The Philistines were part of the Sea People confederation and were called the Peleset by the Egyptians. The Egyptians claim that Ramesses III defeated them in battle at the mouth of the Nile c 1175 BC. This would be one of the stranger "victories" in military history. While true that the Sea People did not penetrate the Nile it does seem as if they moved off to the east and landed in Canaan and overran the coast south of Lebanon. There is a sudden changeover from Canaanite pottery to more Hellenics style ( the Peleset were believed to be from the Greek Islands) and there are destruction layers at Gaza, Ashkalon and so on where the style shifts abruptly from one to the other. More importantly, within 20 years the Egyptians were either evicted or voluntarily abandoned their principal base in Canaan at Beit Shean in the north. It does not sound as if it was as one-sided a victory as the Egyptians pretended.
History and archaeology shows us that from the middle of the 12th century BC the fate of Egypt was to be overrun by one conqueror after another. In many cases she managed to absorb the invaders into her culture until Actium in 31 BC when Octavian said "enough of this shit."
The Hittites were on the Anatolian Plain in Turkey. They were destroyed in the early 12th century BC probably by a combination of forces including earthquakes, disease, and finally war from both the Sea Peoples and the Kassites, probably on different fronts. It is true that a Neo-Hittite culture arose later in Syria and this may have been the result of survivors of the previous disasters relocating to new urban centers. In spite of bible bullshit the prevailing theory, based on the evidence and settlement patterns on the ground is that the so-called "Israelites" arose from similar detritus of humanity being pushed inland from the hostile coastal regions and being forced to mix with nomadic tribes who had lost their trading partners when the various Canaanite coastal towns were overrun.
Something else about that period I always found fascinating. There is a long catalogue of Sea People conquests along both the northern and southern coasts of the Mediterranean and also on Levantine coast, except for the Phoenician cities of Sidon, Byblos and Tyre. Somehow, they managed to avoid being attacked and emerged as an intact power on the coast for a while. I wonder, did they bribe the Sea Peoples..... or hire them as mercenaries to attack their enemies?
History and archaeology shows us that from the middle of the 12th century BC the fate of Egypt was to be overrun by one conqueror after another. In many cases she managed to absorb the invaders into her culture until Actium in 31 BC when Octavian said "enough of this shit."
The Hittites were on the Anatolian Plain in Turkey. They were destroyed in the early 12th century BC probably by a combination of forces including earthquakes, disease, and finally war from both the Sea Peoples and the Kassites, probably on different fronts. It is true that a Neo-Hittite culture arose later in Syria and this may have been the result of survivors of the previous disasters relocating to new urban centers. In spite of bible bullshit the prevailing theory, based on the evidence and settlement patterns on the ground is that the so-called "Israelites" arose from similar detritus of humanity being pushed inland from the hostile coastal regions and being forced to mix with nomadic tribes who had lost their trading partners when the various Canaanite coastal towns were overrun.
Something else about that period I always found fascinating. There is a long catalogue of Sea People conquests along both the northern and southern coasts of the Mediterranean and also on Levantine coast, except for the Phoenician cities of Sidon, Byblos and Tyre. Somehow, they managed to avoid being attacked and emerged as an intact power on the coast for a while. I wonder, did they bribe the Sea Peoples..... or hire them as mercenaries to attack their enemies?
