Posted on 03/13/2007 3:48:08 PM PDT by blam
Philistines, but Less and Less Philistine
Painted inscriptions on ceramic pieces unearthed at the ruins of a Philistine seaport are thought to represent a form of writing.
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
Published: March 13, 2007
Archaeologists have applied more polish to the long-tarnished reputation of the Philistines.
Leon Levy Expedition Recent excavations have raised the estimation of Philistines.
In recent years, excavations in Israel established that the Philistines had fine pottery, handsome architecture and cosmopolitan tastes. If anything, they were more refined than the shepherds and farmers in the nearby hills, the Israelites, who slandered them in biblical chapter and verse and rendered their name a synonym for boorish, uncultured people.
Archaeologists have now found that not only were Philistines cultured, they were also literate when they arrived, presumably from the region of the Aegean Sea, and settled the coast of ancient Palestine around 1200 B. C.
At the ruins of a Philistine seaport at Ashkelon in Israel, excavators examined 19 ceramic pieces and determined that their painted inscriptions represent a form of writing. Some of the pots and storage jars were inscribed elsewhere, probably in Cyprus and Crete, and taken to Ashkelon by early settlers. Of special importance, one of the jars was made from local clay, meaning Philistine scribes were presumably at work in their new home.
The discovery is reported in the current issue of The Israel Exploration Journal by two Harvard professors, Frank Moore Cross Jr. and Lawrence E. Stager. Dr. Cross is an authority on ancient Middle Eastern languages and scripts. Dr. Stager, an archaeologist, is director of the Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon, a Harvard project.
In the report, the two researchers said the inscriptions “reveal, for the first time, convincing evidence that the early Philistines of Ashkelon were able
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
GGG Ping.
ping for future.
Nice art but nasty human sacrifices. Maybe Matthew Arnold chose the wrong term.
Well, well, well. The NY Slimes shows up to tell all us uneducated rubes that it was really the Philistines who were sophisticated, and the Jews were the boorish slobs who stole land.
Memo to the NY Slimes and the idiot that wrote this drivel - the Torah and the Bible are GOD'S WORD! It is true. No one "slandered" anyone. The Philistines were an evil people.
Also, Israel was a wasteland when the Arabs controlled it.
The Jews have turned the land they control into a lush, beautiful land in just a few years.
The Palestinians, on the other hand.............
There was a worldwide tree-ring event in 1159BC. Is this why the Philistines moved?
The Philistines were much more advanced than the 12 tribes of Israel. They were likely immigrants from Phoenecia that were excellent sailors.
The writer is throwing out a strawman. Nowhere in the Bible does it say the Philistines were 'backward or boorish.'
The account of the first kings of Israel demonstrates clearly that the Philistines had superior weapons technology. All of Israel had to go to the Philistines to get their iron farm implements sharpened. This section also details that ONLY King Saul and his song Jonathan possessed swords.
When David fled to the Philistines for sanctuary from King Saul, he almost certainly stole iron technology from them and transferred it to his Bronze Age bretheren when he became king.
The idea that 'Philistine' meant backward is a construct that developed long after the Biblical account was recorded and does not come from the Bible at all.
they were more refined than the shepherds and farmers in the nearby hills, the Israelites, who slandered them in biblical chapter and verse and rendered their name a synonym for boorish, uncultured people.Not true, IOW, the writer from the Slimes is either ignorant or just a liar. The Philistines were enemies of the Israelites, and portrayed as such, but are also portrayed as urban, and militarily strong. More to the point, the Philistines wouldn't ever have been heard of at all, by anyone, had they not been the not-too-neighborly neighbors.
In Pharaohs and Kings David Rohl suggests (pp 164, 168, and 224) that the king of Gath, a Philistine city, had a Hurrian/Carian name, which is not that farfetched, but the idea that King David ruled in Jerusalem at the same time is incorrect. The Gath reference Rohl cites is found in the Amarna diplomatic correspondence, a time in which Gath was no longer Philistine, the Philistines themselves no longer a going concern and David was long dead.Giving Goliath His Due:The name Goliath, like Achish, is not Semitic, but rather Anatolian (McCarter 1980, 291, Mitchell 1967, 415; Wainwright 1959, 79). Not all agree though; the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (2:524) proposes that Goliath may have been a remnant of one of the aboriginal groups of giants of Palestine who now were in the employ of the Philistines. [1. Naveh (1985, 9, 13 n. 14) states that Ikausu, the name of the king of Ekron in the seventh century b.c., is a non-Semitic name that can be associated with that of the Achish of Gath in David's time. The name in the seventh century has a shin ending that is non-West Semitic.]
New Archaeological Light on the Philistines
chapter 5 "David's Flight"
by Neal Bierling
foreword by Paul L. Maier
old edition at Amazon
CaphtorIf Caphtor is not Cyprus, then the Old Testament completely omits reference to this large island close to the Syrian coast. The phonetics of the name also point to Cyprus. Separately I show that Tarshish was the name of Crete.
by Immanuel Velikovsky
(similar idea expressed in Ages In Chaos on p 201 in footnote)
| Catastrophism ping list | ||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
The two groups of people the Old York Times regularly writes stories about in their defense are gays and Palestinians. Is anyone surprised that they treat possible ancestors of the latter the same way?
SNIP
The idea that 'Philistine' meant backward is a construct that developed long after the Biblical account was recorded and does not come from the Bible at all.
Exactly. The usage the author attributes to the Bible comes from Matthew Arnold (cf. Post 5 above), writing in the 19th century and apparently borrowing it from German slang.
Their name probably came across its current meaning in 1689 in Jena when a minister, in a memorial service for a student killed by angry townspeople, referred to the townsfolk as Philistines (German "Philister"). In 1869 British author Matthew Arnold adopted the German slang word in 'Culture and Anarchy,' "The people who believe most that our greatness and welfare are proved by our being very rich, are just the very people whom we call Philistines." It was Arnold's reference that set the term for English.
btt
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Gods |
Just updating the ping lists info, not sending a general distribution. |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
· Discover · Bronze Age Forum · Science Daily · Science News · Eurekalert · PhysOrg · · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · · History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword · · Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · · |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
