Peter Fletcher

I'm confused about some aspects of Phoenicians history. Can anyone help me?

Practically every history text I read about these archetype survivors does not mention those 12th century BC invaders collectively known as the "Sea People".

-------------------

We are told that the Phoenicians were Semitic people living on the narrow strip of land at the eastern end of the Mediterranean from at least the early part of the 2nd millennium BC.

We further learn that their forte was marine trade and they were involved in transporting Cedar timber down to Egyptian from earliest times.

Their reported life goes on sweetly right through the 12th century, without interruption, into the 10th century and beyond with their well documented expansion throughout the Mediterranean.

We are led to believe that the same blood and customs continued without interruption throughout this long period.

On the other hand I separately read about the "Sea People" (Indo-European tongue) smashing their way around the eastern Mediterranean destroying everything in their path until they abruptly get their comeuppance against the Egyptians.

On their Odyssey these invaders destroyed tens of cities, obliterated the Hittite Kingdom, sacked much of Cyprus, eliminated the Kingdom of Ugarit (just to the north of Phoenicia) and ravaged Palestine (just to the south).

How come these wily people managed to keep out of trouble? Or did they?

I find it difficult to believe that the "Phoenicians" who sailed out into the broad Mediterranean around the 10th / 9th century BC were not descendent Indo-Europeans adopting the Phoenician culture and religion. Surely, at least, the leadership would have been Indo-European dominated?

The Tjeker were controlling Dor (next door to Phoenicia), The Paleset the remaining land down to Egypt, the Sikils had set up their new home in Sicily and the Sherden had given their name to Sardinia. All clearly of Indo-European tongue.

Surely something is wrong with this period of Phoenician history, don't you think?

Were not the "Phoenicians" of the 1st millenium BC Indo-European (wolves) in Phoneacian (Sheeps Clothing)?

Peter Fletcher

capnkirk

Remember that "semitic" is a language grouping, not an ethnic one. The "Semitic peoples" necessarily shared a common language root, no more. Your dating would (correctly, I believe) place the Phoenicians in the area some 600 years before the appearance of the "sea people".

The Phoenicians may well be related to the "sea people", but I don't think that they were one and the same. Egyptian records relate the defeat of an invasion of what they called "sea people" in 1231 BCE. Many of the "sea people" settled in Canaan (according to these same Egyptian records) but settled south of Phoenician lands; they were called Philistines (The Paleset, which you identified in your OP) by the Egyptians and the coastal plain where they settled, Palestine. If what little we do know about the "sea people" is correct, THEY may well have been of Indo-European stock (There is even one school of archeologists that hold that the "sea people" were refugees from Troy...), but not so the Phoenicians. Were these "sea people" the Phoenicians, surely the Egyptians would have so identified them at the time. The "sea people" were so successful in their attacks against Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, and Cyprus because they had iron weapons...apparently the first to do so in that region. What does history tell us about the Phoenicians of that time? Did they have iron or were they still a bronze technology? It appears that it was the Philistines who brought the Iron Age to the Levant and to Egypt.

__________________
Enterprise...OUT.