Ha'nès (Hebrew Chânês', חָנֵס, doubtless of Egyptian. etymology), a place in Egypt only mentioned in Isa 30:4: "For his princes were at Zoan, and his messengers came to Hanes." The Septuagint renders the latter clause καὶ ἄλλεγοι αὐτοῦ πονηροί, "And his ambassadors worthless." The copy from which this translation was made may have read חנם ייגעי instead of חנס יגיעו; and it is worthy of note that the reading חנם is still found in a number of ancient MSS..(De Rossi, Varice Lectiones Vet. Test. 3:29), and is approved by Lowth and J. D. Michaelis. The old Latin version follows the Sept., "Nuncii pessimi;" but Jerome translates 'from a text similar to our own, rendering the clause as follows: "Et nuncii tui usque ad Hanes pervenerunt" (Sabbatier, Biblior. Sacrorum Latin. Verss., ad loc.). Jerome adds, in his commentary on the verse, "Intelligimus ultimam juxta Ethiopas et Blemmyas esse AEgypti civitatem." Vitringa would identify Hanes with the Anusis (῎Ανυσις) of Herodotus (2, 137; compare Champollion, L'Egypte, 1, 309; Quatremere, Memoires, 1, 500), which he, with Gesenius and others, supposes to be the same as Heracleopolis (City of Hercules) of Strabo (17, 812), the ruins of which are now called Anacsieh (Edrisi, Afric. p. 512). The Coptic name was Hnes or Ehnes, and it was one of the ancient royal cities of Egypt. Anasieh stands on a high mound some distance west of the Nile, near the parallel of Benisuef. The great objection to this theory is the distance of Anasieh from Zoan, which stood in the eastern-part of the Delta, near the sea. Gesenius remarks, as a kind of apology for the identification of Hanes with Heracleopolis Magna, that the latter was formerly a royal city. It is true that in Manetho's list the 9th and 10th dynasties are said to have been of Heracleopolite kings; but it has lately been suggested, on strong grounds, by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, that this is a mistake in the case of the 9th dynasty for Hermonthites (Rawlinson, Herod. 2, 348). If this supposition' be correct as to the 9th dynasty, it must also be so as to the 10th; but the circumstance of Heracleopolis being a royal city or not, a thousand years before Isaiah's time, is obviously of no consequence here.
The prophecy is a reproof of the Jews for trusting in Egypt; and, according to the Masoretic text, mention is made of an embassy, perhaps from Hoshea, or else from Ahaz, or possibly Hezekiah, to a Pharaoh. As the king whose assistance is asked is called Pharaoh, he is probably not an Ethiopian of the 25th dynasty, for the kings of that line are mentioned by name-So, Tirhakah — but a sovereign of the 23rd dynasty, which, according to Manetho, was of Tanite kings. It is supposed that the last king of the latter dynasty, Manetho's Zet, is the Sethos of Herodotus, the king in whose time Sennacherib's army perished, and who appears to have been mentioned under the title of Pharaoh by Rabshakeh (Isa 36:6; 2Ki 18:21), though it is just possible that Tirhakah may have been intended. If the reference be to an embassy to Zet, Zoan was probably his capital, and in any case then the most important city of the eastern part of Lower Egypt. Hanes was most probably in its neighborhood; and we are disposed to think that the Chald. Paraphr. is right in identifying it with
Tahpanhes (תִּחפִּנחֵס or תּחִפנחֵס, once written, if the Kethib be correct, in the form תִּחפּנֵס, Daphnae), a fortified town on the eastern frontier. Grotius considers Hanes a contraction of this name (Commentar. ad loc.). With this may be connected the remark of De Rossi — "Codex meus 380 notat ad Marg. esse תחפנהס Jer 2:16" (Var. Lect., 1. c.). On the whole, this seems to be the most probable theory, as Tahpanhes was situated in the eastern part of the Delta, and was one of the royal cities about the time of Isaiah. SEE TAHPANHES.