Where did the Phoenicians come from?

Feb 2012
566
Interestingly, there is no pottery evidence in the Eastern Med. of their arrival.
One might assume that a foreign mass of warriors would bring supplies for extended overseas and overland travel, but archaeology finds nothing to indicate the arrival of foreigners.
Prof. Trudy Dothan spent years trying to prove the invasion hypothesis but sadly admitted defeat.
when i went to school we were taught that the sea peoples came from romania. i still have my list of scholars who to that date had published it.

Desborough, Rutter, Walberg, Deger-Jalkotzy, Small, Pilides, Bankoff, Meyer, and Stefanovich

it was based on pottery from the middle danube [cruceni-belegis] and lower danube [coslogeni culture] showing up in greece, anatolia and the eastern med in relation to the destructions. i hope the lady from the hebrew university is well acquainted with romanian archaeology because its pretty obvious they were right. you may have noted in the archeology news sources that huge cities have been found in romania lately that were burned and abandoned exactly at the correct time. iarcuri and urzica are the largest with iarcuri being 25% bigger than rome.


Finally, a local origin for the Peleset/Philistines may have been found at Tel Ta'yinat near Alalakh by Tim Harrison of the Univ. of Toronto.
As research continues it appears a Mediterranean origin for the so-called "Sea Peoples" looks increasingly doubtful.
This should bring into question the conventional interpretations of the Egyptian reliefs, certainly they tell a story of war, but not of foreign invasion.
The Phoenicians/Fenkhu of the Levantine coast appear to have weathered the conflict as their cities suffered little by way of destruction.

Regards...
as you might note from the idols above it seems there was a northern population in tyre when the "sea people" arrived thus explaining why the city wasn't destroyed.

i'm interested to see what gods the tel ta'yinat folks were worshipping. god idols are much better than pots could every be for tracing populations.

peace

ps... it was a canadian university
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,057
Italy, Lago Maggiore
"Sea People" is not a term used at the time, it originated in the Victorian era.

There was no collective term for these foreign warriors.
Interestingly, there is no pottery evidence in the Eastern Med. of their arrival.
One might assume that a foreign mass of warriors would bring supplies for extended overseas and overland travel, but archaeology finds nothing to indicate the arrival of foreigners.
Prof. Trudy Dothan spent years trying to prove the invasion hypothesis but sadly admitted defeat.

Finally, a local origin for the Peleset/Philistines may have been found at Tel Ta'yinat near Alalakh by Tim Harrison of the Univ. of Toronto.
As research continues it appears a Mediterranean origin for the so-called "Sea Peoples" looks increasingly doubtful.
This should bring into question the conventional interpretations of the Egyptian reliefs, certainly they tell a story of war, but not of foreign invasion.
The Phoenicians/Fenkhu of the Levantine coast appear to have weathered the conflict as their cities suffered little by way of destruction.

Regards...
From my memory, tonight I will check.

Actually the way ancient Egyptians called them was overall connected with the sea. There was also a definition similar in the meaning to "Kings of foreign lands", but the most common carried meanings like "Kings of the Western isles" "Kings of the isles in the heart of the great sea" [definition which could make reference to Cyprus or Malta, or Sicily or Crete or Sardinia as well] "arrived from the isles on the wide circle of water" ... and so on.

It doesn't seem they made reference to coastal regions of the Middle East [so a local origin is doubtful from an Egyptian perspective].
 
Feb 2011
822
Kitchener. Ont.
when i went to school we were taught that the sea peoples came from romania.
I think that years ago it was believed that the Sea Peoples came from the Greek islands, and one hypothesis was that northerners from Europe (your Rumanians?) displaced these 'Greeks' and turned them to the sea, hence the Sea Peoples were born.
The hypothesis has undergone many revisions over the years due to lack of archaeological support therefore lack of consensus. I don't think there is a common interpretation any more.

it was based on pottery from the middle danube [cruceni-belegis] and lower danube [coslogeni culture] showing up in greece, anatolia and the eastern med in relation to the destructions.
In the 2nd millennium, until the end of the Late Bronze, there was much Canaanite, Egyptian, Mycenaean & Cypriot pottery in the coastal Levant. At the destruction levels which separate the Late Bronze from Iron I, we see no more Mycenaean or Cypriot pottery, also no more above the destruction levels.
Above these levels though appears Mycenaean Middle (locally made Ib & Bichrome).
No trace of these wares have been found anywhere outside coastal Canaan with the exception of Cyprus & Cilicia. (Cyprus, Cilicia & Coastal Syria were in a business triangle so this was expected).

I have not read of anyone mentioning Romanian wares anywhere in the Levant at this time.


i hope the lady from the hebrew university is well acquainted with romanian archaeology because its pretty obvious they were right.
Ruth Amiran, in 1969, published, Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. A landmark publication on the subject and she covered the whole range including Middle Bronze, Late Bronze, Iron I & II.

There's no mention of Rumanian pottery.

you may have noted in the archeology news sources that huge cities have been found in romania lately that were burned and abandoned exactly at the correct time. iarcuri and urzica are the largest with iarcuri being 25% bigger than rome.
Are you suggesting that someone displaced these Rumanians, who in turn displaced the Greeks, who in turn displaced....etc.?


as you might note from the idols above it seems there was a northern population in tyre when the "sea people" arrived thus explaining why the city wasn't destroyed.
Not sure there is a simple explanation. If the presence of these idols testify to the existence of northerners, and it was these northerners who displaced the Greeks (Sea Peoples), then they could hardly be on friendly terms?

i'm interested to see what gods the tel ta'yinat folks were worshipping.
I agree, so far nothing has surfaced as far as I can tell.

Regards...
 
Feb 2011
822
Kitchener. Ont.
From my memory, tonight I will check.

Actually the way ancient Egyptians called them was overall connected with the sea.
The term you might be thinking of is "en-p3-iamu", translated as meaning "of the sea". It is not associated with all these peoples, it is only selectively applied. Example, it is never associated with the Philistines (Peleset).

Actually, I think "en" should be taken as "at", not "of", according to popular use.
The context of the use of this term might be consistent with the Egyptians meeting the Danuna in battle "at the sea", just by way of example.
As opposed to the Danuna themselves being "of the sea", which in real terms makes no sense.

Regards...
 
Feb 2012
566
I think that years ago it was believed that the Sea Peoples came from the Greek islands, and one hypothesis was that northerners from Europe (your Rumanians?) displaced these 'Greeks' and turned them to the sea, hence the Sea Peoples were born.
The hypothesis has undergone many revisions over the years due to lack of archaeological support therefore lack of consensus. I don't think there is a common interpretation any more.
how could you have a concensus. noone was allowed into romania and nothing was allowed out. just on the power of photos and early exports alot of folks decided they were romanians. this meant anyone could say romania had nothing to do with it and be secure in knowing there would be no archaeological support. now there are huge cities and pots galore so anyone still alive can finally have their day and the others maybe should beware.

In the 2nd millennium, until the end of the Late Bronze, there was much Canaanite, Egyptian, Mycenaean & Cypriot pottery in the coastal Levant. At the destruction levels which separate the Late Bronze from Iron I, we see no more Mycenaean or Cypriot pottery, also no more above the destruction levels.
Above these levels though appears Mycenaean Middle (locally made Ib & Bichrome).
No trace of these wares have been found anywhere outside coastal Canaan with the exception of Cyprus & Cilicia. (Cyprus, Cilicia & Coastal Syria were in a business triangle so this was expected).

I have not read of anyone mentioning Romanian wares anywhere in the Levant at this time.
black-topped pottery is middle danube.

dartmouth university talks about greece and parts of anatolia
Desborough cautiously suggested the possibility of an invasion by land from the north, although at the time he wrote he was acutely conscious of the fact that there was virtually no evidence, except for the destruction levels and widespread abandonments themselves, for the presence of such invaders. He did point out that a few new classes of bronze objects, the {fibula} [or safety-pins] and the cut-and-thrust swords of the so-called “Naue II” type, make their first appearance in the Mycenaean world ca. 1200 B.C. However, these objects always appear in “good Mycenaean” contexts such as chamber tombs with otherwise standard Mycenaean funeral assemblages. They consequently do not appear to have belonged exclusively to an intrusive, non-Mycenaean population element. As a result, Snodgrass (1974) concluded that objects of these kinds need not be taken as evidence of the invasion or immigration of northern peoples from the western Danube basin into the Aegean (as argued by Grumach, Milojcic, and Gimbutas, among others) because they could be considered simply as “good ideas” which “caught on” in the Aegean area at much the same time as similar objects first appeared in northern Italy and in the early Urnfield cemeteries of the Danube basin. All such objects, Snodgrass argued, could have been imported initially and locally copied thereafter by peoples indigenous to the areas in question, rather than necessarily being the belongings of invaders.

Rutter, following in the footsteps of E. French, identified a non-Mycenaean handmade and burnished class of pottery in early LH IIIC contexts at Korakou, Mycenae, Lefkandi, and a few other sites in central and southern Greece. Since this pottery was locally made, it constituted evidence for the presence of a non-Mycenaean population element within Mycenaean Greece in the period immediately following the destruction of the major Peloponnesian centers. This handmade and burnished pottery, in Rutter’s view, had its closest parallels in the “Coarse Ware” of Troy VIIb1 and in the pottery of the Final Bronze Age Coslogeni culture of southeastern Rumania. Rutter therefore suggested that there might be a connection between the makers of this non-Mycenaean pottery and the destroyers of both Troy VIIa and of the Mycenaean centers in the Peloponnese.
Ruth Amiran, in 1969, published, Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. A landmark publication on the subject and she covered the whole range including Middle Bronze, Late Bronze, Iron I & II.

There's no mention of Rumanian pottery.
since noone had real access, i think a re-examination is due.

Are you suggesting that someone displaced these Rumanians, who in turn displaced the Greeks, who in turn displaced....etc.?
i would suggest that the danube was an engine that shat out cultures regularly due to its habit of being catastrophic. huge populations of technically superior peoples mysteriously "disappeared" [vinca, gumelnita etc etc] and everyone seems content that they did. well they didn't disappear. they moved. i would hope someone has a good look at certain vinca populations in relation to the cycladic, levantines, mesopotamians etc etc now that they can.... the gumelnita in association with the villanovans and maadi and etc etc. the cucuteni trypillians built huge circular cities for 3000 years and poof they were gone?

i don't know if this is the place to do it but there are multitudes of pictures available now that never were before. we had excellent ancestors who actually tried very hard to make things easy for us i think.

Not sure there is a simple explanation. If the presence of these idols testify to the existence of northerners, and it was these northerners who displaced the Greeks (Sea Peoples), then they could hardly be on friendly terms?

I agree, so far nothing has surfaced as far as I can tell.

Regards...
i honestly don't know who to call a greek or a northern or southern or eastern or western anymore. you could walk from romania to egypt in 2 months at a leisurely 20miles a day. it was a small world and humans are humans. everyone liked to party.

it is essential we study all the world and not leave a big chunk out because we don't like it for various reasons and in general i've found we don't like romania [or eastern europe] very much do we now.


peace
 
Jan 2011
38
Hello Polaris, well both Arab nationalists and their adversaries mix politics with history, and the result is a bunch of pseudo science!

My personal believe is that Lebanese wether in the modern day or in ancient times were always a mix of different ethnicities that managed to live together and form their own cultural identity!

I don't believe that Phoenicians constituted a single race that we can trace its DNA, they were traders, and their land got invaded by many powerful kingdoms, they were sold to slavery many times and they owned slaves themselves, so looking for a Phoenician DNA seems absurd to me!

As for the link between Phoenicians and ancient Arabs, I'm not making any claims, all what I'm saying is that based on Herodotus writings, and on the similarity between the names of Phoenician cities and some Arab Gulf's names, there is a possibility of such a link, and I would like scientists to investigate such a possibility!

Like Zalloua went to Tunisia, Malta, Lebanon, and Spain to investigate a common DNA marker between these people, another attempt could be made however in the Gulf region to verify what was written in the history.

The problem ALi is not that anti-Arab Lebanese reject the idea that Phoenicians came from Arabia which is actually baseless and has no evidence supporting it whatsoever. The problem is that Muslims in Lebanon do not accept any identity except the Arabian Muslim one which they enforce it upon all minorities, and always one way or the other they end up tying every issue back to Arabia in an endless attempt to falsify history.

Keep in mind, that 1 year before the Islamic expansion in the 7th century, no one in the so called Arab world spoke Arabic or claimed to come from the deserts of Arabia.

Please read the genetic studies that I posted and you will realize that the Phoenicians were never Arabs. Dr.Pierre Zalloua who headed the Genographics project told me personally in an interview once that the directors of the Lebanese museum refused to give him any sample from Phoenician remains when he asked for them because they knew what he was about to prove, which forced him to travel to Turkey and bring samples from there.

This is to show you how Arabism is all about falsifying history.
 

Zeno

Ad Honoris
Jan 2010
13,691
♪♬ ♫♪♩
Interesting bit about their name, it might mean "carpenters":

an exerpt:
***

The Egyptian term FNHW is usually translated as "people of
Syria-Palestine" (Faulkner, R.O.; Meeks, D), without
determining exactly if they were the Phoenicians. This term
is already attested from the Ancient Empire and it is
often used later (Middle Empire, New Empire, Hellenistic
period).

The Egyptian word FNH (singular of FNHW) can be translated
as "carpenter" (Erman, A & H. Grapow; Meeks, D). The
Egyptians got timber from Phoenicia (especially cedar), and
Salomon praised the Phoenician skills at working with
wood. There could be a ralation between the Egyptian FNHW
and the Akkadian PEHUNU, which could be translated as "ship
builder" (von Soden, W).
****
****
http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/library/ane/digest/1999/v1999.n241
 
Jan 2011
38
The problem ALi is not that anti-Arab Lebanese reject the idea that Phoenicians came from Arabia which is actually baseless and has no evidence supporting it whatsoever. The problem is that Muslims in Lebanon do not accept any identity except the Arabian Muslim one which they enforce it upon all minorities, and always one way or the other they end up tying every issue back to Arabia in an endless attempt to falsify history.

Keep in mind, that 1 year before the Islamic expansion in the 7th century, no one in the so called Arab world spoke Arabic or claimed to come from the deserts of Arabia.

Please read the genetic studies that I posted and you will realize that the Phoenicians were never Arabs. Dr.Pierre Zalloua who headed the Genographics project told me personally in an interview once that the directors of the Lebanese museum refused to give him any sample from Phoenician remains when he asked for them because they knew what he was about to prove, which forced him to travel to Turkey and bring samples from there.

This is to show you how Arabism is all about falsifying history.
Hello Polaris,

Sorry for the late reply, but I happened to be doing a small research, and I ended up on this site, and strangely I find that I have already made contribution to this forum myself :)

I remember the period of Dr Zalloua phoenician studies in lebanon, back then it was a hype amongst the lebanese, with many of them rushing to do a DNA test to be proved "phoenician" , what's funny is that a large portion of the people pretending of being of phoenician origin ended up not being so...

Anyway, I do not believe that genetics can be a road map to history, simply because being a phoenician, or greek or roman is not related to your DNA it is more related to the culture were you have being raised! Regardless if you have a J1 or J2 DNA!

Now regarding Arabism, it is a modern concept inspired from the nationalistic parties and tendencies of the 20th century. For me it is an obsolete ideology that is being replaced by islamism in most of the arab world...

If the phoenicians had an ancient origin or connection to Bahrein or Yemen, that does not mean that they were arabs anyway! I've just read the hypothesis somewhere and wanted to know if anyone of you have heard of any research or theories regarding this.