It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who were the Sea Peoples?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...


The earliest mention of the Sea Peoples proper is in an inscription of the Egyptian king Merneptah, whose rule is usually dated from 1213 BC to 1204 BC. Merneptah states that in the fifth year of his reign (1208 BC) he defeated an invasion of an allied force of Libyans and the Sea People, killing 6,000 soldiers and taking 9,000 prisoners.

The abrupt end of several civilizations in the decades traditionally dated around 1200 BC have caused many ancient historians to hypothesize that the Sea People caused the collapse of the Hittite, Mycenaean and Mittani kingdoms. However, Marc Van De Mieroop and others have argued against this theory on several points. Grimal argues that the kingdoms of the Mittani, Assyria, and Babylon were more likely destroyed by a group who dwelled on the edges of the settled lands called by the Akkadian word Habiru. Another argument Grimal makes is that the attempted Sea People invasion of Egypt that Ramses III foiled is now seen as nothing more than a minor skirmish, the records of his victories on his temple walls being greatly exaggerated. Though it is clear from the archeological excavations that Ugarit, Ashkelon and Hazor were destroyed about this time, Carchemish was not and other cities in the area such as Byblos and Sidon survived unscathed.

Another theory concerning the Sea People, based on their recorded names, is that they may have been formed of people involved in the Greek migrations of this period, either the Greek-speaking invaders (identifying the "Ekwesh" with the Achaeans and the "Denyen" with the Dananoi, an ancient name for the Greek people). This theory implies that the Philistines were part of this Greek-speaking confederacy. This theory was recently revived by the archeologist Eberhard Zangger in 2001 (earlier in German) that the Sea Peoples were the early semi-literate city states of the Greek Mycenaean civilisations, who destroyed each other in a disastrous series of conflicts lasting several decades. There would have been few or no external invaders and just a few excursions outside the Greek speaking part of the Aegean civilization. The city states were semi-literate in the sense that very few individuals could master the complex Syllabary used to write in Linear B and other written forms of the early Greek language, and thus relatively few documents were produced in daily life to bear witness to the fratricidal nature of the wars. In contrast, the completely alphabetic writing system which started to appear with the rise of Ancient Greece around 800 BC was relatively easy to learn and use, thus giving rise to the production of documents, fiction and non fiction in vast quantities.


in one of my classes, my professor and classmates have been discussing about the identity of the Sea People and the theories as to who they belong to. so far we had no luck so i thought maybe somebody here may know somthing about the Sea Peoples.




posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   
you sure they wern't atlanteans?



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Are you talking about the ancient contient of Mu? I think that is the contient that was next to south america millions of years ago.


-Aza



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 09:23 PM
link   
They seem to be a loose confederacy of tribes that lived on or near the shores of the Mediterranean/Agean seas... including the Palestinians (Philistines.)
www.courses.psu.edu...

The inscriptions at Medinet Habu provide a number of clues, including the ship bows shaped like the heads of birds. This was apparently common in the Agean.

Here's one of the more popular papers on the subject. You might like to hand it to your prof:
www.sas.upenn.edu...



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azathoth
Are you talking about the ancient contient of Mu? I think that is the contient that was next to south america millions of years ago.

He's not talking about Mu or Atlantis or anything like that. At the end of hte bronze age,(not millions of years ago, but even then there was no continent of Mu, Atlantis, Lemuria or Pan) there were hordes of barbaric peoples that stormed the levant and egypt and parts of whats Turkey. No one knew what to call them, but they came from the sea, like vikings, hence, they were the sea peoples.

Personally, I like the idea that they were from Sardinia and Sicily and other mediteranean islands, and that they were taking advantage of the "End Bronze Age Systems Collapse" (or perhaps, but less likely, causing it).

There is also the idea that there were groups of peoples that had figured out how to make good iron weapons, and that this is why they were able to defeat large, advanced, but still Bronze Weilding (and chariot based) armies, with lightly armed 'skrimishing' steel armed infantry.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 01:11 AM
link   
There was a really interesting show on the Sea people [pertaining to them and the end of the Greek, Minoan, and demise of the Egyptian civilizations.] on the History channel that they replay occasionally. Correct me if im wrong but wasnt the Greek dark age right after the invasion of the Seapeople. I think they also mentioned that they were probably from modern day Turkey and the east Mediteranean. They Had a lot of interesting stuff on the show, i dont remember a lot of it because it was a while ago but i remember that the Minoan civilization colapsed around the invasion of the seapeople, and that the Minoans were coastal people who as the invasion continued, they all retreated to the mountians and built large fortified cities on the hills of Crete. Also that the Egyptians, who were very prosperous before the invasion, barely defeated the Seapeople and were perminantly crippled after the attacks. Also i think the Sea People settled northern Egypt [where they were successful in their invasion] and eventually intermaried with the Egyptians and eventially became history.

they also mentioned that the reasons for the Sea Peoples success was that htey were a light, mobile army consisting of mostly lightly armored spearmen [not phalanx type infantry from greek] and they didnt have huge swarms of chariots like the egyptians and greeks [posible reason why egyptians were successful in defense vs sea peoples] Ill try to find the name of the show. Pretty interesting stuff.

-Lawler



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
external image

This is the book that details one of the theories as to who these seapeoples (and others) were.
Here is a review of it.

Here is someone's summary of it.

Here is an abstract that looks at the end of the bronze age as being primarily due to ecological factors.

Also, this is a neat little bibliography of the topic.



A depiction of one of the seapeople from medinet-habu.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Jesus Christ Nygdan thats one of my books for the class, which it dam cost me big time, about 7 books in total for that class, all of them the requirements. in anicase its a good book and it provides insight about the Sea Peoples but not much.



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   
As a side note I might add that in Saudi-arabia we find the district of Yam (ym), and ym is also the word for the sea.

This could mean that Egypt was under attack on two fronts...

or the mysterious sea people settled and funded the district Yam and that is why its name is the same as that of the sea.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghaele
As a side note I might add that in Saudi-arabia we find the district of Yam (ym), and ym is also the word for the sea.

This could mean that Egypt was under attack on two fronts...

or the mysterious sea people settled and funded the district Yam and that is why its name is the same as that of the sea.

Interesting idea, and not completely implausible. Egypt was a target for conquest a number of different times -- all it took was one moderately weak pharoah on the throne and the rest of the empires came down on it like wolves on a downed elk.

I know this wasn't my question, but thanks everyone for the links and research. That's why I love this place!



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
which it dam cost me big time

? Really? And when you return it at the end of the year they give you like 2 bucks or a fiver for it too, 'sannoying right?

in anicase its a good book and it provides insight about the Sea Peoples but not much.

It groups them into the bigger context of the entire collapse tho. So when he is talking about the Shardanans, etc, he 'might as well' be talking about the sea peoples.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
[? Really? And when you return it at the end of the year they give you like 2 bucks or a fiver for it too, 'sannoying right?


thats true, i was afraid they might not buy it back. mostly i hate wen buying like a 70-100 dollar books and they wont buy it back because of a new edition. probably add a couple of new pics or words just to have a new book and make money.



posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Pick up a copy of THE DESTRUCTION OF ATLANTIS & SURVIVORS OF ATLANTIS by Frank Jospeh. If you consider the Atlantean destruction as occuring near the 900 BCE time period, you can easily see that the "Sea People" were in fact Atlanteans escaping the final destruction and the Deluge that destroyed their home in the world-wide cataclysm caused by the proto-Encke-Oljato comet as it passes the earth and hurled down 'fire from the heavens'.

I've posted some exerpts on another site as well as my own ideas and will post the same here.

In the interest of solving the mysterious origins of Atlantis Frank Joseph has compiled "Compelling Evidence of the Sudden Fall of the Legendary Civilization". This is a MUST-READ for any Atlantis researcher!!!! It's the most thought-provoking and intelligent compilation of evidence from around the world. He utilizes geological, climatology, linguistics, paleo-ecology, archaeology, and mythology to form a solid, believable account of the lost continent. I was so enthralled by the evidence he presents that I must share it with you all.

According to Joseph, the world was bombarded by the Encke-Oljato proto comet, which would have been large enough to see with the naked eye as it grew close to the earth. Beginning in 3000 BCE this comet would have begun to wreck havoc on the earth with debris as it made several passes by the earth and sun. This comet bombarded everything from above the Equator to the Arctic Circle and would have triggered geological disturbances worldwide as it passed by the earth and fired down 'fire from the heavens". Many cities were left incinerated including, the capital city of the Hittite empire, Hattusas, the Palestianian commercial centers, Syrian fortresses. "Passing over the Carribean, it fired down an object 1 mile across. The asteroid plunged into the Atlantic at 100 times the velocity of a 9 mm bullet, and exploded with the force of one megaton explosion. It left a 900' deep crater on the seafloor resulting in a 1000' tall wall of water that swept as far inland as Alabama, killing everything." Conflagrations would have poured over the entire world from the geological havoc this comet wrecked on our unexpecting ancestors. He states this as being the reason for the "Dark Ages" immediately following the Bronze Age. Leaving only a small amount of survivors to record the event in what we call the myth of Atlantis. BUT, 3 pieces of evidence of this celestial fire still exist today. There's a 20 ton meteroite in the New York City Museum and one in Copenhagen, Denmark. "Both originally belonged to a 200 ton nickel-iron object that fell onto Cape York off the Northwest coast of Greenland sometime around 1000 BCE." The comet would have been visible night and day. The other evidence is the 'foremost archaeological parks in North America." The Great Serpent Mound sits atop it. "Within a four mile diameter circle, the bedrock has enormous cracks. Some forced steeply up, while others were forced downward." It's been argued that this was a normal event but according to Kenneth Caroli (I think he's a geologist consulted for this book) "Only an impact from an object approximately 200' diameter, traveling around 45,000 MPH could produce cracks and blocks similar to features found in Arizona's Meteor Crater."

This is just a brief exerpt. He goes on to link every culture's myths to historical and geological evidence in such a manner that it would make the skeptic wonder. My notes from the book are pages long! Joseph takes a hard long look at worldwide legends and fits them perfectly to the story of Atlantis. It's astounding the way he puts the evidence into context and paints a clear picture of what happened to the lost land of Atlantis.

The companion book, SURVIVORS OF ATLANTIS puts into perspective all the myths and ancient texts in relation to the island empire by seperating allegory and metaphor from actual history. He also links the world-wide cultures in such a way that makes one really think long and hard about the story of Atlantis. He also believes that the Atlanteans mined greats amounts of copper from the Lake Surperior region to produce Bronze (which could be considered orichalcum due to its reddish glow)& (something recently confirmed is the fact that tons of Copper is missing from this region), therefore creating and cornering the market on the Bronze Age until it abruptly ended with a "Dark Ages" period sometime around 1000 BCE.

Although his time frame is nearer to the 900 BCE date, he rationally explains the way it could have been misdated as well as the exorbiant size told by Plato. He believes that Plato could have confused aroura, "side" with stadia since the Egyptians employed many units of measurement for various purposes, which would make the size of Atlantis a little more believable in the real world. An 'aroura' is equal to 150 feet, or 1/4 a stadis. "When the aroura is substituted for stadia, Atlantis instantly downsizes from overblown fantasy to proportions entirely commensurate with the late Bronze Age cities of Mycenae and Troy." But it is still an impressive size. He also states that if Atlantis was west of Tartessos (S. Spain) it would have sat on the tail end of the Oceanographic Fracture Zone (fault line of Eurasian and African techtonic plates). When severely disturbed, it would have "blown its top" right near Atlantis.

Size of Atlantis using arouras instead of stadia:
Citadel : 13 Square acres. Circumference of its orichalcum-plated walss was 10,000 feet, covering a 160,000 square foot area. Elevation of walls was about 90' above the inner canal's waterline (110' above canal bed).
Docks under citadel were 263.8 by 208.3 feet. Ships were roughly 60' with 10-15 ' beams, with masts of about 20-35' high. Walls of central part of citadel probably about 30- high by 10-20' thick. Watchtowers were at 100' intervals (a good interval for protecting a city) Bridges around 10- wide and 60' long "were sufficiently high and spaced enough for a ship to go under". Temple of Posidon- 150' long by 75' across and of "proportionate height". Innermost Canal moat beyond citadel, 75' wide and 20' deep. Tin walled ring-island 750' across. Bronze walled ring-island 300' wide, with a 9,375' circumference surrounded by bronze wall. Racetrack ring-island 450' wide with a 4,687'in circumference. Sea Canal was 8,100' long. "Altogether, the area of the Atlantean capital city within the outer wall was approximately 5,080 square acres. The plain stretched for 4,830 square miles. Mt. Atlas comprised 6,000 square miles. This is so much more believable in reference to the technology available at the time and really puts it the island into a credible size with its counterparts. The map of the Atlantean Empire provided also puts into perspective the 'size' of the empire or the territories it controlled.

Again, a MUST READ for any serious researcher of the Atlantean Saga. From the north and south poles, he has really, IMHO, nailed it!



posted on Jul, 17 2005 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by alawler
Correct me if im wrong but wasnt the Greek dark age right after the invasion of the Seapeople. I think they also mentioned that they were probably from modern day Turkey and the east Mediteranean.

As far as my own historical research goes, you're correct. The Greek Dark Ages began shortly after the Trojan War (Yes, there *is* archeological evidence that the city of Troy did exist & suffered from a prolonged war), in which Greeks were replacing trade & commerce with pillage & plunder. Due to this, the displaced tribes & villages became the Sea People, which scattered pretty much over the whole Mediterranean area.

As Greek production decreased & use of plunder increased, this led to their Dark Ages...Much knowledge was lost to barbarism, even to the point where most people even forgot how to read the Greek written language that existed before the Dark Ages.



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Azathoth
Are you talking about the ancient contient of Mu? I think that is the contient that was next to south america millions of years ago.


-Aza


I think ancient contient of Mu is near the Australia and New Zealand, the big statuary on paschal island maybe the relic of the ancient contient of Mu, or the people imitate



posted on Jul, 18 2005 @ 01:19 PM
link   
~~

those are all good answers & research areas,
but here's a oddball? theory...the sea peoples were peoples situated somewheres around
in the area of the Greeks, Agean and maybe up to the Bosphorus area....

remember the famous Helen of Troy...the "Face That Launched 1000 Ships", fame-infamy....
check out this link: www.parowanprophet.com...

you can extract the mythic tale that Helen and her ilk, are from the tribe of Dan who, earlier broke away from the 12 Israelite tribes, and created a strong enclave w/ marine power, etc etc...
the sea people
-> [this ain't your regular history & anthropology model, but a few know of this story/rendition of history]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
st Udio

I like the line of thinking but for Dan

I believe the sea peoples floated in about the same time of the exodus.
This means that somewhere else there was an advanced group of people to launch this flotila.

I go with the Genesis 10 part where it says 'by these were the coastlands settled'.
Some we can track to known areas...others we can only go so far or just guess.
I take that verse to mean all the coastlands. Just like the vikings...where there was water to explore, they explored it



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 06:38 AM
link   
Nobody has posted an opinion that the Sea Peoples were Semitic. There were prominent Semitic colonies in Carthage and Phoenixia going way back in the B.C. period. Inscriptions identified as Semitic by Barry Fell in 1970 have been found in the stone ruins at Salem, New Hampshire. Similar inscriptions have been found on a stone in Los Lunas, New Mexico. The ancient Semitic people go back even farther in time than the Minoans in the Mediterranean areas.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Trying to put together the stories of Troy and "Helen," and the Great Flood, I think "hHelen" was symbollically a name for the Hellenic, or early Greek people, who thought of their own culture as more attractive than the other cultures in their area. Troy was probably a lttle inland and may have "moved" as the Flood waters gradually froze in the polar regions and the water gradually receded in the coastal areas. Witness the fact that Athens and Rome both had seaports a few miles away from the cities proper.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by michaelanteski
Nobody has posted an opinion that the Sea Peoples were Semitic. There were prominent Semitic colonies in Carthage and Phoenixia going way back in the B.C. period.

The phonecians were a semitic peoples. Carthage was a colony that they found. The Sea Peoples are from before the settling of carthage tho. Also, there doesn't seem to be any indication that semites invaded greece and turkey and the like, where there was also lots of devastation, whereas the depictions of the sea people's seems in accord with some ideas on them being at least 'greek-like', ie arms and armour, etc. Also, I think that there is an idea that the philistines are connected with the sea peoples, and are also outside invaders. Tho this seems at odds with the hebrew accounts of the philistine's being native to the region (or at least there before them).


Inscriptions identified as Semitic by Barry Fell in 1970 have been found in the stone ruins at Salem, New Hampshire. Similar inscriptions have been found on a stone in Los Lunas, New Mexico.

These are not definitly semitic, there's an idea that they were carved by phonecians, tho people seem to be putting everyone in the world in america before columbus, vikings (newfoundland, sure, but wisconsin?), romans, africans, egyptians, etc. The evidence seems to indicate fraud and error in most cases.


The ancient Semitic people go back even farther in time than the Minoans in the Mediterranean areas.

Based on what? I'd think that they'd be roughly contemporary no? I mean, we're talking about some really ancient time spans here.


I think "hHelen" was symbollically a name for the Hellenic, or early Greek people

The greeks apparently called themselves Hellenes because they were the ones trying to get helen back.

Troy was probably a lttle inland and may have "moved" as the Flood waters gradually froze in the polar regions and the water gradually receded in the coastal areas

There was no flooding at the time under consideration, and of course there never was a Great Biblical Flood anyway.

Witness the fact that Athens and Rome both had seaports a few miles away from the cities proper

Rome's port was the city of ostia. Rome was an inland town in the near center of the boot. They didnt' have any port, so they used Ostia as theirs. The same with athens. The cities weren't founded close to the coasts. Coastlines are dangerous, because of 'pirates' like the sea peoples.

[edit on 21-7-2005 by Nygdan]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join