The Place of Origin of the Enemy

The association of the so-called “Sea Peoples” of the Egyptian records we have passed in review with peoples of classical reference on the northern shores of the Mediterranean has a long history, going back to the early nineteenth century. Most of the comparanda derives from the epic cycle of the Άχαιῶν νόστοι and from foundation legends. While many of these traditions are to be found in notices no earlier than the first century BC, the very nature of the adumbrated narratives (folk legends) and lyric pieces points to remembered, communal identification, and therefore origin stories of long standing. In view of the consistency and integrity of the evidence of Ramesside date, there is every reason to construe these classical traditions as genuine, and having their roots in historic fact (Hammond, 1975; Redford 1992, 250–54; Finkelberg 2005; Greaves 2011, 508–9). The above optimistic view does not ignore the difficulties. For one thing, in identifying place of origin of individual Sea Peoples, how can we eliminate the uncertainty as to whether a like-sounding toponym represents place of origin, ultimate settlement, or a transitory tarrying place? Again: a second uncertainty manifests itself in the assumption that the rules which governed the transliteration of Semitic words into Egyptian script also applied to Indo-European words (Schneider 2004). A third difficulty, tiresome to deal with because of its egregiousness, has been introduced into the quest for origins by a set of unfounded assumptions: that the Peleset and Tjeker were not new to the Middle East, that they had occupied coastal cities in Palestine before year 8, and that they had been taken on by the Egyptians as mercenaries (Albright 1973; Drews 1993).1