their memory should be blotted out from under heaven (Deut. xxv. 17-19). An allusion to this appears in the account of Israel’s defeat on the occasion of the attempt to force a passage from Kadesh through Hormah, evidently into Palestine (Num. xiv. 43-45, cp. Deut. i. 44-46). The statements are obscure, and elsewhere Hormah is the scene of a victory over the Canaanites by Israel (Num. xxi. 1-3), or by the tribes Judah and Simeon (Judg. i. 17). The question is further complicated by the account of Joshua’s overthrow of Amalek apparently in the Sinaitic peninsula. The event was commemorated by the erection of the altar “Yahwehnissi” (“Yahweh my banner” or “memorial”), and rendered even more memorable by the utterance, “Yahweh hath sworn: Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Ex. xvii. 8-16, on its present position, see Exodus, Book of). The same sentiment recurs in Yahweh’s command to Saul to destroy Amalek utterly for its hostility to Israel (1 Sam. xv.), and in David’s retaliatory expedition when he distributed among his friends the spoil of the “enemies of Yahweh” (xxx. 26). Saul himself, according to one tradition, was slain by an Amalekite (2 Sam. i., contrast 1 Sam. xxxi.). A similar spirit appears among the prophecies ascribed to Balaam: “Amalek, first (or chief) of nations, his latter end [will be] destruction” (Num. xxiv. 20).
The district of Amalek lay to the south of Judah (cp. 1 Chron. iv. 42 seq.), probably between Kadesh and Hormah (cp. Gen. xiv. 7; 1 Sam. xv. 7, xxvii. 8), and the interchange of the ethnic with “Canaanites” and “Amorites” suggests that the Amalekites are merely one of Israel’s traditional enemies of the older period. Hence we find them taking part with Ammonites and Midianites (Judg. iii. 13, vi. 3), and their king Agag, slain by Samuel as a sacrificial offering (1 Sam. xv. 9), was a byword for old-time might and power (Num. xxiv. 7). Even in one of the Psalms (lxxxiii. 7) Amalek is mentioned among the enemies of Israel—just as Greek writers of the 6th century of this era applied the old term Scythians to the Goths (Nöldeke),—and the traditional hostility between Saul and Amalek is reflected still later in the book of Esther where Haman the Agagite is pitted against Mordecai the Benjamite.
Twice Amalek seems to be mentioned as occupying central Palestine (Judg. v. 14, xii. 15), but the passages are textually uncertain. The name is celebrated in Arabian tradition, but the statements regarding them are confused and conflicting, and for historical purposes are practically worthless, as has been proved by Th. Nöldeke (Ueber die Amalekiter, Göttingen, 1864). On the biblical data, see also E. Meyer, Die Israeliten (Index, s.v.). (S. A. C.)
AMALFI, a town and archiepiscopal see of Campania, Italy, in the province of Salerno, from the town of which name it is distant 12 m. W.S.W. by road, on the N. coast of the Gulf of Salerno. Pop. (1901) 6681. It lies at the mouth of a deep ravine, in a sheltered situation, at the foot of Monte Cerreto (4314 ft.), in the centre of splendid coast scenery, and is in consequence much visited by foreigners. The cathedral of S. Andrea is a structure in the Lombard-Norman style, of the 11th century; the façade in black and white stone was well restored in 1891; the bronze doors were executed at Constantinople before 1066. The campanile dates from 1276. The interior is also fine, and contains ancient columns and sarcophagi. The conspicuous Capuchin monastery on the W. with fine cloisters (partly destroyed by a landslip in 1899) is now used as an hotel. Amalfi is first mentioned in the 6th century, and soon acquired importance as a naval power; in the 9th century it shared with Venice and Gaeta the Italian trade with the East, and in 848 its fleet went to the assistance of Pope Leo IV. against the Saracens. It was then an independent republic with a population of some 70,000, but in 1131 it was reduced by King Roger of Sicily. In 1135 and 1137 it was taken by the Pisans, and rapidly declined in importance, though its maritime code, known as the Tavole Amalfitane, was recognized in the Mediterranean until 1570. In 1343 a large part of the town was destroyed by an inundation, and its harbour is now of little importance. Its industries too, have largely disappeared, and the paper manufacture has lost ground since 1861.
AMALGAM, the name applied to alloys which contain mercury. It is said by Andreas Libavius to be a corruption of μάλαγα; in the alchemists the form algamala is also found. Many amalgams are formed by the direct contact of a metal with mercury, sometimes with absorption, sometimes with evolution, of heat. Other methods are to place the metal and mercury together in dilute acid, to add mercury to the solution of a metallic salt, to place a metal in a solution of mercuric nitrate, or to electrolyse a metallic salt using mercury as the negative electrode. Some amalgams are liquids, especially when containing a large proportion of mercury; others assume a crystalline form. In some cases definite compounds have been isolated from amalgams which may be regarded as mixtures of one or more of such compounds with mercury in excess. In general these compounds are decomposable by heat, but some of them, such as those of gold, silver, copper and the alkali metals, even when heated above the boiling point of mercury retain mercury and leave residues of definite composition. Tin amalgam is used for “silvering” mirrors, gold and silver amalgam in gilding and silvering, cadmium and copper amalgam in dentistry, and an amalgam of zinc and tin for the rubbers of electrical machines; the zinc plates of electric batteries are amalgamated in order to reduce polarization.
AMALRIC, the name of two kings of Jerusalem.
Amalric I., king from 1162 to 1174, was the son of Fulk of Jerusalem, and the brother of Baldwin III. He was twice married: by his first wife, Agnes of Edessa, he had issue a son and a daughter, Baldwin IV. and Sibylla, while his second wife, Maria Comnena, bore him a daughter Isabella, who ultimately carried the crown of Jerusalem to her fourth husband, Amalric of Lusignan (Amalric II.). The reign of Amalric I. was occupied by the Egyptian problem. It became a question between Amalric and Nureddin, which of the two should control the discordant viziers, who vied with one another for the control of the decadent caliphs of Egypt. The acquisition of Egypt had been an object of the Franks since the days of Baldwin I. (and indeed of Godfrey himself, who had promised to cede Jerusalem to the patriarch Dagobert as soon as he should himself acquire Cairo). The capture of Ascalon by Baldwin III. in 1153 made this object more feasible; and we find the Hospitallers preparing sketch-maps of the routes best suited for an invasion of Egypt, in the style of a modern war office. On the other hand, it was natural for Nureddin to attempt to secure Egypt, both because it was the terminus of the trading route which ran from Damascus and because the acquisition of Egypt would enable him to surround the Latin kingdom. For some five years a contest was waged between Amalric and Shirguh (Shirkuh), the lieutenant of Nureddin, for the possession of Egypt. Thrice (1164, 1167, 1168) Amalric penetrated into Egypt; but the contest ended in the establishment of Saladin, the nephew of Shirguh, as vizier—a position which, on the death of the puppet caliph in 1171, was turned into that of sovereign. The extinction of the Latin kingdom might now seem imminent; and envoys were sent to the West with anxious appeals for assistance in 1169, 1171 and 1173. But though in 1170 Saladin attacked the kingdom, and captured Aila on the Red Sea, the danger was not so great as it seemed. Nureddin was jealous of his over-mighty subject, and his jealousy bound Saladin’s hands. This was the position of affairs when Amalric died, in 1174; but, as Nureddin died in the same year, the position was soon altered and Saladin began the final attack on the kingdom. Amalric I., the second of the native kings of Jerusalem, had the qualities of his brother Baldwin III. (q.v.). He was something of a scholar, and it was
