(a) (b) I no. II hieroglyphics 36 transliteration (Borghouts) vocalization as employed in <strong>the</strong> present study 1* š3rdn Sherden 2* š3krš3 Shekelesh 3* k3w3š3 Ekwesh 4* rkw Lukka 5* twrš3 Teresh 1 prwst Peleset 2 t3k3r Tjeker 3 š3krš3 Shekelesh 4 d3nw Denyen 5 w3š3š3 Weshesh Fig. 3. <strong>The</strong> ethnonyms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> in Egyptian writing, transliteration, and standardized transcription (from Kitchen 1982: IV, 4 and Kitchen 1983: V, 40). 75 (a) Merneptah, Karnak, marked with * in column I above (b) Ramesses III, Medinet Habu 75 I am indebted to J.F. Borghouts for providing <strong>the</strong> transliteration, and to Wim van Binsbergen for identifying <strong>the</strong> specific transliterated strings with <strong>the</strong> hieroglyphic sections, and preparing and tabulating <strong>the</strong> graphics in this table.
<strong>The</strong> view <strong>of</strong> Maspero that <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> originated solely from <strong>the</strong> eastern Mediterranean has had a great influence on his successors, even up to <strong>the</strong> present day (cf. Redford 1992: 246). At any rate, it has been taken over without much critical reflection by H.R. Hall, who dominated <strong>the</strong> field in <strong>the</strong> first half <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 20th century AD. In a first contribution to <strong>the</strong> Annual <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> British School at A<strong>the</strong>ns 8 <strong>of</strong> 1901-2, he expressed himself in favor <strong>of</strong> Maspero’s identifications with <strong>the</strong> only noted exception <strong>of</strong> Weshesh, which he preferred to connect with Cretan Waksioi instead <strong>of</strong> Carian Wassos. Next, in a collection <strong>of</strong> papers to <strong>the</strong> memory <strong>of</strong> Champollion which appeared in 1922 Hall presented a useful summary <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature on <strong>the</strong> topic <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> up to that moment. In this summary, he proposed to identify <strong>the</strong> Denye(n), whom Maspero had equated with <strong>the</strong> Danaoi <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Argolid in mainland Greece, with <strong>the</strong> Danuna <strong>of</strong> Cilicia as mentioned in <strong>the</strong> El-Amarna texts from <strong>the</strong> reigns <strong>of</strong> Amenhotep III (1390-1352 BC) and Akhenaten (1352-1336 BC). Hall’s work culminates in his contribution to <strong>the</strong> first edition <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Cambridge Ancient History, which appeared in 1926. Here he expressly distinguished <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong>, which, as we have seen, according to him originated from western Anatolia and mainland Greece, from <strong>the</strong> Keftiu, i.e. <strong>the</strong> designation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Cretans in Egyptian texts. Confronted with <strong>the</strong> Biblical sources, according to which <strong>the</strong> Peleset originated from Crete, he came up with <strong>the</strong> solution that <strong>the</strong>y had come from Asia Minor via Crete. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, he noted in alignment with his earlier association <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Denye(n) with <strong>the</strong> Danuna, that some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong>, like <strong>the</strong> Sherden and <strong>the</strong> Lukka, were already mentioned in <strong>the</strong> El-Amarna texts. Of <strong>the</strong>m, <strong>the</strong> Sherden were stipulated to have fought both on <strong>the</strong> Egyptian side and that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> in <strong>the</strong> upheavals at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> Ramesses III. Finally, in true Masperonian way, he envisioned <strong>the</strong> Sherden, Shekelesh, and Teresh, after <strong>the</strong>ir failing attack on Egypt, as being on <strong>the</strong>ir way to <strong>the</strong>ir ultimate homes in <strong>the</strong> central Mediterranean. <strong>The</strong> career <strong>of</strong> Hall ended with his “going Caucasian” so to say: in his last contribution on <strong>the</strong> subject <strong>of</strong> 1929 he explained all ethnonyms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> as reflections <strong>of</strong> similar sounding Caucasian tribal names – a fine example <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> dangers <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> etymological approach when applied without fur<strong>the</strong>r backing. After <strong>the</strong> second World War, <strong>the</strong> first to take up <strong>the</strong> subject <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> again, was Alan Gardiner. In his Ancient Egyptian Onomastica <strong>of</strong> 1947 he meticulously described all that was known at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ethnonyms, especially so <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Sherden and <strong>the</strong> Peleset. 37 Remarkable is that in connection with <strong>the</strong> Denye(n) he spoke against <strong>the</strong>ir relation with <strong>the</strong> Danuna in Cilicia and in favor <strong>of</strong> that with <strong>the</strong> Danaoi <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Argolid in mainland Greece. Moreover, he sided with Hall in his opinion that <strong>the</strong> Peleset were not originally at home in Crete, but used this island as an intermediary station in <strong>the</strong>ir way to <strong>the</strong> Levant. In connection with <strong>the</strong> Sherden, finally, he remarked, with reference to an earlier contribution by Wainwright (1939: 148), that <strong>the</strong> Teresh were known to <strong>the</strong> Hittite world (probably implying a linguistic relation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ethnonym with Tarwisa (= Troy), which, however, is dubious), but <strong>the</strong> Sherden and <strong>the</strong> Shekelesh not and hence that <strong>the</strong> latter might be assumed to originate from outside <strong>of</strong> it – <strong>the</strong> first rudimentary attempt to bring <strong>the</strong> controversy between de Rougé and Chabas on <strong>the</strong> one hand and Maspero on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r to a higher level. Next, Paul Mertens presented in <strong>the</strong> Chronique d’Égypte 35 <strong>of</strong> 1960 a nice overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Egyptian sources on <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> from <strong>the</strong>ir first occurrence in <strong>the</strong> El-Amarna texts and those <strong>of</strong> Ramesses II (1279-1212 BC) up to <strong>the</strong>ir alignment with <strong>the</strong> Libyan king Meryre (= Meryey) in <strong>the</strong> reign <strong>of</strong> Merneptah and <strong>the</strong>ir ultimate attack on Egypt in <strong>the</strong> reign <strong>of</strong> Ramesses III. However, as far as origins are concerned, he did not choose between <strong>the</strong> central to east Mediterranean <strong>the</strong>sis <strong>of</strong> de Rougé and <strong>the</strong> solely east Mediterranean anti<strong>the</strong>sis <strong>of</strong> Maspero, whereas, in connection with <strong>the</strong> Peleset, he followed Bonfante (1946) in identifying <strong>the</strong>m as Illyrians who migrated to <strong>the</strong> Levant via Crete. <strong>The</strong> first to address <strong>the</strong> question what caused <strong>the</strong> upheavals <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> at <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Late Bronze Age was Wolfgang Kimmig in a lengthy paper in <strong>the</strong> Festschrift Tackenberg <strong>of</strong> 1964. In his view, <strong>the</strong>se are a mere function <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> expansion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Urnfield peoples <strong>of</strong> central and eastern Europe into all directions, so also to <strong>the</strong> Mediterranean in <strong>the</strong> south. As Kimmig keenly observed, <strong>the</strong> contribution <strong>of</strong> bearers <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Urnfield culture to <strong>the</strong> movement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> is indicated by <strong>the</strong>ir ships as depicted in <strong>the</strong> reliefs at Medinet Habu having bird head protomes at <strong>the</strong> stern as well as <strong>the</strong> prow – a typical Urnfield feature. He fur<strong>the</strong>r rightly stipulated that some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> were already in contact with <strong>the</strong> Near East when <strong>the</strong> expansion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Urnfielders motivated <strong>the</strong>m to look for new homelands in an agreeable surrounding. Although he tried to avoid <strong>the</strong> vexed question <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> origins <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Sea</strong> <strong>Peoples</strong> as much as possible, Kimmig restricted his Urnfield model for <strong>the</strong> cause <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> latters’ movement to <strong>the</strong> eastern Mediterranean: an incursion <strong>of</strong> Urnfielders
- Page 1: The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples 1
- Page 4 and 5: Promotiecommissie Promotor: Prof.dr
- Page 7: CONTENTS Preface ..................
- Page 10 and 11: profited from the collaboration wit
- Page 12 and 13: Frontispiece. Rowers depicted on a
- Page 15 and 16: In a work which deals with the ethn
- Page 17 and 18: similar vein, to accuse Georges Dum
- Page 19: upon a pre-existing local populatio
- Page 22 and 23: certainty about the 8th century BC
- Page 24 and 25: with the Heraklids Kresphontes and
- Page 26 and 27: after the end of the Bronze Age. 43
- Page 28 and 29: Miletos may be due to an historical
- Page 30 and 31: It lies at hand to correlate the fa
- Page 32 and 33: more, he rearranged the western pro
- Page 35: 4. AN HISTORIOGRAPHIC OUTLINE In th
- Page 39 and 40: ples as mere pirates goes Helck’s
- Page 41 and 42: site or manoeuvring in mountainous
- Page 43 and 44: The contemporary sources with a bea
- Page 45 and 46: Enkomi cylinder seal (Inv. no. 19.1
- Page 47 and 48: Tablet 1687 from Enkomi Side A (15)
- Page 49 and 50: RS 20.238 ù dú-nu-na-ta dan-níš
- Page 51 and 52: Libyans (year 5) as well as success
- Page 53 and 54: Fig. 5. Land battle scene of Medine
- Page 55 and 56: he said to me: “To be sure, they
- Page 57 and 58: 6. LUKKA AND THE LUKKA LANDS Since
- Page 59 and 60: 7. ETHNOGENESIS OF THE GREEKS The d
- Page 61 and 62: the archaeological record by the Ma
- Page 63 and 64: adopting the then modern Indo-Aryan
- Page 65 and 66: Evidently, the Hyksos were a highly
- Page 67: linguistic features from an hypothe
- Page 70 and 71: have been Crete, since in the text
- Page 72 and 73: war 199 - a suggestion further emph
- Page 74 and 75: give and take a few dialectal reshu
- Page 77 and 78: In Homeros there are three indicati
- Page 79 and 80: Models The problem of Etruscan orig
- Page 81 and 82: 7th century BC, is, considering the
- Page 83 and 84: (proto-)Villanovan is attested (cf.
- Page 85 and 86: sumed that the Etruscans have borro
- Page 87:
grave of North Pontic steppe type,
- Page 90 and 91:
Trojans, nor will they change their
- Page 92 and 93:
“Venel Atelinas has given this to
- Page 94 and 95:
as follows: 370 1. M(arce) Vnata
- Page 96 and 97:
Fig. 17. Settlement of the Sea Peop
- Page 98 and 99:
salian Gyrtone. 406 On the basis of
- Page 100 and 101:
of their foundation of Kume, the Ai
- Page 102 and 103:
Asherah, Ugaritic y-, -m)!”. 453
- Page 104 and 105:
inhabitants of the Mesara plain at
- Page 106 and 107:
sociated from that of Mls, a predec
- Page 108 and 109:
found here. 513 It is interesting t
- Page 110 and 111:
Fig. 21. Distribution of Trojan gre
- Page 112 and 113:
The story continues with the Sherde
- Page 114 and 115:
On the basis of the combined eviden
- Page 116 and 117:
our identification of the Weshesh w
- Page 118 and 119:
(Histories I, 57) reports, adopted
- Page 120 and 121:
lesh are geographically based, bein
- Page 123 and 124:
APPENDIX I: ON THE DECIPHERMENT OF
- Page 125 and 126:
36. 5 005 191 TIWATA, [ti] PF 2 (35
- Page 127 and 128:
Evans CHIC CL value attestation 64.
- Page 129 and 130:
identical to Egyptian bi’ty “ki
- Page 131 and 132:
# 258 # 271 # 296 # 309 1 2 3 1. 'y
- Page 133:
# 314 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. 'tá-PÁRA
- Page 136 and 137:
52. “-ship” -®i- -c-, -- (pro)
- Page 138 and 139:
59. 3rd pers. pl. pres./fut. -nt -n
- Page 140 and 141:
pattern is formed by the G pl. in -
- Page 142 and 143:
LUWIAN ROMAN INDIC GERMANIC F1 Tark
- Page 144 and 145:
linguistic point of view, however,
- Page 146 and 147:
meat) or as a sacred animal per se:
- Page 148 and 149:
Behn, Friedrich, 1924, Hausurnen. B
- Page 150 and 151:
tury B.C’. Orientalia 56. Pp. 1-3
- Page 152 and 153:
Gardiner, Alan H., 1947, Ancient Eg
- Page 154 and 155:
Ägäis und die Levante während de
- Page 156 and 157:
terranean in the mid second millenn
- Page 158 and 159:
occidentale. Studia Mediterranea 8.
- Page 160 and 161:
Sommer, Ferdinand, 1932, Die A®®i
- Page 162 and 163:
--- , 2004b, Woudhuizen, Fred C., S
- Page 164 and 165:
hele andere etnische groep rekenen.
- Page 167:
CURRICULUM VITAE VAN FREDERIK CHRIS