King David

[Minimalist]

I know that it does not quite match up by a few hundred years, but still suspect the eruption of Santorini had something to do with the migration of the sea people and general disruption of the mid east

Evidence from Crete suggests that within a couple of hundred years after Santorini mainland Greeks overran Crete. Crete must have suffered greatly from the blast and after effects. One could logically assume that her fleet would have been smashed. The myth of Theseus and the Minotaur is a thinly veiled reference to Cretan dominance of Greece being thrown off. Freed from Minoan domination the Greeks could have engaged in a little reverse domination of their own.

Israeli archaeologist Amihai Mazar has noted that the earliest Philistine pottery on the Canaanite coast had a distinctly Hellenic ancestry. So, I'd say you have a point. It would have taken the Greeks a while to recover themselves but they could not have been hit as hard as the Minoans.

[Rokcet Scientist]

Freed from Minoan domination the Greeks could have engaged in a little reverse domination of their own.

"Could have"...? We know they did, don't we?
That's no maybe, afaic. Until this day...

[Minimalist]

It's a question of timing. Mainland Greece would have suffered from the tsunami but the bulk of the ash cloud would have gone to the east because of the prevailing winds. I'm speculating that they could have recovered much quicker than the Minoans who were blasted.

The Greeks built up a palace system ( Pylos, Mycenae, etc) by 1200 BC and those went down along with the rest of the LBA kingdoms to the Sea People who also hammered Egypt and started it on the long slow road to oblivion. Greece also entered a period of barbarism from which it did not begin to emerge for several centuries. After that, as you say, they were fairly expansionist at least in terms of colonizing.


What we still don't know is whether the Sea People were caused by political or ecological factors. Why do large groups of people start moving? The fact is we don't even know if they were large groups. Viking raiders caused hell with relatively few ships. It is a puzzle.

[Rokcet Scientist]

What we still don't know is whether the Sea People were caused by political or ecological factors.

Why do large groups of people start moving?

Because other people drive them off?
It's happened a number of times in history that aggressive marauding peoples from central Asia surged west and violently pushed all peoples in their path before them. Remember Attila? And Djengis Khan?
By one opinion the Sea Peoples originally came from what is now southern Ukraine, where they were aggressively displaced by Central Asians, and went first west, then south, raping and thrashing Thrace, Mycenae, and Cyprus on their way to Egypt and Palestine, where they finally settled after centuries of drift.

The fact is we don't even know if they were large groups. Viking raiders caused hell with relatively few ships. It is a puzzle.

A puzzle?
Osama Bin Laden terrorized a billion people with 20 fanatics...
You don't need many people to wreck the fabric of a society. At all.

[Minimalist]

I don't disagree, Rok.

I simply don't know if we have any actual evidence for the Central Asian theory.

To carry the Viking analogy a bit farther, though, there has been some speculation that the early Viking raids were caused by overpopulation which led to any number of landless men who took to the seas. WE are always quick to assume some disaster but, and its a big but, suppose these were people living along the coasts who were suddenly freed from subservience to the Minoans or other LBA powers. Instead of facing disaster they may have simply outgrown their homelands and taken to the seas for adventure/profit? Viking tactics were to appear suddenly, make their raid, and withdraw before any military force could be mustered to move against them. Its a tactically sound doctrine and there is no reason to think that the Vikings were the only ones to think of it.


I don't even disagree with the Osama bin Laden anaology. Rumors had been spread by word-of-mouth for millenia before the invention of FOX news.

[Rokcet Scientist]

there has been some speculation that the early Viking raids were caused by overpopulation

"Overpopulation"? in Scandinavia?

WE are always quick to assume some disaster but, and its a big but, suppose these were people living along the coasts who were suddenly freed from subservience to the Minoans or other LBA powers. Instead of facing disaster they may have simply outgrown their homelands and taken to the seas for adventure/profit? Viking tactics were to appear suddenly, make their raid, and withdraw before any military force could be mustered to move against them. Its a tactically sound doctrine and there is no reason to think that the Vikings were the only ones to think of it.

Just like there is no reason to assume that Attila was the first 'scourge from the east'.

[Minimalist]

http://www.suite101.com/content/conques ... ge-a240726

In A History of the Vikings, for example, Gwyn Jones highlights persistent overpopulation and a shortage of land, not as a result of rampant and immoral Norse polygamy as Dudo would have us believe, but due to accepted Scandinavian social practices: “Great men had wives by marriage-contract and, if they wished, by loose-bridal. For any save the very poor a quiverful of sons was welcome. They were proof of a man’s virility.” A "quiverful" of sons would, of course, have to be provided for and this could have placed significant pressure on chieftains and farmers, in terms of providing adequate resources to their sons.

Yep. That's what the man says.

Just like there is no reason to assume that Attila was the first 'scourge from the east'.

Again - it's a question of evidence.

[E.P. Grondine]

Evidence from Crete suggests that within a couple of hundred years after Santorini mainland Greeks overran Crete. Crete must have suffered greatly from the blast and after effects. One could logically assume that her fleet would have been smashed. The myth of Theseus and the Minotaur is a thinly veiled reference to Cretan dominance of Greece being thrown off. Freed from Minoan domination the Greeks could have engaged in a little reverse domination of their own.

HI Min, Barrcuda -

not a couple of hnundred years, but around 50 years. end LM1B.

What the evidence from Crete SHOWS is that the Achaeans occupied the island shortly after 1585 BCE or so.
L.B. ai-a-ja/me-na if I remember correctly, and the Achaeaens is the HIttite cunieform documents.

See the my notes on absolute chronology posted elsewhere here at this site.

The Achaean occupation occurs shortly after the destruction of the "Minoan " (Lycian Trade Federation) forces by impact while they were aiding
Hittite King T'e Hantilishi (Tantalus in later myth).

In other words, the islands had lost their defenders.

The only problem left is WHY the Sea Peoples attacked the Hittites, Egypt, and everyone except those pareticular trading cities mentioned earlier in this post.
What was the trigger?

Sheppard is right in including Spain in this situation.

[Minimalist]

The most common dates I've seen for the destruction of the "neo-palatial" period on Crete are in the 1400-1450 range. Thera has been fairly well established at c 1628 BC. Assuming the mid-range of 1425 BC for the palace culture on Greek to be attacked we have a two century span. It would have taken the Greeks a while to shake the cobwebs out of their heads after the blast, too.

Moreover, we cannot assume that there are no intervening events. It seems reasonable that the Minoans would try to re-establish their imperial interests. Thera was gone, Greece was the next closest place. We have a date for Thera and a date for the Mycenaean overrunning of Crete but we don't really know what went on in between. Burning the palaces might merely have been the final act in a two-hundred year ( more or less ) war for which we have no record at all.


Your second question is one which has periodically annoyed the hell out of me for years. Why was Phoenicia left so conspicuously alone by the Sea Peoples? Perhaps one merely needs to look at the behavior of modern states? Assuming that the Sea People began in the West...and the whole Med. is west of Phoenicia... they could have, as soon as the Sea People demonstrated their prowess:

a) hired the Sea Peoples as mercenaries to work over their competitors.
b) made an alliance with the Sea Peoples for the same purpose.
c) paid the Sea People off.
d) ___________________________. ( Make an alternate suggestion.)

I'll take odds on each of these and we can let Michelle hold the stakes!

[Rokcet Scientist]

Your second question is one which has periodically annoyed the hell out of me for years. Why was Phoenicia left so conspicuously alone by the Sea Peoples? Perhaps one merely needs to look at the behavior of modern states? Assuming that the Sea People began in the West...and the whole Med. is west of Phoenicia... they could have, as soon as the Sea People demonstrated their prowess:

a) hired the Sea Peoples as mercenaries to work over their competitors.
b) made an alliance with the Sea Peoples for the same purpose.
c) paid the Sea People off.
d) ___________________________. ( Make an alternate suggestion.)

I'll take odds on each of these and we can let Michelle hold the stakes!

d) Maybe the Sea Peoples left their taxi drivers in peace? They used a lot of sea transport for all that moving during their diaspora and raids. And the Phoenicians were the prime providers of transport in the Med. Especially after the Sea Peoples bowled the Minoans out of the game. So the Sea Peoples needed the Phoenicians, as the Sea Peoples themselves, in spite of their name, are not known for their seafaring prowess.

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi min -

If any of the Old Testament does turn out to accurately preserve some record of Bronze Age history,
I doubt if it will shake your disgust with religions. The chronolgy of the Americas is separate, of course ).

That said:
Thera erupts 1628 BCE exactly, tree ring dating.
Following well known laws of physics, Comet Encke also passed into the inner solar system in exactly the same year - the pillar of light in the east in Exodus?
LM 1B lasts about 50 years.

Sheppard attributes the end of LM 1-B to a pyroclastic flow from Thera:
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.p ... er=1146478

Of course, the contemporary records detail an impact event which destroyed the "Minoan" militarry forces,
citations to which writings I have given several times here.

There is a lengthy literature on the debate of the stratification of the LB tablets found at Knossos.

It is llikely that the Sea Peoples originally came from the eastern Mediterranean, and had trade ties there from the Atlantic and Western Med.
The Palu/ili were among them, perhaps from SW Anatolia.

The big event preceding the invasions was the treaty between the Hittites and Egyptians.
Either both were attacked by the Sea Peoples,
or the Dorians displaced people on the Anatolian coast, who joined in a move south and the attacks.

In any case, the pattern is quite baffling.

[Minimalist]

Your second question is one which has periodically annoyed the hell out of me for years. Why was Phoenicia left so conspicuously alone by the Sea Peoples? Perhaps one merely needs to look at the behavior of modern states? Assuming that the Sea People began in the West...and the whole Med. is west of Phoenicia... they could have, as soon as the Sea People demonstrated their prowess:

a) hired the Sea Peoples as mercenaries to work over their competitors.
b) made an alliance with the Sea Peoples for the same purpose.
c) paid the Sea People off.
d) ___________________________. ( Make an alternate suggestion.)

I'll take odds on each of these and we can let Michelle hold the stakes!

d) Maybe the Sea Peoples left their taxi drivers in peace? They used a lot of sea transport for all that moving during their diaspora and raids. And the Phoenicians were the prime providers of transport in the Med. Especially after the Sea Peoples bowled the Minoans out of the game. So the Sea Peoples needed the Phoenicians, as the Sea Peoples themselves, in spite of their name, are not known for their seafaring prowess.

I'd say that was covered under a) or c) but in either case, the home region of the Minoans was taken out by 1400 BC at the latest and it appears as if the Mycenaens were responsible. The Sea Peoples came along later and duly knocked off the Mycenaeans...along with a lot of others. Still, if the lack of Minoan control of the sea allowed piracy to flourish there would have been an impact on the commerce of the remaining kingdoms which may have weakened them. There was peace between the Egyptians and the Hittites but we have no idea who else may have been fighting whom. Peace along one front does not mean peace everywhere.

Yes, the Phoenicians do seem to be the ultimate beneficiaries. Virtually alone among the existing powers in the aftermath of the Sea People wave the Phoenicians expanded. Definitely to the south where they have been detected at Tel Rehov in the Beth Shean valley in Israel and probably to the north as well.

[Minimalist]

Hi min -

If any of the Old Testament does turn out to accurately preserve some record of Bronze Age history,
I doubt if it will shake your disgust with religions. The chronolgy of the Americas is separate, of course ).

That said:
Thera erupts 1628 BCE exactly, tree ring dating.
Following well known laws of physics, Comet Encke also passed into the inner solar system in exactly the same year - the pillar of light in the east in Exodus?
LM 1B lasts about 50 years.

Sheppard attributes the end of LM 1-B to a pyroclastic flow from Thera:
http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.p ... er=1146478

Of course, the contemporary records detail an impact event which destroyed the "Minoan" militarry forces,
citations to which writings I have given several times here.

There is a lengthy literature on the debate of the stratification of the LB tablets found at Knossos.

It is llikely that the Sea Peoples originally came from the eastern Mediterranean, and had trade ties there from the Atlantic and Western Med.
The Palu/ili were among them, perhaps from SW Anatolia.

The big event preceding the invasions was the treaty between the Hittites and Egyptians.
Either both were attacked by the Sea Peoples,
or the Dorians displaced people on the Anatolian coast, who joined in a move south and the attacks.

In any case, the pattern is quite baffling.

You're right about the OT, EP. So far, none of it has been shown to accurately reflect LBA realities. Archaeologist Amihai Mazar wrote that the OT is like a telescope looking backward in time. The further back you look the dimmer things become. Mazar, of course, agrees with Finkelstein that the gist of the stories date from the 7th century BC and thus give you a better view of the 8th century than they do of the 10th. But what if he is wrong and the telescope really is positioned in the 3d century?

As far as Encke goes, according to my research it is a short period comet that comes by every 3 years or so. So, it may have come by in 1628 BC but it also whizzed by in 1631 and 1625 BC and every 3 years since. It was last here in August and is due back in 2013. How many "impacts" can it have? Surely, the ancients would have known about it? They seem to have paid far more attention to the skies than most of us today.

No one could argue with your final observation. Of course the pattern is baffling and it may result from a combination of causes. Any one "cause" ( damage to trade by piracy; migration of people caused by climate or earthquake; military disaster; famine; disease; drought; revolution; ) might not be enough to bring the whole house of cards tumbling down but if you get a combination of causes it becomes a whole new ballgame.

Who knows, after centuries of repression by their overlords the Sea People might have been greeted as liberators by the farming communities they encountered?

I recall a documentary where Amnon Ben Tor was holding out for a destruction of Hazor by parties unknown ( even he would not say "Joshua") while his assistant argued for a revolution by the locals using the same evidence. Our information is just too scant.

[Barracuda]

Thanks, E.P. The chronology is closed than I thought. I had it off by several hundred years.


Personally, I tend to believe Rockets explanation. I think the Sea Peoples were an eclectic group, and that Phoenicians were part of the group, and had some control over it.

Why not, they had not only the nautical expertise, but they also knew the area and the politics from trading with the locals. They would know the Egyptians were a more vulnerable target that they might have seemed from the outside.

[kbs2244]

“Who knows, after centuries of repression by their overlords the Sea People might have been greeted as liberators by the farming communities they encountered?

It happened much later.

When the Spanish conquered Central and South America they had local help.