Philistines

More than 30 years ago the American anthropologist-archaeologist William Adams wrote a seminal article on the interpretation of material culture change in ancient Nubia entitled ‘Invasion, Diffusion, Evolution?’ (1968). In it the author laid bare the inadequacies of invoking population movement to explain changes that could just as easily be attributed to cultural diffusion or evolution. A decade later Adams co-authored another article that took an even dimmer view of ‘migrationism’ (Adams, van Gerven and Levy 1978). In this latter article the authors offered up the Philistines as an example of a ‘historical migration’ – that is, a migration known from texts or through philology, but largely indiscernible through excavation. Although many of their points are well taken, the case of the Philistines should have been exempted from this sweeping criticism of the migrationist tendencies of culture-history. In addition to the textual evidence that attests to the movement and settlement of Philistines and other Sea Peoples along the Levantine coast, there is a burgeoning corpus of supportive archaeological data. Indeed, the Philistines, based on extensive excavations at three of their capital cities (i.e., Ashdod, Ashkelon and Tel Miqne-Ekron),  provide a superb case study of migration from an archaeological perspective.
The main purpose of this paper, however, is not to address Adams’ passing dismissal of the Philistine migration as an archaeologically observable event; but, rather, to counter the more focused and sustained revisionist thinking of the past decade regarding the Sea Peoples phenomenon. First, though, it is necessary to present a brief history of how the Philistines and their fellow Sea Peoples have been regarded over the past 150 years.

How archaeology,  textual criticism , and geography help us reconstruct battles
Just as similarities or variant forms of personal names can create textual problems, the same is true of geographic names. A case in point is the confusion of Gibeah and Geba ‫ַ. Both names mean "Hill City", an appropriate name for a city in the hill country of Benjamin, where other cities are named Lookout (Mizpeh) and Height (Ramah). Adding to the mix is the related name Gibeon.The situation is clarified (or confused further) by the modifiers that are sometimes added to the names. The difficulty of keeping these cities distinct is increased by textual problems. Sometimes "Geba" may be used for "Gibeah," and vice versa.
This articles shows how combining geography, textual criticism, and military common sense helps translators and commentators produce a clear account of the battle of Jonathan and the Philistines at Mikmash.

The paper surveys and discusses the updated archaeological evidence for Philistine cult and religion, and cult and religion in Philistia during the Iron Age. The evidence can be related to public or official cult, represented in temple and shrine structures, and to that coming from households, representing possibly more popular religion. The evidence of public cult, so far mostly from peripheral sites, includes largely cultural elements linked with the local Canaanite cult and religion. Yet, within households at the Philistine cities there is more evidence for cultic elements of Aegean affinity during Iron Age I. In particular, figurines and ceramic figurative vessels and objects will be discussed. It seems that the Philistine religion may have retained certain distinctive elements also during Iron Age II. Nevertheless, it is still difficult to reconstruct the details of the nature of the Philistine religion due to the limited amount of evidence and lack of textual records.

PUBLISHER'S DESCRIPTION:

"The Medinet Habu Records of the Foreign Wars of Ramesses III is a new translation and commentary of the Textual record of Ramesses III’s military activity. As such it dwells heavily upon the inscriptions dealing with Libyans and Sea Peoples. Since the format is oral formulaic, the texts are scanned and rendered as lyric. The new insights into the period covered by the inscriptions leads to a new appraisal of the identity of Egypt’s enemies, as well as events surrounding the activity of the Sea Peoples. The exercise is not intended to dismiss, but rather to complement the archaeological evidence."

Accademia delle Antiche Civiltà (AdAC) - Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (ISMEO)
I popoli del mare: leggenda o realtà?
Attraverso gli occhi del nemico. La figura del guerriero Filisteo nelle fonti egiziane e nell’Antico Testamento
6/11/2021

Vpád morských národov do priestoru starovekého sveta neustále láka pozornosť bádateľov. Je to jeden z najpozoruhodnejších a najtragickejších komplexov udalostí v dejinách ľudstva. Nešlo iba o inváziu bojovníkov na dané územie. Do pohybu sa dali celé
národy, etnické a kultúrne zoskupenia, aby na sklonku doby bronzovej najmä vo východnom Stredomorí, ale aj v iných častiach Eurázie, zmenili dávny svet. Ten už bol po tomto veľkom sťahovaní národov iný.

Ancient Israel did not emerge within a vacuum but rather came to exist alongside various peoples, including Canaanites, Egyptians, and Philistines. Indeed, Israel's very proximity to these groups has made it difficult - until now - to distinguish the archaeological traces of early Israel and other contemporary groups. Through an analysis of the results from recent excavations in light of relevant historical and later biblical texts, this book proposes that it is possible to identify these peoples and trace culturally or ethnically defined boundaries in the archaeological record. Features of late second-millennium B.C.E. culture are critically examined in their historical and biblical contexts in order to define the complex social boundaries of the early Iron Age and reconstruct the diverse material world of these four peoples. Of particular value to scholars, archaeologists, and historians, this volume will also be a standard reference and resource for students and other readers interested in the emergence of early Israel.

SUMMARY: Lecture-18 discusses the origins of the Israelites, including the first mention of "Israel" in Merenptah's "Israel" Stela, the current status regarding minimal to no archaeological evidence for an Exodus (also postulated as being a later remembrance of Hyksos expulsion), the state of evidence regarding the sojourn in Sinai (also minimal/no archaeological evidence), the "Exodus Papyrus" (noting the escape and tracking of two fugitives from Egypt), the conquest account (which also contains conflicting data in the archaeological record), the emergence of numerous, small, hill country and other settlements (i.e., typically small, agrarian enclosures with some terracing in areas, herding, semi-nomadic roots in settlement design, forest clearance in newly occupied terrain, simple pottery and other artefacts with clear Canaanite roots), and the emergence of a more complex, Israelite polity by 1000 BC. This lecture is designed mainly as an educational resource/aid for college students (i.e., normally posted only on my institution's course website), the public (e.g., people auditing my course), and interested colleagues from other disciplines (to whom I periodically provide copies privately).  I am posting it here, both as a broader access, educational tool, and especially to promote the study of this region and its past societies.  For further knowledge about this region and period, I refer interested parties to the textbooks and other sources from which the initial materials were extracted for this ppt. (see syllabus; e.g., initially Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible), and/or the bibliographies in these works and my online resource guides (see other files in my academia folders).  Much of this and the other lectures summarize the pertinent materials in the course textbook(s), add in other data, including my own research materials, and furnish numerous images to clarify/illustrate the wealth of information encountered in the textbook(s).  Some generic imagery (usually indicated as such) is posted to aid in transmitting various concepts visually, and/or when a specific image remains not located (temporarily).  I update and revise such lectures each time, with such elective courses normally being taught once every two years.  I try to cover the most current, mainstream views, and usually place summary notes at the end of each lecture (or in separate test study guides).  Over time, each lecture is improved, errors rectified, and additional data placed within the lecture.  These ppt. lectures take many hours to compile, but they have proved useful to many of my more serious students (who have since pursued graduate degrees), and a few colleagues, who, like me, often teach outside our main fields of specialty, and I hope they can be of benefit to others as well.  My apologies for any errors I may have made (over time, as I teach this course every two years, I try to rectify any errors that might slip in inadvertently), and for my liberal usage of educational imagery from professional sources and vetted internet sources.  UPDATED:  Oct. 2023, re-formatting, and a new slide and text revisions.

The notion of a United Monarchy of Israel has been a hotly debated topic since at least the 1980s, especially since the archaeological record did not seem to reflect a vast kingdom that many presume to have existed, perhaps rivaling that of an empire, if the biblical account is accurate. This has called into question whether a Davidic dynasty ever existed, and whether a historical David ever lived. The archaeological evidence that has been excavated between the 1990s and 2010s has counteracted many of these criticisms, and one of the key sites that has contributed to the silencing of the critics is Khirbet Qeiyafa, a military outpost on the western fringe of the Shephelah designed to deter Philistine advances into Judah. Yosef Garfinkel has argued that the site was occupied exclusively during the Iron Age IIA, which equates to the reign of David. Lily Singer-Avitz has countered that Qeiyafa was inhabited instead during the Iron Age IB, which equates to the reign of Saul. The matter to resolve here is whether the short-lived site of Khirbet Qeiyafa was occupied during Saul’s reign, during David’s reign, or spanned both reigns.

Abstract
In this article I propose to show that in his eighth regnal year Ramesses III campaigned against the Philistines on the Northern borders of Canaan and where halted by them. Ramesses was victorious in a pitched battle, routed them to their home and destroyed their kingdom – “the Land of Palestine”. This land was recently located in the Amuq plain in Southern Turkey – the ancient Kingdom of Alalakh.

The discovery of the necropolis of Khalet al-Jam'a, around 2.2 Km southeast of Bethlehem (Nigro et al. in this volume), provides new data on the Bronze and Iron Age town which controlled the main route connecting Jerusalem to Hebron, and the access to the wadiat crossing the southern Judean desert and leading to the coastal plain. Intermediate Bronze Age/Early Bronze IV, Middle Bronze shaft tombs, and at least two major Iron II burial caves (Tomb A7 and the Barmil's Tomb) excavated by the Palestinian MOTA-DACH in an Iron Age cemetery allow to draw up a renewed picture of Bethlehem and its environs and give the opportunity to re-appraise its long history.

This study of the history of the Philistines during the first quarter of the first millennium BCE has a twofold aim: First, to examine in detail a number of ancient texts, mainly biblical until the rise of the neo-assyrian empire, while evaluating each text in its own right as a potential historical source. Second, to offer a synthetic reconstruction of the course of Philistine history between 1000-730 BCE, employing the results of the textual study in conjunction with those of recent archaeological excavations in Philistia.

The transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age (LH IIIB-C) in the eastern Mediterranean, Aegean, and Near East was marked by the destruction of empires and the migratory movement of populations. This time of upheaval was also marked by a change in the iconography of warriors and warfare, particularly in Egypt and in the Aegean world, including the first representations of true naval combat. Warriors in feathered headdresses, never before seen in Helladic or Egyptian art, are shown on Aegean pottery and in Egyptian relief taking part in battles on both land and sea, and the Helladic oared galley (Wedde’s Type V) makes its first appearance at this time as an instrument of naval warfare. This paper investigates these earliest representations of naval combat, with a special emphasis on the appearance and employment of new maritime technology and its effect on naval warfare. Also considered are what changes in fighting, if any, had to be made in order to adapt to this early form of ship-based combat.

The 7th century BCE in Philistia and Judah is characterized by economic prosperity, which is usually regarded as resulting from the “Assyrian Peace”, and from a policy of the Assyrian empire that aimed at maximizing production. The large center for the production of olive oil that was unearthed at Ekron in southern Israel is regarded as the best example of this policy. The present paper questions this scholarly consensus regarding the role of Assyria in the economy of the southern Levant, through a closer look at the olive oil industry in the region.

The kingdom of Judah and the Philistine cities along the coast had experienced un-paralleled economic prosperity during the seventh century BCE. This is evident from the surge of settlement in the fringe areas of the Negev and the Judean desert, and  from the large production and trade centres unearthed around Jerusalem and at Ekron and Ashkelon. The discovery of Judahite wheat in Ashkelon, together with other available archaeological evidence of trade and the local geographical conditions, enable us to reconstruct the well-integrated economy of the region in the seventh century, and to re-examine its role within the period's larger economic structures. After presenting the evidence regarding the economic system of Judah and Philistia in the seventh century BCE, the paper will reconstruct the function of this "local" system within the larger "world" system, and will re-examine the role of the Assyrians, Phoenicians and Egyptians in its creation.

Despite a broad temporal presence in Egyptian records, the association of the Sherden with another ‘Sea Peoples’ group, the more well-known and better archaeologically attested Philistines, has led to several assumptions about this group, its members’ origin, and their role both in the events that marked the transition from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age and in Egyptian society as a whole. This study separates the Sherden from the Aegean migration and greater ‘Sea Peoples’ phenomenon of the Late Bronze–Early Iron Age transition in an effort to challenge long-held assumptions about their initial encounter with Ramesses II in the early years of his rule, their role in the famous land battle and naumachia of Ramesses III’s eighth year, their participation in the migrations that marked the end of the Late Bronze Age, and their status as foreigners to the Levant whose main function was to serve as mercenary soldiers and pirates. Through a close reading of the extant literary and pictorial evidence from the New Kingdom and beyond, this paper traces the role of the Sherden within Egyptian society from its adversarial origin, through a phase of combined military cooperation and social exclusion, to a final, multigenerational period that was marked by rapid and enduring acculturation and assimilation into Egyptian society.

Данная монография является серией законченных очерков по спорным вопросам истории позднебронзового века в Восточном Средиземноморье в период с XIV по начало XII в. до н.э., связанных, однако, между собой общей темой, а именно передвижениями так называемых «народов моря». К концу указанного периода этот
конгломерат племен различного происхождения стал представлять серьезную угрозу для существования государств Малой Азии, Леванта и Восточного Средиземноморья и, в конечном итоге, согласно надписи Рамсеса III явился причиной гибели Хеттского царства, Каркемиша, Угарита, Амурру и других государств региона.

The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely skeptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires: Mycenaean on one hand and Hittite with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III's year 8 describe actually a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the "Sea Peoples", but without giving any reason. A precise chronological reconstruction, based on few absolute dates, shows that the annexation of the kingdom of Cyprus (Ala!ia), closely linked to the Mycenaean world, by Hittite King Tudhaliya IV (1241-1209) played a role of detonator in the confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates and privateers on one side and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, as Troy and Ugarit, on the other. This struggle to control a vital sea path, from Crete to Egypt, via Cyprus, which ended with a complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the famous Trojan War, had begun 10 years earlier. Surprisingly, this conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes (276-193). Historical and epigraphic context shows that Homer wrote his epic shortly after Queen Elissa founded Carthage (c. 870 BCE).
https://www.lulu.com/shop/gerard-gertoux/the-trojan-war-chronological-historical-and-archaeological-evidence/paperback/product-22620667.html

The Shephelah was densely settled in the Late Bronze Age, but most of the settlements were gradually abandoned during the transition to the Iron I period. Only a few Iron I settlements existed in the eastern part of the region (excluding the Philistine sites at the northwestern edge of the Shephelah), forming a small Canaanite enclave. During the Iron II period the region was gradually resettled, and it became part of Judah. This process lasted until the 8th century BCE, when the region reached an unparalleled demographic peak. Sennacherib’s campaign brought wide-scale destruction, and the region recovered only partially before being devastated by Nebuchadnezzar. After reconstructing the region’s settlement history, the article reassesses its political and demographic
history in comparison to the neighbouring regions of the Judean highlands and the southern coastal plain, it is concluded that the Shephelah had a lesser role in the history of Judah than some recent studies suggest.

The appearance of the brailed rig and loose–footed sail at the end of the Late Bronze Age revolutionized seafaring in the eastern Mediterranean. The most famous early appearance of this new technology is found in history’s first visual representation of a naval battle, on the walls of Ramesses III’s mortuary temple at Medinet Habu. In this monumental combat scene, both Egyptian and Sea Peoples ships are depicted with this new rig, as well as top–mounted crow’s nests and decking upon which shipborne warriors do battle. The identical employment of these innovative components of maritime technology by opposing forces in this battle suggests either some level of previous contact between the invaders and those responsible for designing and constructing Egypt’s ships of war, or shared interaction with a third party, perhaps on the Syro–Canaanite coast. This article examines the evidence for the development of the brailed rig in the eastern Mediterranean, and explores the possibility that at least one group of Sea Peoples, who may have comprised a key part of the international economy of the Late Bronze Age in their role as “pirates, raiders, and traders” (Georgiou 2012: 527) – Artzy’s “nomads of the sea” (1997) – played a similarly integral role in the transference of maritime technology between the Levant, Egypt, and the Aegean.

Despite the late date and dubious veracity of the Deuteronomistic history, and despite the Bible’s status as the only Bronze or Iron Age text which indisputably refers to Dagon in a southern Canaanite geographical context, scholars have traditionally accepted 1 Samuel 5:1–8’s portrayal of Philistine cult in the Iron Age I as being centered on this deity and his temple at Ashdod.

This study marshals archaeological and historical evidence to assess the level of support for the presence of Dagon in Iron I Philistia, and for a temple at Ashdod  as described in the biblical account.

Also considered, through comparison with the materially analogous situation in the Bronze Age Aegean, is the critical role that a textual complement to physical evidence (or, in the case of the Philistines, the lack thereof) plays in cultic analysis and pantheonic reconstruction.

The Philistine paradigm attempts to answer fundamental questions in Philistine history, namely the how and when of Philistine settlement in the southern Levant. According to the traditional paradigm, the Philistines, among other 'Sea-Peoples', came from the Aegean islands and were settled in Egyptian strongholds in the south Canaanite Coastal Plain in the eighth year of Ramesses III. Formulated on the basis of Egyptian texts and Philistine archaeological remains, the paradigm has been criticized over the reliability of both source materials. Therefore, it is the aim of the present study to conduct a methodological analysis of the pillars on which the paradigm rests and to offer a new reconstruction of the events that took place in the Levant in the twelfth century BCE.

In the words of late Professor Moshe Kochavi, the Philistine repository pit at Yavneh is the kind of discovery made only once every fifty years. It is the richest repository pit ever found from Bronze and Iron Ages Israel/Palestine, containing thousands of cultic finds originating from a temple, including an unprecedented number-more than a hundred-of cult stands (so-called 'architectural models') carrying rich figurative art, dozens of fire-pans, chalices and other objects. The present volume includes the full publication of the excavation, the stratigraphy, the cult stands and the figures detached from cult stands, several clay and stone altars and some pottery vessels related to burning of plant material, most likely incense. This exceptional book raises a host of highly important and intriguing questions. Is this a favissa, or even a genizah? Why are many cult stands badly broken, while some are intact-were cult stands broken on purpose? What is the explanation for the unique stratigraphy and for the layer of gray ash in the pit-was fire kindled inside as part of a ritual? How do we know that these finds are Philistine? Are they part of the 'furniture' of the temple or objects dedicated by worshipers as votives? Do the figures on the cult stands represent mortal beings, or divinities? If divinities, can we relate them with Biblical or extra-biblical data on the gods of the Philistines? What was the function/s of cult stands? Were they models of buildings, supports for images, offerings tables, altars, or perhaps incense burners? Why are female figures dominant, while male figures are virtually absent? In discussing such topics, Yavneh I treats issues that are central to many fields of study: religion and cult in Iron Age Israel/Palestine; the history and archaeology of the Philistines and their 'western' relations; Near Eastern iconography, the meaning of cult stands/architectural models and the understanding of votive objects and of repository pits in general. Literally salvaged from the teeth of the bulldozer, these rare finds are now published. Generations of scholars will discuss and reinterpret them-there is no 'final word' for such finds and hence, this final excavation volume is not an end, but a beginning.

The intrusive nature of the Philistine material culture, which suddenly appears in southern coastal Canaan in the first half of the twelfth century BCE, has never been in doubt. Moreover, it is widely acknowledged that the origin of this material culture is to be found in the Aegean/Mycenaean world, which, by the end of the thirteenth century, encompassed much of the eastern Mediterranean region. Precisely how the Philistines transported themselves and their material culture from their original to their adoptive homeland, however, has never been adequately explained.
A cursory glance at a map quickly reveals that travel from most proposed Philistine homelands (i.e., mainland Greece, the Aegean Islands, Crete, Cyprus) to southern coastal Canaan require travel by sea; however, travel from two others (i.e., coastal Asia Minor, Cilicia) do not. A large-scale, overland migration from these latter regions, although possible, would have been extremely difficult because of the geographic barriers present along this route. More telling is the pattern of sites that have produced the so-called, Sea Peoples material culture: they are all located on or near the coast, thus strongly suggesting that the settlers of these sites arrived by sea.
An examination of the excavation and survey data relating to southern coastal Canaan at the time of the Philistine settlement indicates the influx of a large, foreign population. The question remains, however, was maritime capability ca. 1200 BCE commensurate to the task of transporting a great number of people across considerable distances? Evidence contained in texts, iconography, and the results of underwater
archaeology pertaining to Late Bronze Age seafaring indicates that, indeed, it was.
A secondary source of data for the Philistine migration is later, better documented, seaborne migrations, such as the Greek colonization of the western Mediterranean. Contemporary histories combined with extensive excavation of the settlement regions provide a clearer picture of most aspects of these later migrations by sea than is available for the Philistines. Finally, the application of migration principles generated in other social scientific fields to the context of the Philistine settlement leads to a broader understanding of the process of the Philistines’ migration.

Yavneh II is the second and last excavation report on the dramatic favissa/genizah pit full of Philistine votive objects, discovered by Raz Kletter in the city of Yavneh, Israel, near the Mediterranean coast (south of Tel Aviv). The first volume, Yavneh I (OBO.SA 30, 2010) included studies on the history and archaeological exploration of Yavneh, the excavation, the stratigraphy and the interpretation of the pit as a favissae of votive objects that originate from a public temple; but especially on the mysterious cult stands, which number more than a hundred and include many stands with zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figures. In the present volume we publish many additional cultic finds, including fire pans or shovels that could be used for moving hot coals and for burning incense (comparable to the biblical maḥtāh); a rectangular shrine-model (naos) with detached pillars; zoomorphic vessels; a larger sample of pottery with statistical analysis; imported Cypriot pottery; dog bones (probably related to ritual); an inscription on a bowl; fragments of worked stones (perhaps from altars); and chemical residues from juglets and chalices, which seem to indicate presence of hallucinatory and incense materials. In addition, we offer an update on the iconography of the Yavneh cult stands and a study of the larger world of cult stands in the southern Levant; criteria for identifying favissae and their appearance from the Late Bronze Age to the Persian Period in Palestine; and a concluding discussion on Yavneh, incense, and Philistine ethnicity.

Tell it in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel. Essays in Honor of A. M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday”, I. Shai, J.R. Chadwick, L. Hitchcock, A. Dagan, C. McKinny, and J. Uziel eds. Ägypten Und Altes Testament 90, Münster: Zaphon, 2018, 283-293.

This paper follows the iconography of the 12th century BC Philistine ‘feathered helmets’ from the Medinet Habu reliefs in Egypt to Cyprus, the Levant and the Aegean, establishing key components of the helmet and its decoration. Possible
material remains of such helmets found in 12th century Greece are then compared with the iconographic evidence.

Scores of publications have enlightened the Aegean/Cypriot origins of the Philistines and the largely intrusive character of their culture in the Southern Levant. Nonetheless, these migrants did not enter a cultural vacuum and, indeed, established their centres at key Canaanite sites. The south-Levantine Philistine culture arose as the outcome of encounters and integration of mixed groups of newcomers with local Canaanite backgrounds, in a complex ethnogenetic process where indigenous traditions and multi-faceted alien facets overlapped and intermingled in shaping the new forms of the Iron Age I culture of the south-Levantine coastal plain. Religious architecture, cultic paraphernalia and worshipped deities might be a privileged observatory to detect how and how much Levantine cultural attributes were incorporated and became entangled within the Philistine culture, and the role they play in the formation and transformation of this transcultural identity of Iron Age Southern Levant.

Tell it Not in Gath’ (Micah 1:10): What is Gath Doing in a List of the Destroyed Towns of Judah?”, in Itzhaq Shai, Jeffrey R. Chadwick, Louise Hitchcock, Amit Dagan, Chris McKinny and Joe Uziel (eds.), Tell it in Gath: Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel: Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday, Ägypten und Altes Testament 90, Münster: Zaphon, 2018, 445-495.