The Ninth Bow

This video is an interpretation based on available evidence as of the time of this video's publishing, and contains some speculation. This video is not meant to be an authoritative work, but for the purpose of encouraging discussion on what the Bronze Age Collapse could have looked like, and how it reshaped the geopolitics of the region.

I plan to make a follow-up commentary video to discuss my map choices and speculations, but until I actually have the time to make it, this post will serve as substitute.

...

In the late 13th Century BC, the major players of the Late Bronze Age were Egypt, Assyria, The Hittites (labelled Ḫattuša), Kassite Babylon (labelled Kar-Duniaš), Elam and Mycenaean Greece (labelled Achaea). These nations formed a tight knit system, each deeply interwoven into a large trade network, where all nations prospered. This trade network extended far beyond the Near East, reaching as far as the Baltic Sea, to the British Isles, and as far east as modern-day Afghanistan & Pakistan. However, this period is marked by dramatic shifts in the climate, with significant increases in droughts, and thereafter famines, and thereafter plagues, which weakened all of these states. This climate stress also affected people groups beyond the near east, notably in central Europe & the Western Mediterranean. It is believed these external stressors pushed various peoples of central Europe to migrate in search of better lands, some of which may have been included among the so-called “sea peoples”.

Around 1210 BC, the Libu chief Meryey waged a war against Egypt. Among the ranks of his army were counted a collection of peoples referred to as “Sea Peoples” in the Egyptian recount of the war. This account appears to be the first mention of the term “Sea Peoples” as a group. The Ethnonyms of these people were: Šrdn, Škrš,ʾIqwš, Rkw, & Twrš. The final battle of the war, located in the “fields of Perire” (likely somewhere in the western Delta region) ultimately resulted in an Egyptian victory and the end of Meryey. [source]

Another event which occurred around the same time and recorded in the Merneptah Stele is Egypt’s conquest of the Levant. Under the reign of Ramesses II, the city-states of the Levant pledged their fealty to Egypt; however at this time, there appears to have been revolts in the Levant against Egyptian rule. Merneptah records campaigning against 5 distinct polities in the region: Canaan (perhaps Gaza), Ashkelon, Gezer, Yanoam (perhaps located in the Jezreel plain or just east of the Jordan) and Israel (likely located in the Highlands). Khor is also mentioned at the end of this list, which at this time period was the Egyptian term for the wider Levant, and would have included all the aforementioned polities.

In a letter to the governor of Ugarit, King Šuppiluliuma II, mentions the presence of Šikalaya, who “dwell on ships” off the southern Hittite coast. This group’s name bears a striking resemblance to the Škrš mentioned as one of the “Sea Peoples” in the Egyptian records. And indeed, their attribute of dwelling on ships certainly brings to mind the image of a “sea people”.

The exact identity of the Sea People has been much scholarly debate, but due to archaeological and genetic evidence, we can know a significant portion of them came from the Aegean. But let’s take a step further, and place ourselves in the shoes of the Merneptah, after the defeat of Meryey at the battle of Perire. As we count those lost in the battle, we also count the enemy soldiers whom we’ve captured. Many seem to wear strange clothes, and speak a strange language. However, with how interconnected the world was at this time, there certainly would have been an Egyptian official who could have interpreted Mycenaean Greek (the dominant power in the Aegean at that time). As he went down the line, asking each commander to identify their people, perhaps this is what they would have said:

Šrdn | Sardôn | Sardinian

Škrš | Sĭkelós | Sicel

ʾIqwš | Akhaiwós | Achaean

Rkw | Lukka* | Lycian

Twrš | Trṓs | Trojan

*Lukka was likely borrowed directly from Hittite, into Egyptian likely through Phoenician (as attested c. 1,800 BC on the Abishemu Obelisk).

Around 1200 BC, we see a marked shift in the material culture of Cyprus, specifically in the city of Enkomi. Enkomi not only shows signs of destruction, but also the distinct appearance of “Sea People” artifacts, namely Mycenaean, Nuragic (Sardinian) and Philistine artifacts. It is likely that Cyprus became the Sea People's “home base” from which they would then launch further incursions. 

In 1192, Ugarit & Suksi on the Syrian Coast show evidence of attack. Indeed, letters from Ugarit to the Hittite king confirm this invasion from the Sea Peoples. The following year, Adana, and likely the entire Cilician plain were sacked and taken by the Sea Peoples. Finally, c. 1190 Alalaḫ in Syria is taken and a new city is founded in its destruction: Kinalua. 

Around this time, the capital city of the Hittites, Hattusa, appears to be sacked and burned. The invading force is unknown, but it is often thought to have been the Kaskians of Northwest Anatolia, as the Hittites had been in on-and-off conflict with them at this time. Additionally, it is likely that the Phrygians and other Balkan peoples may have pushed further into Anatolia at this time, perhaps even in coalition with the Kaskians (although this is speculative). However, it is likely that Šuppiluliuma II survived this attack, and simply moved his capital elsewhere in the Hittite Empire. The Hittite Territory along the Euphrates and in the Taurus Mountains appears to have been largely unaffected during this time, and seems to have been the core location of the Hittites moving forward. 

Taking a step back, Egypt appears to have lost control of its lands in Canaan following the civil war between Amenmesse and Seti II, as the nation experienced severe economic decline. In the absence of Egyptian sovereignty, a Syrian man appears to have conquered nearly the entire region of the Levant. In Egyptian texts, he is nameless, and is referred to by the title jr-sw, often understood to mean “he who made himself” or “self-made man”. He is referred to as a “Kharru”, which during this time period was a term that extended to anyone from the Levant. Upon the ascension of Tausret to the Egyptian throne in 1191, the queen allied herself to this jr-sw, legitimizing his reign over the region. 

Based on the general timeline of Israel existing in the region at minimum by 1208 per the Merneptah Stele, and the timeline of events presented in the Hebrew scriptures, I find it plausible to identify jr-sw with the individual of Kushan Rishathaim mentioned in the book of Judges, chapter 3. If this is the case, and if the location of Aram-Naharaim is to be located in Northwest Mesopotamia, this could be understood to have been the earliest incursion of Arameans into the Levant. However, I do not think Kushan himself was an Aramean, but I’ll save that rabbit hole for a separate post.

If the time period in the book of Judges is to be believed, Kushan lost his hold on the southern Levant after 8 years of rule, which would be around 1185. Interestingly, this is one year after Pharoah Setnakhte ascended to the throne of Egypt, and unlike his predecessor Tausret, Setnakhte was actively hostile toward jr-sw, which certainly led to his power waning in the region.

In 1184, the cities of Mopsuestia and Mopsucrene appear in the archaeological record. These cities were named after and purportedly founded by the famed Mopsus, a seer of Ancient Greek legend who led Greek settlers along the Anatolian coastline. In a bilingual Luwian/Phoenician inscription from the 8th century BC, Azatiwada, king of the regional kingdom centered on Adana, ascribes his dynasty as being descended from Mopsus (M-p-š / Muksa). As such, perhaps the Greek Legend here is indeed based on some truth. 

Around 1180, we see a widespread wave of destruction in the cities of the Aegean. Nichoria and Pylos in southern Greece, as well as the famous Troy in Anatolia all show signs of attack. Perhaps this was internal uprising due to poor living conditions, or perhaps this was external attack. In any event, these destructions likely led to another influx of refugees into the developing “Sea-Peoples” Kingdoms in the Eastern Mediterranean.

In 1178, the infamous Battle of Ḏahy occurred. The exact location of the battle is unknown, as the Egyptian province of Ḏahy encompassed the Jezreel valley, the lowlands surrounding Hazor, the Highlands just south of Lebanon, and the Coastlands from Acre to Ashkelon. However, it is most likely this Battle occurred somewhere on the coastlands, as this is where we see the largest settlement patterns of the Sea Peoples. Ultimately, although the Egyptians claimed to have won the battle, it is clear that the Sea Peoples prevailed, as they pushed the Egyptians back to one final battle in the Nile Delta a few years later. The Sea Peoples recorded in these battles are: W3š3š, D3iniw, Šrdn, Škrš, Twrš, Pwrst, & Ṯ3k3r.

W3š3š | uncertain; since 'Lukka' are not mentioned here, this may be in reference to the city of Iassos (i.e. Carians, who appear to be present in the Levant according to 2 Samuel 20 & 2 Kings 11). If not, the 'Weshesh' may refer to the Ausones/Oscians, or perhaps another unknown group

D3iniw | likely Danaans (synonymous with Achaeans)

Šrdn | likely Sardinians

Škrš | likely Sicels

Twrš | likely Trojans

Pwrst | likely Philistines

Ṯ3k3r | perhaps Teucrians

Around 1175 the Sea Peoples face-off against the Egyptians in a final, full frontal assault. This likely took place in the eastern Delta region, although the exact location is unknown. Ultimately, although the Sea Peoples proved a formidable opponent, the Egyptians truly did prevail in this final battle. As a result, the Egyptians allowed the Sea Peoples to remain settled in the southern Levant under their governance, although some settled in the heartland of Egypt. And thus, with their migration complete, the Sea Peoples coalition appears to dissolve as each settlement develops into it’s own Kingdom with their own unique cultures. The kingdoms that appear to have been founded by the Sea Peoples are:

Pamphylia: So called from Greek pam- (a dialectal variation of pan-) “every” and phūlḗ “tribe”; i.e. “Land of Every Tribe”. If there ever was a nation representative of the Sea Peoples coalition, Pamphylia certainly seems to have taken this title in its name. However, it seems Greek culture was predominant, as not only the name but the local language appeared to be a dialect of  Greek (albeit with heavy Anatolian influence). Not much is known about how this nation functioned, what sort of government structure it had or the names of any of its rulers, but it certainly seems to have been the most peacefully founded of all the Sea Peoples nations. 

Cilicia: The exact etymology of Cilicia is tricky. The name certainly comes from Hittite Ḫilika, but the exact meaning of this term is uncertain. Another name the nation used for itself was Piruwanda, meaning “stony place” due to the region’s rocky terrain. Regardless, the population of Cilicia appears to have been predominantly Luwian.

‘Chaea: Traditionally referred to by the Assyrian name Que, ‘Chaea was certainly founded by a predominately Greek population, although they appear to quickly adopt Luwian as it was the predominant language of the region. The name of the nation, as appears in the bilingual stele found at Karatepe is Ḫiyawa in Luwian and Danunayim in Phoenician, as the names are used as translations of each other. Here, we see a clear connection to the Hittite term Aḫḫiyawā, used to refer to the Achaeans, and the Egyptian Denyen, used to refer to the Danaans. Both classical terms are used interchangeably by Homer for the Greek people, and we can see that association here as well. Thus, for the sake of clarity, I chose to refer to this nation as ‘Chaea, a clipping of Achaea, just as Ḫiyawa is a clipping of Aḫḫiyawā.

Palistin: Most likely derived from Peleset, the ethnonym of the Philistines. The exact etymology is uncertain, but I speculate it could be from either a Luwian source (*”Peleset”-Uwatna “Philistine Land”), a Greek source(“Peleset”-ēnḗ “Philistine Land”) or a Semitic source (e.g. Hebrew Plištim, “Philistines”); although I personally think the Greek source is the most compelling. It is unknown what language the Philistines spoke, but it is likely they spoke an Anatolian language based on the substrate found in the Philistine dialects of the southern Levant. Regardless, the state of Palistin became a predominately Luwian speaking state, likely facing the same pressures as ‘Chaea. 

Dor: The Story of Wenamun mentions the coastal city of Dor being under the sovereignty of the Ṯ3k3r, with the king being called b3dỉr (either a name or title). The exact identity of the Ṯeker is debated among scholars, although the Teucrians appear to be a convincing etymological match. 

Philistia: Most famously, the Philistines appear to have predominately settled in the southern Levant, with their center of power being the pentopolis of Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron and Gath. Much of the military history of these southern Philistines is recorded in the Hebrew Bible, as they frequently clashed with the Israelite highlanders during the 12th-11th centuries. 

Isle of the Danaans: The island of Cyprus appears to have been populated by all manor of Sea Peoples, but as the years went by, it appears that Greek Culture became dominant on the island. The Ancient Greek Dialect on Cyprus is well attested in the Iron Age, and appears to strongly resemble the ancient Mycenaean Greek Dialect. Assyrian sources refer to the island as Ia’dnana, likely translating to “Island of Danaans”, suggesting the Greek cultural dominance was solidly in place at least by the 8th century. The exact government structure of Cyprus at this time is uncertain, but it is likely that it was ruled by a collection of city-states, as we see in later on in the Iron-Age.

...