Who were the Sea Peoples?

ib-issi

Ad Honorem
Mar 2011
3,403
just sitting here
#61
The only other place i have seen mention of something that may refer to the nine
bows is in a book called " the history of Genghis Khan , the great 1st Emperor of the Moguls and Turks , by Ms.Petit De La Croix.

In this book whilst Genghis is still called Temugin , after his victory over the Keraite
King Ounghcan ,(otherwise known as Prester John ) and his son Sancoun,

all the Cans that sided with Temugin came to his birth village where he had retired ,
and wanted to pronounce him Grand Can , he accepted , and a coronation was
planned in Yeca Mogul at Dilon Ildac his birth place ,

on the day Seven Cans lifted him up , and carried him to his throne , where all the
Cans bent their knee nine times in the traditional manner , to show their obedience
to their new Great Can , and in response to their example , all the people in
attendance at once bowed their knees nine times in submission.

Now obviously this 9 bows cannot be chronologically the 9 bows mentioned in the
sea peoples myths , but if it is a long held tradition of respect for the Great Cans of the Moguls , then just possibly they were Scythians (Moguls, mongols , Keraites )of
Caracatay (Black Cathay )
 
Feb 2011
761
Kitchener. Ont.
#62
According to him the Philistians wasnt not more than aegeanized Chanaanites and when he denie the presence of sea people from the eastern mediterranean he after write himself about the Philistians the Daneans from Cilicia and other coast and sea people.
Archaeology has yet to unearth any artifacts at designated "Sea Peoples" sites which directly link those settlers to mainland Greece, or even the island of Crete.

What is repeatedly found are artifacts which link these sites to Cyprus, S/E Anatolia & coastal Syria.
There is no doubt that the occupants of these new Iron Age cities betray an Aegean influence of long standing, but nothing to suggest they came directly from the West.

Had these so-called Sea Peoples originated from Crete or mainland Greece, they would surely have passed through the Cyclades.
Yet, in fact, archaeological surveys of the Cyclades, Chios through to Rhodes, and the S/W coast of Anatolia demonstrate no such evidence of a large movement of mainland peoples eastward, which if the theory has any viability at all, must have been the prime route taken by any seaborne invaders.

It simply never happened.

It is necessary, and entirely supported by archaeological findings, to look much closer in the Eastern Mediterranean for a point of origin of these adversaries who moved against Egypt.
 
Nov 2013
842
Lykaonia
#63
I write specially about the Philistians, so far I know they was mycenean Greeks. When in original egyptian sources are mentioned Daneans, Acheans and this are not just some similar sounding names than they was also other Greeks outside of the Philistians taking part in this episode .

For sure this time was mycenean Greeks in Crete , Cyprus and the southern anatolian coast. Not only aegean influences but settlements, greek presence at all.
 
Feb 2011
761
Kitchener. Ont.
#64
In the table not listed are the only under Ramses II. As allies of the Hittites in the Battle of Kadesh mentioned Dardunu (d3rdnjj), Mesa (m3s3) Mawuna or Yaruna (jrwn) Pidasa (pt3s3) and Kelekeš.
It is also necessary to hi-lite the fact that a portion of the alliance at Kadesh under Khatti, includes Kode, Carchemish and Ereth (Arvad).
The very same 'nations' identified by Ramesses III, except that he also listed Yeres (Alishaya), which is understandable as Alishaya was only added to the Hittite political sphere in the days of Tudhaliya IV, some decades after Kadesh.
Otherwise, the Hittite alliance faced by Ramesses III was the same, but smaller, than those at Kadesh a century before.

Ramesses III records:
"No land could stand before their arms, from Khatti, Kode, Carchemish, Yereth (Arvad) & Yeres (Alishaya)"

This, I maintain, is not a list of conquered 'nations', but a list of Hittite allies. Ramesses is claiming that no-one could stand before this assembly of Hittite nations.

The so-called "Sea Peoples" were allied to those Hittite assemblies, as the texts declares:
"Their confederation was the Peleset, Tjekker, Sheklesh, Denyen and Weshesh".


In texts (rarely mentioned) at Medinet Habu Ramesses III has made it clear that he has beaten this alliance:
He shows the "Captured chief of Khatti", and the "captured chief of Kode", and among the list of conquests he names "land of Carchemish", and "land of Ereth/Arvad".


The confederation of "Sea Peoples" appear to have been nothing more than an alliance of coastal peoples who "made a conspiracy in their isles/coasts", to join the Hittite political cause against Egypt.
 
May 2015
99
Bristol
#65
Circa 1200 BC The Bronze Age Palace Culture of Mycenaean Greece collaped, one of the Troy's is destroyed, Egypt is attacked & most importantly Hattusa (now Bogazko, Turkey) capital of the Hittite Empire is destroyed.

The question is are the SEA PEOPLES the cause of this anarchy ie a Bronze Age version of Attila & his Huns or are they a consequence of the anarchy a bit like the Free Companies which dominated large parts of France in the hundred years war. This is a bit of a which came first the Chicken of the egg situation.

However, while the Dorians may have moved south from Illyria and may have played a part in the fall of the Mycenaean Palaces. Which could in turn have triggered other movements of people and war bands. I think it would be an error to view the crisis as caused by hordes of "Greek" invaders sweeping down from the north and triggering the collapse of the late Bronze Age powers for the following reasons.

- We have evidence from tree rings that plant growth was bad in this period. Poor harvests put pressure on all pre Industrial societies.

- Hittite records from the reigns of Arnuwandas IV show that prior to the destruction of Hattusa that vassels to the west & east were in revolt. Hittite culture with its distinctive use of Hittite hieroglyphic script is however preserved in city-states in Syria and Cilicia. Outsiders may have moved in later but it would seem that the Empire failed from within.

- Most of the peoples listed as attacking Egypt esp the Libyians and the Sherdens were known to Pharaoh as Mercenaries both before and after 1200 es. Indeed in 1186 Sherden seemed to have fought both for and againat Pharaoh.

- The Hittite texts and the Vassels of Pharaoh often refer (in a very hostile manner) to Habiru & the Sa-Gaz and efforts have been made to identify them as a people. However it seems that that they were actually mercenary bands.

As wandering mercenaries from varied souces the Habiru-Sa-Gaz left few remains in the archaeological record but a heavy relience on such bands could be one reason why in 1200 the Hittite Empire fell, Egypt was later taken over by its own Libyan mercs (22 Libyan Dynasty) but Assyria which at this period based its Army on the tough Assyian levies seem to have come through the crisis period fairly unbothered.
 
Feb 2011
761
Kitchener. Ont.
#67
Trevor Bryce writes about the evolving opinion that the Hittite Empire collapsed due to internal strife likely between the northern capital at Hattushas, and the southern royal seat at Tarhuntassa.
The third royal seat at Carchemish was the beneficiary being the only seat to survive into the Iron Age.

There is still nothing to support the old theory that the Hittites were destroyed by any marauding "Sea Peoples", as a result the theory is dying a slow death.

The Habiru were never a significant threat, certainly not enough to concern a nation the size of Egypt or Khatti.
 
Nov 2013
842
Lykaonia
#68
I wonder what Ramses III description means with sea people than:

Sea Peoples made the alliance and conspire. They aim to put in hand all the lands of the earth. Nobody can deal with them. From the Hittite destroyed simultaneously Candy (Cilicia), the Karchemis the Arzava and Alasgia. The camp is somewhere in Amourrou. They attack and destroy the places as if they had never existed. They came, they put fire and said, "Go for Egypt." Their allies were the Peleset, the Tzeker, the Shekel, the Denyen and Veses.
 
Feb 2011
761
Kitchener. Ont.
#69
I wonder what Ramses III description means with sea people than:

Sea Peoples made the alliance and conspire. They aim to put in hand all the lands of the earth. Nobody can deal with them. From the Hittite destroyed simultaneously Candy (Cilicia), the Karchemis the Arzava and Alasgia. The camp is somewhere in Amourrou. They attack and destroy the places as if they had never existed. They came, they put fire and said, "Go for Egypt." Their allies were the Peleset, the Tzeker, the Shekel, the Denyen and Veses.
It isn't the translation that is at fault. Ramesses knew what he was saying.
It is the interpretation of that translation, it is we who have not understood what he said, that is where the fault lies.
Though the one you offer above is decidedly unique :)
 

Similar History Discussions