The stage has been set. We have looked briefly at the biblical references to the Philistines. We have also looked briefly at the archaeological record of Tel Miqne-Ekron, one of the five major Philistine cities mentioned in the Bible. We have examined the possible origins of the "Sea Peoples," a diverse and extensive collection of tribes which likely included the group we know today as the Philistines, and we have seen that they came from Greece, Crete, and western Anatolia. In this chapter we will utilize the archaeological records of Tel Miqne-Ekron as well as those of other Philistine sites along the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, and, in conjunction with data from ancient Egypt and the Aegean, we will develop a chronological record of events that allows us a better understanding of the social and religious life of God's people Israel in its encounters with the Philistines.

We begin this study at the end of the Late Bronze Age and the beginning of the early Iron Age. The traditional date for this transition is 1200 B.C., but period shifts are of their very nature gradual. The various dig sites in an extended basin frequently indicate a gradual shift, and the dig results throughout the Eastern Mediterranean support this fact. The history of this area during the Late Bronze Age was full of momentous events. The last half of the thirteenth century B.C. witnessed the collapse of the Hittite empire in Anatolia, the Trojan War, the collapse of Aegean civilization and culture at numerous Greek mainland and island sites, and the end of Egypt's domination over Syro-Palestine.

This collapse of the dominant powers allowed for the maritime migration of various ethnic groups out of the Aegean to travel, plunder, trade, and settle along the Anatolian coast and in Cyprus, Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. The material remains uncovered in excavations on Cyprus and along the coast of Syria and Palestine indicate not just a destruction level in many sites, but also evidence of a new people moving in to establish new cultures. For example, along the southern coast of Canaan, there is no mistaking the new "Philistine" pottery for the earlier Canaanite pottery of the Late Bronze Age. At the various dig sites a sequence of cultures is seen, as well as an overlap of Aegean, Canaanite, Egyptian, and Israelite cultures. Although this study focuses on the Philistines, who settled primarily south of modern Tel Aviv to the Negeb and from the Mediterranean to the mountains of Judea, it is important to realize that there are sites within this area that were not affected by the Philistines and their culture. While it is not possible to establish an "absolute" chronology of events -- even when considering Egyptian historical records that list the various pharaohs and their actions against the Sea Peoples and the Canaanites -- "low" and "high" Egyptian chronologies have been developed upon which archaeologists generally agree. The two chronologies differ by only about fifteen years.

The chart below includes the Egyptian rulers most relevant to our study of the Philistines and other Sea Peoples.

High Chronology Low Chronology

Merneptah 1224-1214 B.C. 1212-1202 B.C.

(Queen) Tausert 1209-1200 1193-1185

Ramesses III 1198-1166 1182-1151

Figure 1 incorporates the chronologies with the dating of the stratigraphic levels of the digs at various sites. The identification of the bulk of the finds at each level is indicated by the shaded bars.

There are clearly two locally made pottery types associated with the Philistines, the monochrome Mycenaean IIIC:1b and the later Philistine bichrome ware. Some scholars, such as T. Dothan, refer to two waves of migrating Sea Peoples beginning in the second half of the thirteenth century B.C., with the Philistines coming in the second wave early in the twelfth century (during the reign of Pharaoh Ramesses III). According to this theory, the first wave of invaders made the monochrome Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery, and the second wave made the bichrome pottery, which replaced the monochrome. Other scholars, such as Stager, speculate that there was one basic group of Philistines that moved into the area in the twelfth century (during the reign of Pharaoh Ramesses III); this group soon adapted its Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery style to that encountered locally and developed the Philistine bichrome. All scholars, however, agree that the Philistines were on Canaan's seacoast by the middle of the twelfth century B.C.

The events surrounding the scriptural references to the Philistines and their first encounters with Israel in the Promised Land probably occurred shortly after the beginning of the twelfth century B.C. It was then that the Lord said to Joshua, "You are old and advanced in years. . . . This is the land that still remains: all the regions of the Philistines . . . " (Josh. 13:1-2).

In Exodus 13:17 we read that when Pharaoh let the Israelites go, they were not immediately led to the land of the Philistines, even though that land was nearest Egypt, for God is said to have thought, "If the people face war, they may change their minds and return to Egypt." Later, while at Mount Sinai, Israel was told that the borders of the Promised Land would be "from the Red Sea to the sea of the Philistines, and from the wilderness to the Euphrates" (Exod. 23:31).

The exodus is generally placed in the first half of the thirteenth century, during the reign of Ramesses II or earlier. To date, archaeologists have not found any evidence of Philistines living in Canaan prior to the turn of the twelfth century. Evidence for Sea Peoples, yes, but there is no record of a group of people called by the name Philistines until Ramesses III names and describes them at Medinet Habu. For this reason, some biblical scholars have concluded that this early reference in Exodus 13:17 to the Philistines is an anachronism. They believe the word Philistine is used in Exodus to speak to a later audience who by then knew this way into the Promised Land as the "Way of the Philistines."

Historical records inform us that the Egyptians knew this coastal artery leading to Canaan and Syria as the "Way of Horus." Fortunately, recent archaeological digging has uncovered material relevant to understanding the Exodus 13:17 passage. Digging has uncovered evidence of six fortresses on this route described in Exodus as the road through the Philistine country. The most dramatic of these finds is the fortress found at Deir el-Balah (T. Dothan 1982a and c). This site is located approximately seven miles south of Gaza and a scant mile east of the Mediterranean. For centuries the prevailing westerly winds have blown the beach sands there, creating dunes which long ago covered the settlement.

Extensively excavated in the 1970s and the early 1980s, this Gaza Strip town, Deir el-Balah, covers a large residence or palace that dates back to the mid-fourteenth century B.C., the Amarna period of Pharaoh Akhenaton. Superimposed on the large residence was a fortress with massive walls seven feet thick. This second structure and the artifacts it contained can be dated to the period of Pharaoh Seti I, the father of the great Ramesses II. Seti I recorded his achievements on the Temple of Amon at Karnak in Upper Egypt. The reliefs there also describe the Way of Horus and the fortresses built along this highway. The pottery analysis at Deir el-Balah has led T. Dothan to conclude that the existence of this fortress continued through the reign of Ramesses II (ca. 1304-1237 B.C.), who is thought by many to have been the pharaoh of the exodus. In the sediment immediately above the fortress a settlement was found containing artisan quarters and an industrial area with kilns that probably were used to prepare clay burial coffins. The next higher layer proved to be a Philistine settlement containing numerous pits holding Philistine pottery. This was the layer immediately under the covering sand dune, which was over forty-five feet deep. The Philistine pottery in the top layer has been dated to the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the eleventh century B.C.

The most striking finds in this Deir el-Balah dig site were uncovered while excavating the cemetery, namely, anthropoid clay coffins with removable lids in the shape of heads. None of the heads pictured on these coffins, however, wore the feathered headdress of the Sea Peoples (see p. 59); their headgear was of an Egyptian style. Nonetheless, these Egyptian clay coffins, dated to the fourteenth-thirteenth centuries B.C., may have influenced later Philistine burial customs, as the Philistine settlement succeeded that of the Egyptian fortress built on the Way of Horus.

To date there are no Philistine burial sites positively identified as belonging to any one of the five chief Philistine cities mentioned in the Old Testament. Tel el-Far`ah, in southern Israel (see pp. 70-71), has numerous tombs in its cemetery 500 containing Philistine grave goods, and Beth-shean (see p. 163) has Philistine clay coffins. Because the clay coffins found at Deir el-Balah contained numerous Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery imports, T. Dothan would like to reexamine all the artifacts from its cemetery in order to study more precisely the cultural influences on the Philistines.

The Deir el-Balah site serves as an important link to understanding Exodus 13:17. The site confirms that the Egyptians of the fourteenth-thirteenth centuries B.C. had a string of fortresses on this route that they called the Way of Horus and that Exodus calls the "way of the land of the Philistines." First mentioned by Pharaoh Seti I (ca. 1316-1304), Deir el-Balah was possibly used later by Pharaoh Ramesses III as a location to settle the Philistines he conquered during the twelfth century B.C. The finding of forty anthropoid clay coffins holding artifacts from the Aegean world, Cyprus, and Canaan, as well as from Egypt, not only reflects the international flavor of the area, but also explains where the Philistines may have picked up the idea of using clay coffins like those found at Tell el-Far`ah in the Negeb and at Beth-shean.

The archaeology done at Deir el-Balah shows that Philistines were on the southern coast of Canaan in the twelfth century B.C. Their presence is even more evident archaeologically at the five sites mentioned in Joshua 13:2-3: "This is the land that still remains: all the regions of the Philistines . . . ; there are five rulers of the Philistines, those of Gaza, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Gath, and Ekron. . . ." Also, in the allotments of the Philistines given to Judah, Simeon, and Dan, we read of two additional cities that must be considered in this study: Timnah (Josh. 15:10; 19:43), which we will encounter later in the Samson stories, and Ziklag (Josh. 19:5), which was given to David by Achish, the king of Philistine Gath.

What the archaeological record says about these various sites is more than simply interesting, since the biblical record is at best ambiguous and at times confusing. In Joshua 13:6 we read, "I will myself drive them [the Philistines and other enemies] out from before the Israelites; only allot the land to Israel for an inheritance, as I have commanded you." And in Judges 1:18 we read, "Judah took Gaza with its territory, Ashkelon with its territory, and Ekron with its territory." Yet, the following verse states, ". . . but [Judah] could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain, because they had chariots of iron." Then, two chapters later, in Judges 3:1, 3, we read, "Now these are the nations that the Lord left to test all those in Israel who had no experience of any war in Canaan . . . : the five lords of the Philistines. . . ." What exactly happened on the coastal plain of Canaan and in the hills of Judea?

Due to the political situation, the Gaza Strip has not been excavated extensively since 1967. In fact, Tell Harube, which may be the biblical Gaza, has not been examined by archaeologists since 1922. Even in that year only a few soundings were done on the mound itself. Philistine pottery was found, but since both the excavation and the publication of the material have been incomplete, all that can be said currently is that the Philistines were present at the site.

The Ashkelon site on the coast north of Gaza is being worked today (Stager 1985b, 1986, 1987, 1991a). It is a huge site topped by impressive ruins left by the medieval crusaders. The debris layers there are up to forty-two feet deep. The Philistine layers have been exposed to any great extent only since 1985. In spite of the massive amount of debris present at Ashkelon, Philistine fortifications were finally uncovered there during the 1990 season. An impressive mudbrick tower, thirty-four feet by twenty feet, was revealed. This tower was part of the fortification system protecting a Philistine city of over one hundred fifty acres. (Jericho and Jerusalem in the same time period covered approximately thirteen acres each.) What had been found at the extensively excavated Ashdod site has now been found true for Ashkelon as well: the imported pottery from Greece (Mycenaean IIIB) was present exclusively during the Late Bronze Age and was followed by monochrome Mycenaean IIIC:1b, the locally made pottery.

The later monochrome pottery has been tested by neutron activation analysis. This analysis has confirmed that -- as was true for Ashdod and Ekron in Israel and Enkomi, Kition, and other sites on Cyprus -- local clays were used to make the IIIC:1b pots. For Stager, the excavator at Ashkelon, the presence of an abundance of locally made Mycenaean pottery marks the arrival of the Philistines on the East Mediterranean coast. This pottery is in turn followed by the classic Philistine bichrome variety.

This is the same pottery sequence found at most Philistine sites. However, Mycenaean IIIC:1b does not show up at Timnah nor at Tell Qasile (in modern Tel Aviv). A. Mazar, the excavator of both Timnah and Qasile, believes that the Philistines arrived at those sites later than they did at Ashdod, Ekron, and Ashkelon.

Quite naturally, the pottery sequence plays an important role in determining precisely when the Sea Peoples first arrived on the southern seacoast of Canaan. While nearly all scholars agree that this occurred around the end of the thirteenth century B.C. or the beginning of the twelfth century, they do not agree about the exact date. The Egyptian reliefs discussed in chapter 3 and the many excavated Philistine artifacts are all major factors in attempting to date the stories of the judges and to understand Israel's encounters with the Philistines. What happened at Ashkelon figures very importantly in the argument.

Three Egyptian inscriptions need to be considered. First is the stele inscription of Pharaoh Merneptah relating how he repulsed the invasion of the Sea Peoples allied with the Libyans (ANET, 376-78) in the fifth year of his reign (during the final quarter of the thirteenth century). This was found alongside his list of invaders, which was cited in chapter 3 (p. 64). Second, on the bottom of the same stele, sometimes referred to as the "Israel Stele," is an inscription from Merneptah that may allude to an earlier campaign into Canaan. This inscription contains the only mention of the name Israel in Egyptian writings of the period. That part of the Israel Stele reads:

The third inscription is a series of reliefs on a wall at Karnak in Upper Egypt, which in the past had been credited to Merneptah's father, Ramesses II, and to Merneptah's brother, Khaemwase. Stager, in a detailed article, presents the case that Merneptah's cartouche (name), and not that of his father, was the original one mentioned in parts of the battle scene reliefs (1985b; Yurco 1990, with pictures).

Stager believes that four of the battle scenes on the reliefs at Karnak are likely to have originated with Merneptah rather than with his predecessor, Ramesses II. He also argues that credit for the four Merneptah battle scenes was later usurped by Merneptah's successors. In stating his conclusions, Stager focuses his attention on the Ashkelon battle scene. He points out that in it the inhabitants of Ashkelon, which is a named city on the relief, are dressed and armed as Canaanites, not as Sea Peoples. (We know the dress of the Sea Peoples from the later reliefs of Ramesses III at Medinet Habu.) In addition, these people at Ashkelon on the Karnak reliefs are seen to be besieged within their citadel high on a mound. The picture presented above the Ashkelon scene is the same, except for one major change -- the besieged people being vanquished are missing both a mound and a fortress with walls. They are fighting, instead, in open, rolling countryside. Though the top part of this relief, where the mound or fortress could have been, is missing, Stager believes, after closely studying the battle scenes, that this particular enemy had no citadel (see also Yurco 1990, 27-32). The other two battle scenes at Karnak are similar to the Ashkelon scene, in which the besieged inhabitants are within their citadel on a mound. Stager concludes his article by arguing that the three citadels with mounds are those of Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yano'am, even though only Ashkelon is specifically named. He points out that the determinative that Egyptians regularly used on stelae for cities, countries, and provinces is syntactically feminine, and this is how the three cities are presented on the Israel Stele. The type of determinative usually used by Egyptian scribes for people without a fixed city is used for Israel. The linguistic gender of this determinative is masculine: "his seed is not" (Stager 1985b, 60-61; Yurco 1990, 28). Stager does not believe this to be a haphazard designation.

Using the reliefs at Karnak and the Israel Stele, Stager drives home his point that during the reign of Pharaoh Merneptah, Ashkelon (as well as Gezer and Yano'am) was a Canaanite city and not yet a city belonging to the Sea Peoples. If all four battle reliefs at Karnak are credited to Merneptah and correspond to the stele, then this conclusion by Stager (and Yurco) is obvious. In addition, if the enemy without the mound or fortress on the relief is indeed the Israel mentioned on the stele, that would constitute pictorial evidence for Israel's presence in Canaan by the end of the thirteenth century. The depiction on the relief also fits well with our conception of a non-urbanized Israel during the beginning years of the conquest (see Stager 1985b and Yurco 1990 for additional discussion on Israel). The main focus of the Israel Stele, however, is the attack on Egypt by the Libyans and their Sea People allies; therefore, the stele and the four battle reliefs at Karnak have important implications for dating the arrival of the Sea Peoples into Canaan. If Stager's evaluation is correct, Ashkelon clearly was still a Canaanite city during the reign of Merneptah.

Keeping the pottery sequence and the reliefs in mind, we can propose a well-informed dating of the Sea Peoples' arrival at Ashkelon. If the imported Mycenaean IIIB ware was still used and in place there through the reign of Merneptah, and if Canaanites controlled Ashkelon during the fifth year of Merneptah, then the Sea Peoples could not have controlled the city before Ramesses III defeated them (ca. 1175 B.C.) and settled them in southern Canaan.

We do not have evidence of an early wave of Sea Peoples coming down and settling in Ashkelon before the attack on Egypt during Merneptah's reign, circa 1207 B.C. Stager is convinced that the Philistines arrived at Ashkelon a generation later, circa 1175 B.C., during the reign of Ramesses III. These people began to make Mycenaean-style pottery (IIIC:1b) from the local clays. It was still another generation later, circa 1150, according to Stager, before the inhabitants of Ashkelon made the classic Philistine bichrome pottery assimilating Egyptian, Canaanite, and other motifs. As will be demonstrated when we look at the archaeological evidence of Ashdod and Ekron, this arrival date of 1175 B.C. is twenty-five years or so later than archaeologists date the settlement of the Sea Peoples at those sites.