|
THE SEA PEOPLE AND THEIR MIGRATION |
|
by Shell Peczynski Acknowledgments I want to thank the matriarchs of my family for believing that, as a woman, I could do anything; Professor Cargill for luring me to Rutgers University with his class syllabus of the Ancient Near East course and subsequent courses on Greece. I also need to mention Professor Tannus for planting the seed in my mind of actually doing a thesis paper. I would also like to thank Tom Andruszewski for taking the first step into the deep dark waters of thesis writing and surviving the swim, encouraging me not to drown in the process, and that it can also be done by those of us who work full time. I cannot forget Shanna and Marion; my smart life-long friends who have inspired me and helped me through the rough patches with their computer knowledge and multi-tasking skills. These women inspired me to take the leap into the dark sea of higher education. Which leads me to my mentor Dr. Figueira, whose lecturing of mythology struck me with the epiphany that I want to someday tell the stories of the ancients and inspire our youth in such a way that I can mirror his brilliance in the unrehearsed flow and clarity of the lectures and tangents we may go on. His eloquence of speech and knowledge of diverse histories is colorful and vibrant, lacking the dryness of some historical topics and generic monotone speaking of many historians. The inspiration I have gleaned from these individuals has taught me that I can not only question stories of the past but answer the questions I seek, for future generations to expound upon. And that is the quest of a true teacher which I have recently aspired to be. The confederation of tribes we label the Sea Peoples were a complex web connecting the threads of what would later become scholarly debate. Their memory is but words in a dusty book, on a desolate shelf, long forgotten by an apathetic modern world. All that remains are pictures set in timeless stone telling of their attempt to conquer Egypt, in what we term the Late Bronze Age. Let us consider a time of prehistory. Discovering a past lost, still undeciphered which could hold a key to our future. In this never- nding story… we open the pages in the middle; for the beginning pages have been destroyed. Nevertheless, we may reconstruct through epigraphical evidence, alternate pages of this foreign his-story. The story tells of a population fleeing. This was such a definite turning of events that time was redefined from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age. In defining the ages of man, a transition occurred from the use of bronze metal in daily lives to the use of stronger iron implements. This marks a definite transition in power and lifestyles. Tribes and their societies depended on war and conquest as well as work and trade for food and survival. The climate was changing and so were their lifestyles, sometimes rapidly. Piracy was prevalent and an acceptable and feasible way of life, as long as you had the resources. The Mediterranean Sea was being traversed and migrations were recorded “over a period of at least fifty years in the later twelfth and early eleventh centuries BCE”.1 These tribes about which I shall speak were recognized and recorded by the Hittites, Egyptians, and the Alashiyans of what we now call Cyprus as well as Syrians of Ugarit. Hewitt believes that they started as united allied villages which grew into provinces and aggregated into larger confederations of allies such as the Sea Peoples. Leahy tells us that “there is a broad consensus that they came mainly from the Aegean and Anatolia, and archaeological discoveries increasingly suggest that upheavals in the Mycenaean world lay behind their abandonment of their native countries”.2 This era was marked with heavy inflation of food subsidies and famine across the Mediterranean. This was a time of chaos, and of fortification to protect what was life sustaining. Forts were built, troops were trained, and resources in metal were the base for the protection of each nation. Its importance cannot be stressed enough. Their era was categorized by it; power was defended by it. The rise and fall of civilizations was defined by it. There was “activity of trade caused by the discovery, by the mining tribes of the North of Asia Minor and Cyprus, of the ores of metals, the methods of extracting metals from the ores, and of working them when extracted.”3 They were in search of ore deposits and a better way of life. During this time “the foreign invaders included women and children in carts, and there can be no doubt that what we see was not just a military force but a population on the move”.4 This population was seeking food, wealth, trade and sustainability. They found all of it in Egypt and the Levant. There was a power struggle in the eastern Mediterranean over land and resources, especially metals. Metals equaled commerce and currency, it made tools to dominate other tribes. In the fifteenth century B.C. the Hittites were powerful, but were fading, while the Egyptian power waxed and then waned. When the Hittite kingdom was abolished, trade routes were upset.5 We can see this in the archaeological patterns formed in the Levant and Syria. This confederation of tribes we will now refer to as the Sea Peoples are thought to have sacked the Hittite cities. We must ask why they would uproot from their homeland and risk death and slavery by a foreign race. Leahy observes that they played a part in the loss of the Levant from Egypt.6 When they arrived there they staked a claim on the Levant. Arriving as mercenaries they used their influence and esources to better their lives. Barako states that because of the weakened state of Egypt, which held political sway over southern Canaan for most of the Late Bronze Age, the Philistines and other tribes of the Sea Peoples were able to threaten their power.7 After all they had allies, ships and metal implement to fight with. Moreover, in textual evidence from Medinet Habu, their threat to Egypt indicates they could conquer the coveted land in the Levant. These mysterious tribes appeared in a power vacuum and carved out a piece of the Levant for themselves and their families. They were hoping, but not succeeding, to include Egypt in their spoils of conquest. What they did was leave a mark on the Mediterranean history of their time. This mark was written in cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphics. In chapter one of this paper the physical proof that the tribes of the Sea People actually existed and were not just myth is argued from the epigraphical record of textual and pictorial records inscribed by the Egyptians, Hittites and Ugaritans. Unfortunately we do not have any written proof that survives from the Sea Peoples perspective. Everything found so far is from a foreign perspective. In chapter two we review the scholars who have previously chosen to study the Sea Peoples and classify them. Chapter three explores which were the tribes of the Sea Peoples and which lands they were thought to have occupied. Chapter four digs into the archaeology and their migration route through the archaeological remains. Chapter five gives a hypothetical route by land for the Sea Peoples and talks about the obstacles they may have encountered. It is obvious they traveled by sea as well and that is a complicated subject that I leave to more learned scholars than myself. The land route is a new hypothesis I have enjoyed exploring. Chapter six asks why they migrated and looks at the ruins around them while exploring the earthquake hypothesis again with the new science of Archaeoseismology and earthquake storms. Chapter seven goes into detail about epigraphical evidence of famine and drought reported around that time. Once we establish that they were real historical people, I summarize who has talked about them in scholarship and what archaeological trails they left behind. Where their path took them and what disrupted their lives enough for them to risk all. Erratic weather in different forms and hypothesis will be explored. Chapter 1: EPIGRAPHICAL EVIDENCE In tracing these movements at the end of the Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron Age, I looked to the epigraphical evidence left behind in baked clay and stone. The Hittites’ kept records and diplomatic correspondences that were written in baked clay tablets. The Egyptians left their exploits and stories in stone and papyrus transmitted through intermediaries. Important documents were on display in their Pharaohs’ temples and on stelae. Stelae were ancient message boards relaying in stone the Pharaohs accomplishments. Cohen and Westbrook identify the Late Bronze age stretching from the sixteenth century to the twelfth century BC.8 Politically the Mediterranean region was divided up by Kingdoms considering themselves Great Powers. Their rulers felt justified in calling themselves ‘Great King(s)’ and explained their ‘brotherhood’ as equals.9 These Great Powers consisted of the kings of the Hittites, Babylonia, Assyria,10 and Egypt which entered in the “fifteenth century, after the campaigns of Thutmose III who had taken Egyptian arms as far as the Euphrates and won for Egypt an empire in Canaan”11 or the Levant, where we will focus on archaeologically when looking for these tribes. The Alashiyans of Cyprus were considered an independent state and the Syrians of Ugarit were corresponding diplomatically with Egypt as well. These were the competitors for power, and, when they lost it, the confederation of Sea Peoples formed an alliance and stepped into the power vacuum left behind. They were leaving broken towns in search of a better life. Our earliest source, the Amarna letters, represented correspondence during the Egyptian Eighteenth Dynasty.12 These political letters imprinted in baked clay date from 1386-1318 BCE.13 These documents are the earliest historical evidence of the tribes encompassing the Sea Peoples.14 Lorenz summarizes the ethnic groups referenced in the Amarna letters as being the Shardana, the Danuna, and the Lukka.15 The Shardana are mentioned by Rib-Hadda of Gubla, residing in what we call Byblos. This Amarna letter, which is now entitled “An Attempted Assassination”, is correspondence between Rib- Hadda and an Egyptian Pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty. He informs the Great King that “A Sirdanu…order”[ed] an assassination in Gubla [Byblos].16 This political dispute over land is between two vassals of Egypt, Gubla and Amurru. The ruler of Amurru had “taken all of Rib- Hadda’s cities” and was conquering more by luring support away. These Sirdanu, whom Woudhuizen equates with the Sherden tribe, will be discussed later in detail since it has controversial origins.17 In the other two examples both alternative versions of one letter, EA 122 and EA123 entitled “An Enormity” and “An Enormity: Another Version”, the vassal Rib-Hadda complains to his lord, the Pharaoh, that his enemy killed many “Sirdanu people”. These became known later as one tribe of the Sea People. The ethnic group, known as the Danuna, is found in EA 15118 (which is entitled “A Report on Canaan)”.19 In this letter, it is reported that “the king of Danuna died; his brother became king after his death, and his land is at peace”.20 This is followed by a report of fire destroying half of the palace at Ugarit.21 Turmoil was prevalent in the last stages of the Bronze Age. Another ethnic group is referred to as the men of Lukki, appearing in only one Amarna Letter, EA 3822 entitled “A Brotherly Quarrel”.23 Lorenz summarizes wonderfully that the Egyptian pharaoh accuses some Alashiyans in allying with Lukki and raiding his territory, 24 and the king of Alashiya points out that he loses villages to the “men of Lukki, year by year”.25 They are obviously on the move. This group will be examined more in the next chapter. This letter represents the first mention of any tribes of the Sea Peoples. They are offhandedly recognized as being a problem for vassals of Egypt of the late Bronze Age. These piratical tribes were disrupting Egyptian power. In chronological succession our next source is found on the walls of the Temple of Amun at Karnak. This inscription was inscribed for Pharaoh Merneptah in Year 5 of his reign c. 1285 BC. It heralded his accomplishments as Pharaoh. Breasted informs us that the original inscription that was thought to be in Memphis has no longer survived.26 Leahy assumes about one-third of the invaders in this attack were Sea Peoples.27 The Libyan part of the army came at Egypt from the west.28 The title translates as “[Beginning of the victory which his majesty achieved in the land of Libya] -----i, Ekwesh (-k-w-s), Teresh (Tw-rw-s), Luka (Rw-kw), Sherden (S-r-d-n), Shekelesh (S-k-rws), Northerners coming from all lands”.29 This lists all the foreign enemies in this attack whom we group as the Sea Peoples. In the tenth month of the third season, saying: “The wretched, fallen chief of Libya, Meryey (M-r-y-yw-y), son of Ded (Dy-d), has fallen upon the country of tehenu with his bowmen----- Sherden ([S]-r-d-n), Shekelesh (S-k-rw-s), Ekwesh (-k-w-s), Luka (Rw-kw), Teresh (Tw-ry-s), taking the best of every warrior and every man of war (phr) of his country. He has brought his wife and his children ----- leaders of the camp and he has reached the western boundary in the fields of Perire.”30 This was a tribe on the move with their allies standing with them. They had a goal and were on the attack. They wanted a fresh start in a new fertile land. What follows is Merneptah’s speech which mentions “[Shall the land be wa] sted and forsaken at the invasion of every country, while the Nine Bows plunder its borders, and rebels invade it every day?”31 An earlier epigraph tells of the past “it was forsaken as pasturage for cattle because of the Nine Bows it was left waste from the times of the ancestors”.32 These Sea Peoples are aggressors and have attacked in the times of the ancestors. The speech continues: “They come to the land of Egypt, to seek the necessities of their mouths; their desire is ----- bringing to an end S-rk the Pedetishew (Pd ty-sw), whom I caused to take grain in ships, to keep alive that land of Kheta.”33 This seems to be telling us that the Pharaoh has given grain in the past to people in the land of Kheta. Now the battle begins over supremacy in the wealthy countries of the pharaoh’s dominion. Desperation over food sources and competition for limited supplies turns good men bad. They became outlaws and pirates, taking what they needed instead of honestly living. Those ways of life were acceptable in those days. Merneptah victoriously returns “laden with the uncircumcised phalli of the country of Libya, together with the hands of every country that was with them”.34 The Egyptians exacted revenge and tried to make sure that their enemies could not reproduce another generation to come back again and attack Egypt. Proudly, the Pharaoh lists: The captives carried off from this land of Libya and the countries which he brought with him; likewise the property ----- [between] the chateau of Merneptah-Hotephirma Tehenu (Ty-[h]-nw) which is in Perire (Pr-yrr), as far as the upper towns of the country, beginning with ‘—of Merneptah-Hotephirma.’
They were taken away ---- fire was set to the camp and their tents of leather.35 This list describes the Sea People and their possessions. It tells us that they fought with copper swords and that they brought their wives and children who were migrating with them. Animal husbandry was important to this nomadic society. It was a steady source of food. This was not merely just a battle between armies this was a population on the move. They traveled in leather tents and carried armor, knives and silver drinking vessels. They were a society that used many metal instruments and utensils, not just pottery. Livestock, their livelihood through animal husbandry, and current food supply was transported with them as well. Breasted tells us this is “one of the longest documents preserved on the temple walls of Egypt.”36 This is a fact which must have pointed to its importance. Summarizing what happened, Breasted portrays the Libyans making “a coalition with the maritime peoples of the Mediterranean, who now poured into the Delta.”37 The picture painted is:
It was a time of conquest and competition for arable land and resources; especially metal that can sustain a society. These were desirable commodities and tribes tended to be nomadic and aggressive. They were leaving a bad situation in hopes of gaining a new opportunity. Our next source was also found in Egypt, carved in Merneptah’s 5th year reign c.1285 BCE. It describes the second month of the third season. Known to us as the Cairo Column, its importance lies in the accurate dating of Merneptah’s victory over the Libyans.39 It reiterates the content of the great Karnak Inscription. There is a pictographic representation with hieroglyphics that show a god telling Merneptah, “I cause that thou cut down the chiefs of Libya whose invasion thou hast turned back”.40 This is meant to show the favor of the gods with Egypt and against its enemy. Underneath is a partially eroded inscription containing the exact date of the battle: year 5, second month of the third season (tenth month). One came to say to his majesty: ‘the wretched [chief] of Libya has invaded with --, being men and women, Shekelesh (S’- k-rw-s’).’41 The Cairo Column breaks off at this point and we must turn to another source to find out the completed message. Cline and O’Connor summarize the translation wonderfully in their appendix of- “The Mystery of the ‘Sea Peoples’” article: …has invaded and the land of Libya, being men and women, Shekelesh and every foreign country, which is with him, to violate the borders of Egypt”.42 We are fortunate that the Egyptians made multiple commemorations of their exploits, boasting to future generations of their prowess. In piecing together these clues to the past, we can construct a path followed by the legendary Sea Peoples. Our next source is referenced as the Athribis Stela, and is made of granite.43 It was found in the town of Athribis located in the southern Delta of Egypt.44 Breasted tells us it now resides in Cairo. The introduction titled “Valor of Merneptah” tells us:
This describes a famished people with their food taken and their fields destroyed. It clearly states the “families” are scattered and helpless and there is no safe haven for them. What were they leaving? It seems they were in search of better food sources and an opportunity for rebuilding and perhaps raw materials that they equated with safety and prosperity. Egypt was known to all as a land of agricultural wealth, sustained by the Nile River. It appears a desperate people searched for a better life and risked their entire “families” in bringing them with the armies to settle fertile land. The Stela continues with a list of the slain, captives and spoils. Verse 601 is comparable with verse 588 with the numbers varying slightly. Though one designation stands out in referring to the “Ekwesh (‘-k-w’-y-s’) [of] the countries of the sea, whom had brought the wretched [fallen chief of Libya]”.46 This geographic note is only placed after the Ekwesh tribe in both the Great Karnak Inscription and the Athribis Stela.47 The ethnic groups that we call the Sea People mentioned on the Stela are called the Ekwesh, Libyans, the Shekelesh and Teresh as well as the Shardana. We can now move to another piece of the puzzle. A stela was found by Petrie, in the year 1896, at the mortuary temple of Merneptah in the city of Thebes, Egypt.48 This stela speaks of the victory of Merneptah in the fifth year of his reign c. 1230 BCE, known also as the Hymn of Victory of Mer-ne-Ptah or simply, the Israel Stela.49 Mainly reiterating the Karnak inscription, it adds one shocking detail. The last section refers to Israel and is the first identification of Israel that we have found, and it appears in a statement of the subjugation of foreign peoples, while the eight lines between are a list of the defeated foreigners.50 It is important to note the second phrase, “his seed (pr t) is not”.51 This form of punishment the Egyptians liked to deal out to their defeated enemies and is found similarly in other parts of the inscriptions:52
The importance of bringing up the Egyptians’ way of despoiling body parts in dealing with defeated foes is their determination to eradicate future generations of opposition to Egyptian power. This could explain why we have difficulty, in this age, finding the pieces of the Sea Peoples and where they definitively ended up. With the men of that generation no longer able to procreate and sustain their race, the women were integrated into Egypt’s current society. Once captured the men were made into eunuchs and the women into slaves. There is an intriguing reference to Egypt “removing the mountain of copper from the neck of the people so that he might give breath to the people who were smothered”.55 This points to copper’s importance in their society and the Pharaoh’s power to give life and take it by defeating enemies. The passage continues later “that breath enters into their nostrils at the sight of him”.56 Another part of the Israel stela reveals the desolation of the Sea Peoples in:
These passages portray the plight of a desperate, starving people trying to find a new way of life in a foreign land. Thoroughly defeated by Merntptah, they have nothing left but strife, hunger and desolation. Threading the tapestry further, we arrive at the competition for power in the famous Battle of Qadesh. Fought primarily between the Hittites and the Egyptians, we should identify the allies as the Sea Peoples. This story is told in cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphic documents which some think can be filled in with the legends of Greece. 58 Barnett refers back to the year 1300BC, when: The great clash took place at Quadesh in Syria (modern Tell Nebi Mind on the upper Orontses River) between the young Ramesses II and Muwatallish, the Great King of the Hittites. The List of the Hittites’ allies, recorded by the Egyptian scribes, includes a number of peoples of Anatolia and Syria.
These are the names that we know denominate the Sea People as written as in Hittite and Egyptian documents; referring to the allies of the Hittites in the battle of Qadesh. Chapter 3 will explore their names and epithets more. Here we are limited to noting their presence in physical documents. Barnett reminds us that in Merneptah’s second year c. 1235 BCE, grain was sent from Egypt to the Pds while they suffered from famine that spread across the Mediterranean Sea; “this is said by Herodotus (1.94) to have afflicted Lydia for eighteen years, and finally forced the Etruscans to emigrate from that country… A second famine occurred in Anatolia 30 years later c. 1205 BCE”.60 Clearly emigration and migrations were occurring because of food shortages; thus causing turmoil and disputes over land in the Late Bronze Age. They were competing for resources and power. The interior courtyard within Egypt’s Medinet Habu temple has a text upon the wall written for Ramesses III, second Pharaoh of the Twentieth Dynasty in Year 8 of his reign. The text tells us:
Much is told in this inscription culminating in the defeat of the Sea Peoples by Pharaoh Ramesses III that will be discussed in my later chapters. There was intense competition and fighting for wealthy land. Another inscription in the interior courtyard at Medinet Habu which was once claimed to be “the inscription of the Year 5” is thought by Cline to be happening rather in reigning year 8:62
This obviously describes an invasion. Why would men risk their families’ safety if they could avoid it. Obviously the stakes were high in this battle and proportionately the losses were as well. This text at Medinet Habu I: plate 14 shows ships battling in the pictures, and the hieroglyphics explain:
They met death head on. The text continues the story of the battle with 1: plate 15: …As for the countries who came from their land in the isles in the midst of the sea, … a net was prepared for them, to ensnare them. They that entered into the Nile mouths were caught, fallen into the midst of it, pinioned in their places, butchered, and their bodies hacked up. … Amun-Ra repels my foe and gives to me every land in my grasp.65 This account implies that the battle was a trap, ensnaring the Sea Peoples. They perished; brutally hacked up. We will come back later to the geographic clue about their origins from land in the midst of the sea. On the face of the first pylon, to the south of the main gateway in the Medinet Habu temple of Egypt, there lies a stela beginning with “Year 12 under the majesty of Horus I overthrew the Tjek[er], the land of Pele[set], the Danuna, the [W]eshesh, and the Shekelesh; I destroyed the breath of the Mesh[wesh], --, Sebet, --, devastated in their (own) land.” …66 Again stela in Egypt are erected to boast of the Pharaoh’s triumphing over those coveting Egyptian land. He names the ethnic groups of what we call the Sea Peoples in this inscription. We find more records in a different form than previously illustrated: Papyrus, a form of ancient paper that kept well in the dry heat of Egypt. The first document is named Papyrus Harris for the man who found it. N.K. Sandars relays the contents of this document written for Ramesses III:
They had nowhere else to go. Their intent was to settle. Ramesses III tells us he charitably took in the Shardana warriors and their families as mercenaries for his army:
We see that Ramesses III was so impressed with the Shardana’s fighting skills that he took them into his army and provided for their families. He gave them jobs, there was no need to steal. There was no need to become an outlaw when you can provide sustenance for your family. They had no more reason to fear; he considered them happy and satisfied. Cline and O’Connor add a translation different from Sandars: “I sustained alive the whole land, whether foreigners, (common) folk, citizens, or people, male or female.”69 Perhaps he was talking about grain supplies. This describes the magnanimity of the Pharaoh for having mercy on captured foes who may be of use for defending Egypt’s frontiers against other invaders. It also boosts his ego to have life and death power over so many people. Another obscure Papyrus called the Wilbour Papyrus is discussed by Leahy and tells us the Sherden: are recorded as settled in Middle Egypt in the land survey from the reign of Ramesses V recorded in the Wilbour Papyrus. They had presumably been given plots of land in return for their military service, and had doubtless[ly] intermarried, and were in the process of being assimilated.70 They were obviously content to settle in this wealthy land, which was their original intent. This gives one reason the Sherden tribe of the Sea Peoples dropped from Egyptian Records. They were assimilated into another culture, taking on its women and traits while living on its land. The next source is a word list referred to as an onomasticon, in particular, the Onomasticon of Amenemope which Simpson tells us dates to the end of the twentieth dynasty and is repeated on ten different papyrus, scratched on potsherds, and was carved on a piece of leather. 71 This must have been practice for training scribes since it seems to have been copied by scribes many times over. Simpson notes that the ‘Misadventures of Wenamun and the Story of Woe’ was discovered at El-Hiba along with the Golenischeff papyri.72 O’Connor and Cline summarize that the ethnic groups Sherden, Tjeker, and Psset are in this word list.73 A Tjeker town, Dor is entered by the main character, Wenamun whom argues with its Tjeker prince.74 Ugarit, located in Syria, is where our next source comes from. These Ugarit Letters from the king of Alashiya, modern Cyprus, to Ammurapi, King of Ugarit, warn of enemy Sea Peoples ships sighted (Ugaritica 5.23).75 The reply is in the form of a clay tablet correspondence from Ammurapi (Hammurabi), king of Ugarit, to the king of Alashiya (Cyprus). This reply warns that “the ships of the enemy have been coming.”76 Hammurabi and Ugarit have been attacked by the enemy (Sea Peoples). Fires have been set and the land has been harmed, seven ships in all have been sighted while the Ugarit navy has been away fighting in the Lukki land.77 This reaffirms that the Sea Peoples were a problem for the powers of the late Bronze Age. They had appeared on the scene and were trying to carve out settlements for their own people from the fertile lands of the area. These migrating nomads were trying to find a prosperous land for their families to grow up. They had a motive to take over available resources. The ethnic group of Philistines are mentioned in the Old Testament (1 Samuel 13: 19-22) as being the metal smiths of Israel and they would not share their secrets with the Hebrews but were willing to trade with them. Unfolding in later chapters will be the importance of metal to the daily lives of these people. This is an overview of the epigraphical evidence found in the Late Bronze Age describing the Sea Peoples. They seem to have left their own territory en masse and were emigrating to other occupied lands, arriving in ships and raiding enemy towns. They were in need of food and metal resources, appearing on the scene in search of these necessities and willing to fight for them. Following a trail of broken pot sherds we can reconstruct this migration. First we must define who these Sea Peoples were and what ethnic groups comprised them. CHAPTER 2: WHO COMPRISED THE SEA PEOPLES? A conglomeration of different tribal names has been mentioned in the previous chapter. Egyptian Pharaoh Amenophis III names the Lukka, Sharden, Danuna, and Meshwesh.78 Pharaoh Ramesses II talks of the Lukka, Sharden, Quarqisha, and the Labu.79 Pharaoh Merneptah, who inscribed much about his victory over the Sea Peoples, lists them as Lukka, Sharden, Eqwesh, Teresh, Shekelesh, Labu, and Meshwesh.80 Pharaoh Ramesses III, in his fifth reigning year, inscribes the following tribes: Qayqisha, Labu, Meshwesh, Asbata, Shayu, Hasa, and Baqan.81 Pharaoh Ramesses III, again in his eighth reigning year, battles these Sea Peoples and names them: Shekelesh, Weshesh, Danyen, Tjakker, and Peleset.82 These are all Egyptian sources naming foreign enemies from the north. We have been referring to them as simply the Sea Peoples. It should be mentioned that Habiru or SA.GAZ, were known in the Near East “as a social category of refugees” their numbers spread at the end of the Bronze Age.83 They came as soldiers and metal craftsmen, some were outlaws, similar to pirates but on land.84 Hittite sources list this allied group and later enemy as Lu-uk-ka, Ta-ru-i-sa, Si-kala- yu, Kar-ki-sa, and Daniya-wana.85 As illustrated, there are many different references for what could be thought of as a few raiding tribes. All of these names are from the surrounding areas of the Mediterranean Sea, and many have been traced to Asia Minor and the Aegean. Barako summarizes that “these people originated from somewhere within the Aegean/Mycenaean world, which by the end of the Late Bronze Age, included the Greek mainland, the Aegean islands, Crete, Cyprus, coastal Asia Minor and Cilicia; and that they had settled in southern coastal Canaan, as archaeology and the Hebrew Bible abundantly demonstrate”.86 Woudhuizen has a revealing chart in his dissertation titled “The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples”, clearly representing the Egyptian hieroglyphic names of the Sea Peoples and their transliteration” (see figure 1).87 Given all of the physical epigraphical evidence and the common stories of plunder and migration associated with the previously named tribes, why do we care? As historians, we try to reconstruct paths through a foggy and dense sea we call history. This history was chaotic and in ruins. Maspero, a professor at the College of France in the year 1881, coined the term “peoples de la mer” for these tribes about whom we have been talking, which translates into the English People of the Sea or Sea Peoples.88 We can trace back further the study of these tribes- to Champollion who was the first scholar to decipher ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics.89 His book Grammaire egyptienne of 1836 linked the Peleset tribe with the biblical Philistines,90 though he was not the first to think of this. In 1747, Fourmont was the first to connect the Peleset with the Pelasgians of Greece, and Chabas picked up this equation.91 Biblical sources say the Peleset originated in (Camphor) Crete.92 Bonfante, in 1946 and Mertens in Chronique d'Egypte of 1960, assume the Peleset as Illyrians who migrated to the Levant via Crete.93 De Rouge in the Revue Archeologique used phonetic similarity or “Gleichklang” to trace the tribes on the walls of Karnak “with names of known Mediterranean peoples or locations”94. De Rouge then added the Teresh, equated “with the Tyrrhenians or Etruscans, the Shekelesh with the Sicels, and the Sherden with the Sardinians,” bringing the Sea Peoples out of Asia Minor and into the central Mediterranean.95 Chabas in 1872 drew a link between the Tjeker and the Teukroi of the Troas, the Denye(n) with the Daunians, and the Weshesh with the Oscans again pointing to Italy instead of Asia Minor. Maspero, in 1910, thought that the homeland of the Sea Peoples should be restricted to western Anatolia and mainland Greece.96 Then a heated controversy among scholars began. Maspero believed Herodotus’ when he put the origin of the Tyrrhenians in Lydia (Histories 1.94).97 He suggests that the Sea Peoples migrated to the central Mediterranean after their defeat in Egypt.98 Perhaps they got away from the pharaoh. Maspero concludes that just the Philistine tribe turned east and made a settlement in Canaan.99 The controversy has continued, with some modern scholars accepting Maspero’s hypothesis and others trying to refute it. Hall writing for the Cambridge Ancient History in 1926, places the Sea Peoples’ route from Asia Minor as stopping in Crete.100 Gardiner in 1947 sided with Hall in his assessment that the Peleset were not from Crete, but used it as a port when traveling to the Levant.101 Kimmig in his paper in the Festschrift Tackenberg, 1964 connected the Urnfield peoples of Europe with the Sea peoples.102 Kimmig explains the cause of the migrating Sea Peoples was an invasion of these Urnfielders into Greece setting off a domino effect.103 Barnett, writing for the 3rd edition of the Cambridge Ancient History in 1969 and 1975, identifies the Sea People according to similar sounding people and places and agrees with Maspero’s thesis.104 Both place Lydia as an original home for the Teresh, and the Shekelesh have migrated to Sicily. He agreed that the Sherden are from Cyprus, and that they leave there to sail to Sardinia.105 They equate the Peleset with the Philistines who colonized the Canaanite cities of Gaza, Askelon, Asdod, and Dor via Crete.106 Barnett brings out the point that the famine relayed by Herodotus in his Histories (1.94), was the cause of the Lydian migration to Etruria.107 Stadelmann writing in Saeculum hypothesizes the Phrygians, started from the Balkans area, and then crossed the Anatolian plateau while destroying the Hittite Empire during the late Bronze Age.108 He adds that the Philistines allied with the Phrygians in crossing from the Balkans to Asia Minor, and then they continued trying to dominate the Levant and Egypt stopping at Crete then Cyprus.”109 Stadelmann also concluded that the Sherden, Shekelesh, and Teresh traveled on to the central Mediterranean trying to colonize Sicily, Sardinia and central Italy, from where they still traded with their allies staying in the Levant until the Phoenicians came to dominate.110 Lehmann and Woudhuizen conclude they have inferred the cause “from the distribution map of groups of the Sea Peoples in the central and eastern Mediterranean”. These maps can be found in Die mykenisch-fruhgriechische Welt und the accompanying text (pp.43-49) they both considered the Adriatic as the source of trouble for the wider Mediterranean. Tribes here could have been pushed by things happening der ostliche Mittelmeerranum in der Zeit der ‘Seevölker’-Invasionen um 1200 v. Chr. of 1985 (p.47) and in the Danubian area.111 Nibbi wrote in 1969, The Tyrrhenians and later The Sea Peoples and Egypt in 1975 and views “the Sea Peoples as Asiatics living in the Nile delta”.112 The next year 1976 Strobel strongly suggests a drought playing part in the cause of the migrations.113 Two years later in 1978 the scholarly hunt goes on with Sandars’ book, The Sea peoples, Warriors of the ancient Mediterranean 1250-1150 BC, where she talks of system collapse as well as attacks near the borders.114 Then four years later, Schachermeyr wrote in 1982 and followed some of the Sea Peoples back to the Adriatic, especially Illyria, where the Sherden and Shekelesh are thought to have migrated to the Levant by ship, pushing the Mycenaean Greeks along the route, and the Tjeker and Peleset to have infiltrated by land, overturning the Hittite Empire.115 That same year, in 1982 Dothan studied the Philistines and the archaeology of Palestine.116 1983 brought more analysis and Holbl pointed out two phases of migration of the Sea Peoples infiltration.117 First, a strictly military one at the time of Merneptah in which the groups of the Sea Peoples mentioned act as mercenaries or auxiliaries to the Libyan king Meryre (=Meryey)-who himself takes with him his wife and children with the obvious intent of settling in the Egyptian delta. Secondly a migratory one at the time of Ramesses III in which at least some of the groups of the Sea Peoples mentioned have decided to settle in the Egyptian delta as evidenced by the fact that they take with them their wives and children in oxcarts.118 This thesis explores possible answers as to why they left where they were. Vanschoonwinkel in his L’Egee et la Mediterranee orientale a la fin du II millenaire written in 1991 views violent earthquakes as a cause of the catastrophe.119 Drews places the cause of the catastrophe in the change from chariot warfare to “a new style of infantry with round shields, slashing swords, metal greaves, and javelins”.120 The Sherden tribe was known to be mercenaries good at fighting. The strength of the Sea Peoples lies in their naval power and with that they could raid and conquer.121 Drews holds an “anti-migratory view” disputing that the Sea People “were ever a cohesive group”.122 In 2000 Oren collected papers and published them as “The Sea Peoples and Their World: A Reassessment” where Wachsmann agrees with Kimmig in that the Urnfield culture is connected to the Sea Peoples by way of their ship ornaments.123 Again the puzzle of the Sea Peoples catches scholar’s attention. During 2001, Barako presented his thesis to Harvard University on the Seaborne Migration of the Philistines; he also proposes a land route which will discuss later in chapter five. In 2003 Cline and O’Connor wrote an article in the book Mysterious Lands with an appendix for translations of the epigraphical evidence on the Sea Peoples. The most recent publications in English include a thesis by Woudhuizen, of Erasmus University, entitled The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples which came out in 2006. Birney presented her dissertation to Harvard University in 2007 titled Sea Peoples or Syrian Peddlers? The Late Bronze –Iron I Aegean presence in Syria and Cilicia, an important study. Many of these English language authorities will be reviewed in this thesis in order to determine an answer to what led to the migration of the Sea Peoples. There has been much study on the different proposed ethnicities of the conglomerated tribes of the Sea Peoples. This was followed by many heated discussions by respected scholars. This paper does not want to join the discussion but simply state the chronological opinions up to date. Now we turn to the most popular names of the tribes. CHAPTER 3: The Confederation of Lands and Tribes United to Form the Sea Peoples Front. The debate has settled somewhat and most scholars agree that the Sea Peoples hailed from Asia Minor, the Aegean, the Balkans, and Cyprus.124 In Merneptah’s text, these are noted as “foreign lands of the sea”125 which includes the following tribes: Shardana, Shekelesh, and Eqwosh.126 They are also referred to as “northerners who came from every land”.127 This would encompass the Teresh, Lukki, and the previously mentioned Shardana, Shekelesh, and Eqwosh. Ramesses III calls them “foreign countries (who) made a conspiracy in their isles”128 and also “northern countries who were in their isles”129; or even “the countries who came from their land in the isles in the midst of the sea”.130 Hence the name coined for them, Sea Peoples which aptly describes their surroundings. Another source, the Papyrus Harris places the Danuna “in their isles” and the Shardana as well as the Washosh “of the sea”.131 Therefore, we can assume that the so called Sea Peoples are mariners and live on a coastline. Birney in her dissertation indicates that their “area is taken by most scholars (and archaeologically supported) to indicate the broader region of western and south western Anatolia, the Dodecanese and Rhodes”.132 Most prior theories are based on linguistics and similar sounding place names to title which the Sea Peoples have been called by the Egyptians, Hittites, and Ugaritans. Birney stresses in her Harvard University dissertation that “the Sea Peoples are not a homogeneous group”.133 She places them as the beginning of a wave of peoples from Asia Minor and the Aegean islands migrating into the Levant.134 Their actions set in motion:
Let us start with the Shardana. We find the Shardana first in the Amarna Letters. They are fighting on the Egyptian side and are stationed at Byblos.136 A home-land is not clearly given. Another source, the Papyrus Harris tells us what happened to them after they are defeated by Ramesses III. It states that the “Shardana (and the Washosh) were brought as captives to Egypt, that Ramesses ‘settled them in strongholds bound in my [Ramesses III] name, and that he ‘taxed them all, in clothing and grain from the storehouses and granaries each year’”.137 Another source, the Onomasticon of Amenemope also referred to as “Wen- Amon’s story” lists the Shardana as one of the peoples ruling the [northern] coast [of the Levant].138 Birney relates that this is the region of Akko.139 In the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, Leahy tells us that the “Sherden are recorded as settled in Middle Egypt in the land survey from the reign of Ramesses V recorded in the Welbour Papyrus”. hey had most likely been rewarded for their mercenary activity for the Pharaoh and were rewarded with land and Egyptian wives therefore taking on Egyptian ways and assimilating into their culture.140 Some scholars including Egyptologists emphasize the similarity in the words Shardana and Sardinia.141 They could have colonized here at any point, but, as Cline and O’Connor point out, there is not at this time any evidence for this settlement unless you count the Bronze Age ruins found on the island of Sardinia in the form of nuraghi (circular stone structures).142 Zertal connects these ruins with similar ones found in El-Ahwat, Israel that are connected to the Iron Age.143 Next we will investigate the Shekelesh ethnic group. In Egyptian it is spelled skls who may, according to Cline and O’Connor, be the “Sikilayu who live in ships”, found in a letter from the Hittite king to the last king of Ugarit.144 Sandars reminds us that a people known as the Sikels were found by the Greeks living in Sicily after the Trojan War, i.e., in the eighth century.145 Maspero’s Anatolian thesis connects them with Asia Minor and the town of Sagalassos.146 Though Woudhuizen doubts this because Suppiluliumas II of the Hittites, rules western Asia Minor around that time and does not talk of the Shekelesh. Therefore, he prefers Stadelmann’s assumption that the Sherden, Shekelesh, and Teresh sailed across the Mediterranean to colonize Sardinia, Sicily, and central Italy where he suggests they kept trading with their allies in the Levant.147 Some Egyptologists connect the Shekelesh with Sicily as well.148 In contrast Stern, the director of the excavation of the Tel of Dor, equates the Sikils with Tel Dor instead of the Tjekru. The Wen-Amon story tells us in a later time period, Beder the prince of Dor was a Sikil, and after leaving, Wen-Amon sees eleven ships belonging to the Sikils following him.149 Stern also believes that the Sikils occupied the northern Sharon plain, where the Sherden settled the Acre valley”.150 Nibbi tells us they are from Canaan.151 Inhabitant’s of Ascalon a city that has historically been aggressive towards Egypt.152 The Old Testament tells us that Ascalon later had Philistines living there. This evidence points towards Ascalon being an important area, since more than one Sea People “tribe” has called it home. Next we will investigate the Eqwosh ethnic group. They are equated by some with the Washosh, or Weshesh. These have been connected with Carian Wassos people or the Cretan Waksioi by Hall. Wachsmann connects their boats, on account of the birdheaded bow and stern, to the Urnfield culture.153 Woudhuizen identifies them with the Oscans. He connects his invasion of Italy by bearers of the European Urnfield culture with the stirring up of people in that region and views them as a prime mover of the upheavals of the Sea Peoples. This domino effect started mass migrations. Woudhuizen points out that the pictographs of Sea People ships with protruding bird-head devices at both the bow and the stern are of a typically Urnfield type. Thus for him, the spread of handmade barbarian ware of proto-Villanovan Italian or European Urnfield backgrounds, and the growing popularity of the rite of cremation during and after the catastrophic, Late Bronze Age events may be attributed to the influence of Oscan participants.154 In his study of the papyrus, Harris states about the Weshesh (W’-s-s) [and the Sherden] of the sea, that “they were made as those that exist not, taken captive at one time, brought as captives to Egypt.”155 Then the Pharaoh proceeds to gloat “I settled them in strongholds, bound in my name, [and] numerous were their classes like hundred- thousands.”156 This notice helps to explain where these ethnic groups were settled and what happened to them after their attack on Egypt. The Teresh (Egyptian Trs)-are first heard of in Merneptah’s inscriptions at Karnak and his Athribis (Kom el Ahmar) stela.157 Sandars points out that the Hittites had a Taruisha, in northern Assuwa. They have also been settled near the future area Lydia, in central western Anatolia. Herodotus places them near Tyrrhenian land. Sandars connects the Teresh-Taruisha-Tyrsenoi and the Etruscans.158 Unfortunately there are no archaeological remains that are clearly labeled Tereshian.159 Some Egyptologists place the Tursha within Tyrsenia or Tyrrhenia being the coasts of Italy.160 The piratical Lk deserves our attention next. Scholars have come to believe that they originated in Lycia, as well as in Caria which is also located in Anatolia.161 At that time, the Amarna letters are the main evidence of their existence. Unfortunately we have not found any Lukki remains yet.162 Bryce concludes that Lukka territory should be included to the coast west of Tarhuntassa, Greek Lycia.163 It is well known that Homer identifies the Lycians geographically with the valley of the Xanthos River in Anatolia.164 Woudhuizen argues that the main area of Lukka refers only to the lower Xanthos valley including Patara, Awarna, Pinata, and Talawa; compared to the Lukka hunting lands that include walking to the north, east, and west of settlement Lukka.165 Drews generalizes that Egyptologists place the Lukka within Lycia.166 The Meshwesh tribe, another supposed Sea People group, was allied with the Libyans and was according to Drews “often identified with the area around Tunis, [North Africa] where Herodotus locates people whom he calls Maxyes”.167 Libyans are often talked of as invading the Egyptian Delta. There were many invasions of Egypt one in 1220 BC, Merneptah’s reign, known as the Libyan war; and again in 1189BC, and again in 1183BC, both in Ramesses III’s reign.168 They originally were from the central Balkans and migrated at some point in the past to become Libyans in Africa, flanking Egypt’s western border.169 When invading Egypt the whole family came with the warriors, along with their possession, with an intention to settle. This was no ordinary war. The Tjekker are known as from the Wen-Amun story to have controlled the town of Dor, in the Levant.170 They are known as pirates here as well. In 1872, Chabas connected them with north western Asia Minor and the Teukroi settled there. Later Sandars writing concurred.171 The notable of the Sea Peoples are the Philistines, known to the Egyptians as the Peleset. Champollion noted and connected them after he deciphered Egyptian hieroglyphics. They are first talked about in the reign of Ramesses III when they attacked in both the fifth and eighth year of his reign. Drews describes Chabas’ theory of 1872: that Peleset were Pelasgians in the Aegean Sea region and after migrating for a long time, they were pushed back from Egypt and were settled in the Levant to become known as the Philistines.172 Strange thinks that they were most likely settled in the Levantine city-states as Egyptian garrisons keeping down any Palestinian uprising.173 Then, as I have said before, the Egyptian power waned in the Levant. Nibbi accepts them as the ancient Peleset (PRST or PLST) living in Ascalon.174 Woudhuizen calls them new settlers to the Levant. They started a pentapolis consisting of the towns or confederation of city-states being Ekron, Askelon, Gaza, Asdod, and Gath (at the time of the upheavals of the Sea Peoples).175 Strange places their territory between Gaza in the south to Ekron and Ashdod in the north while the eastern boarder was Gath.176 The Old Testament states that the Philistines came from Caphtor (Amos 9:7).177 The path is followed when “as for the Avvim, who lived in villages as far as Gaza, The Caphtorim [Philistines, Peleset], who came from Caphtor, destroyed them and settled in their stead (Deuteronomy 2:23).178 The Papyrus Harris tells of the Peleset settled by Ramesses III as vassals. After being settled in Palestine, the Philistines were in a position of power holding military superiority over the Canaanites which was owed to their hold on resources and iron production in the Levant the bible informs us (I Samuel 13, 19- 3).179 The Old Testament continues (Jeremiah 47:2-5) to describe “the day that is coming to destroy all the Philistines” and talks of what we would call a tsunami: “Behold, waters are rising out of the north and shall become an overflowing torrent; they shall overflow the land and all that fills it, the city and those who dwell in it” (Jeremiah 47:2).180 The Old Testament describes “for the LORD is destroying the Philistines, the remnant of the coastland of Caphtor; baldness has come upon Gaza, Ash’kelon has perished” (Jeremiah 47:4-5).181 This puts the onus of the Philistines demise at the hands of the LORD. In fact some Philistines must have escaped to continue their people on the coast, told of in the oracles of prophets during the 7th and 6th century BC. 182 The Danuna, Denye(n) or Danaoi are different spellings of another tribe thought to be the Sea Peoples. Yadin tells us the Tribe of Dan had been nomadic, though some make a camp at Mahaneh Dan. The tribes migrate with their women and children like the Libyans, armed for protection. An enemy, the Amorites, forced the children towards the hill country and out of the valley (Judges I, 34-35). Camps were made in Zorah and Eshtaol and the Danites wished to settle, they scouted a safe looking place known as Laish so they took it and named it Dan.183 The tribe of Dan is known in the bible extensively. Woudhuizen thinks the Denye(n) hail from Tel Qasile and have Mycenaean forefathers.184 Woudhuizen further specifies their territory as Joppa thus placing them between Asdod in the south and Dor in the north. They then conquered Zora and Eshtaol continuing onto Laish.185 This confederation of tribes did settle separately in the Levant. The Peleset thought of as Philistines settled Askelon, Asdod, Gaza, Ekron, and Gath, their pentapolis. The Tjeker thought to be Teukroi settling and ruling Dor. The Sherden maybe Sardinians, found in Akko. The Denye(n) or Dan inherit Joppa and take over Laish. In Hamath, we find the culture of European Urnfielders some identify with the Weshesh or Oscans. Ekwesh also connected to Akhaians settle in the Cilician plain.186 While trying to find the first stirrings of interest in other lands for the Sea Peoples Nibbi relates that people called Asiatics, low born and domesticated were placed in Egypt from 2050-1786 BC. Their livelihood was animal husbandry, and shepherding, they imported the animals from Syria and Palestine. Craftsmanship in bronze and lapis lazuli is brought to Egypt during this period.187 “During the eighteenth dynasty, the number of workers and slaves from the northern countries” multiplied exponentially.188 Asiatic artisans brought their skill of metalwork and stone working to Egypt, and, during the eighteenth dynasty an influx of people began to migrate to Egypt for work and a better life. Word probably spread back to a homeland that was lacking in some way. Hayes tells us in the Cambridge Ancient History vol. II, that Egypt’s “exploitation of such natural resources as the mines of Nubia and the eastern desert made Egypt in gold alone the richest nation on earth”.189 Nibbi further explains that a large annual tribute was indebted to Egypt by pharaoh’s vassals.190 As we follow this spread of power the fact that tribute was being demanded and threatened is significant, resentment must have abound. 191 Nibbi reminds us that we have records of Libyan people paying tribute starting at the first dynasty.192 This display of wealth by the Egyptians and the unfolding picture of opportunity that is being seen by the different Sea Peoples (as mercenaries or artesans) is of a better life. Nibbi reminds us that Asiatic Bedouins have been shepherding their flocks with permission in the Eastern Delta for a while. 193 In the Amarna Letter Rib-addi, governor of Byblos writes to Egypt of his enemies uniting with the Gaz people, known to be refugees and outlaws. He talks of an enemy leader named Abdi-Ashirta who “all lands unite with the Sa. Gaz people”…and his sons whom the “whole land belongs… have now entered Amurra”.194 This is where we start to see rebellion and the uniting of different people. Again the Amarna Letters are the first source to speak of the uniting of Egypt’s enemies geographically to the north. It is a starting point of action based on the coveting of Egyptian wealth and Egypt’s diminishing power in the Levant. Nibbi observes that many city-states such as Ascalon, Lachish and Gezer had allied with the Sa. Gaz refugees and outlaws. These people controlled the metal resources and they were all up in arms rebelling against Egyptian dominion.195 She further classifies the Sea People in that one group of them the Tyrrhenians are a conglomeration of tribes who sailed together with the purpose of survival and dominance.196 Here we see metal resources taken by outlaws. Its importance known by all and its value given to whoever dominates. We are reminded that Egypt received copper from the mines of the Sinai Peninsula. During ancient times Asiatics worked as slaves in these mines.197 Nibbi lets us know that artesans were taught to manipulate copper and iron within Hittite territory.198 She continues to tell us that there were ancient copper and bronze centers in the Levant and that “copper production in Egypt by the time of Ramesses III (1198-1166 BC) reached enormous proportions” due to the reference in the Papyrus Harris of “large quantities of copper work”.199 From the Old Testament we get a clear view that the Philistines, a tribe in the confederation of Sea Peoples, were expert metal smiths and guarded their secrets to deter the enemy from amassing more weapons than themselves. Peter Machinist explains that they “controlled the metallurgical expertise…[and] hint[s] at special weaponry on the Philistine side”.200 This would explain why the Sherden were welcomed into the Egyptian army and fought for Egypt as mercinaries for a period of time. Strange adds to this “summing up, the Philistine cities were all solidly fortified [and] there is also some evidence that the Philistines initially enjoyed superior knowledge of metal-working, which would have given them a military advantage.”201 This explains their gravitation towards the areas of the known world with metal resource deposits. This conglomeration of different ethnic groups combined their manpower to be stronger in attaining their goal of dominance in the coveted lands. _______________ Notes:
1 A. Leahy, “Sea Peoples”, in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt,
ed. Donald Redford (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2001), 257.
|