The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

menians are not yet living in Armenia! As related by Herodotos (Histories VII, 73), the Armenians are an apoikia of the Phrygians, who prior to their migration to the Anatolian plateau inhabited the Olympos region in the borderland of northern Thessaly and southern Macedonia on the European continent, and before this, as we have seen above, even the region as far south as the Peloponnesos. There is some evidence that the Phrygians entered Anatolia already in the Late Bronze Age, as according to Homeros they are situated along the banks of the Sangarios in the period before the Trojan war (c. 1280 BC). Moreover, a Hittite text from the reign of Tud®aliyas II (1390- 1370 BC) or Arnuwandas I (1370-1355 BC) makes mention of a certain Mita (= Phrygian Midas) of Pa®®uwa, a region to the northeast of the Hittite capital Boazköy/Hattusa. 146 However, there can be no doubt that the greatest surge of Phrygians into the highland of Anatolia took place only after the fall of the Hittite empire at the end of the Bronze Age, when, under the name of Muski, they are recorded by the annals of the Assyrian king Tiglathpileser I (1115-1077 BC) to have reached the region of the upper Euphrates in great numbers. As cogently argued by Igor Diakonoff, this particular historical event triggers the formative phase of the Armenian people, in a country formerly inhabited by Luwians and Hurrians. 147 Another weakness in the scenario presented by Drews is formed by the crucial role he attributes to the Thessalian plain in the colonization of Greece by the proto-Greeks. Thus it is assumed that the proto-Greeks first arrive in Thessaly and from there go on to take over central and southern Greece. 148 This view is contradicted by the archaeological evidence, which clearly shows that the Mycenaean culture first develops in the Argolid and only at a later time spreads to more northerly regions like Thessaly. 149 In fact, the plain of Thessaly, just like the hinterland of Thebes, remains predominantly Minyan in 146 Woudhuizen 1993b; contra Drews 1993b, who also denies the European origin of the Phrygians on account of the fact that archaeological evidence, for which he is tendentiously looking only c. 1200 BC, is lacking. 147 Diakonoff 1984 (65; 117 assigns a date of c. 1165 BC to the invasion of the Muski, which is incompatible with the reign of Tiglathpileser I, but suits their first mention in the Assyrian records, see Vanschoonwinkel 1991: 463). 148 Drews 1988: 192-4. 149 Dickinson 1977: 24. 62 character up to well in Late Helladic III. The centre from which Mycenaean influence radiates, ancient Iolkos in the south, is still characterized by Minyan cist graves as late as the Late Helladic IIB-IIIA period, whereas a Mycenaean palace is reported here only from Late Helladic IIB or IIIA1 onwards. 150 From an historical point of view, the persistence of Middle Helladic traditions in Iolkos during the earlier phase of the Mycenaean period coincides with the “Minysche Schicht” of its royal house as represented by Kretheus, Pelias (= the brother of Neleus who with Pelasgians settles at Pylos c. 1600 BC, see further below), and Akastos. 151 Finally, it is noteworthy that Drews heavily leans on the linguistic thesis put forward by William Wyatt, who maintains that the Indo-European invaders of Greece knew the chariot and the horse when they first entered Greece. Wyatt arrived at this conclusion by comparing the words for chariot and its major parts to that for the four-wheel mule wagon, from which comparison it appeared that the first category is based on Indo-European roots, whereas the latter is not. However, the conclusion that the Greeks introduced these Indo-European words is only valid in case there is no evidence of Indo-European speech in Greece prior to the Greeks, as Wyatt explicitly asserts. 152 In the previous pages, we have seen reason to believe that there were Indo-European speaking tribes in Greece before the arrival of the Greeks or their otherwise coming into being. This nullifies Wyatt’s reasoning. As we have noted in the foregoing, the horse was already known in Greece from c. 2300 BC onwards. In line with this observation, it is of interest to note that the Greeks have preserved the old centum form for “horse”, Mycenaean i-qo (= later Greek hippos), instead of taking over the new Indo-Aryan satem form ava- which came in vogue in other regions under the influence of the from the late 18th century BC onwards modern chariot warfare (cf. Luwian asuwa-). 153 Furthermore, the Greeks preferred their own word for the chariot itself, Mycenaean a-mo (= later Greek harma), instead of 150 Hope Simpson 1981: 161; Vanschoonwinkel 1991: 135; Papadimitriou 2001: 129; cf. Smit 1989. Note that Stubbings 1973: 642 is mistaken in assigning the Mycenaean palace at Iolkos to the transition from Middle Helladic to Late Helladic I. 151 Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopädie, s.v. Iolkos. 152 Wyatt 1970. 153 In the centum languages the palatals k, g, and g h develop into gutturals, whereas in the satem languages they become assibilized.
adopting the then modern Indo-Aryan indication ratha-. More in general, I do not understand why Wyatt does not take into account the evidence from Kassite, where the parts of the chariot, with only one exception, are all indicated by Akkadian instead of Kassite words (Balkan 1954: 127-30). If we next turn to the scenario presented by Best, it first deserves our attention that identification of the proto- Greeks with the Hyksos from Egypt and their kinsmen from Canaan and Syria, contrary to Drews’ thesis, is in ba- 63 sic outline in harmony with the relevant archaeological and historical data. In order to estimate its validity, however, we have to go more into detail. As we have noted earlier, the transition from Middle Helladic to Late Helladic I c. 1600 BC shows evidence of discontinuity in occupation. From an historical point of view, it is highly interesting to observe that precisely the sites which show discontinuity of occupation figure prominently in the stories about the foundation of new royal houses or a memorable war (see Fig. 9). The evidence may be summarized as follows: site conqueror(s) subjected or expelled source 1. Argos Danaos from Egypt Pelasgos or Pelasgio- Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopädie, s.v. Datansnaos. 2. Thebes Kadmos with Phoenicians Hyantes and Aones Pausanias, Guide to Greece IX, 5, 1. 3 Kirrha- Krisa Cretans from Knossos women & daughters Homeric Hymn to Pythian Apollo 388 ff. 4. Pylos Neleus with Pelasgians from Iolkos Pylos with Leleges Pausanias, Guide to Greece IV, 36, 1. 5. Eleusis Erekhtheus from Athens Eumolpos with Pauly-Wissowa Realencyclopädie, s.v. Thracians Eumolpos. Table 2. Literary traditions with a bearing on the transition from Middle Helladic to Late Helladic I, c. 1600 BC. Fig. 9. Distribution of centres of radiation of Late Helladic I material. Square symbols: pottery in combination with architectural remains (Pylos, Kirrha, Thebes, Eleusis, and Athens). Triangular symbols: pottery in shaft graves, tholos- and chamber tombs (Koryphasion, Peristeria, Epidauros Limera, Lerna, Mycenae, Prosymna, and Thorikos). Sources: van Royen & Isaac 1979 and Hope Simpson 1981. With respect to this overview it must be admitted that the association of Danaos with Argos is problematic, since the latter site is abandoned in the earliest phase of the Mycenaean period. Probably Argos has seized the myth at the expense of some other site in the Argolid. Furthermore, Thebes is not included in the list of sites which lent itself to a continuity/discontinuity analysis by van Royen & Isaac, even though it might be pointed out that the different orientation of the earliest Mycenaean walls as compared to their Middle Helladic predecessors rather suggests discon-
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 and 36: 4. AN HISTORIOGRAPHIC OUTLINE In th
Page 37 and 38: The view of Maspero that the Sea Pe
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: the archaeological record by the Ma
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
show all

The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?