The Philistines
I. Introduction
In 1914 R.A. Stewart Macalister wrote the following words,
If we had any clear idea of what the word 'Philistine' meant, or to what language it originally belonged, it might throw such definite light upon the beginnings of the Philistine people that further investigation would be unnecessary. The answer to this question is, however, a mere matter of guess-work.(1)
And over the next ninety-five years not much has changed and their origin is still debated but some scholars lean towards their being part of the Sea Peoples who terrorized the eastern Mediterranean coastlines. (2) Or their origins came from the Mycenean area, possibly Crete or other nearby islands.(3)
I have a hard time accepting the Sea People theory simply because there is such little proof of their involvement, with these people as their realm of influence remained quote small; five cities in the western part of modern Israel.
Of course with the unknown that surrounds these people, there is always controversy as K.A. Kitchen reports in His book, On The Reliability of the Old Testament, Israel Finkelstein’s attempts to drastically down date the 12th-10th centuries B.C. and compact them into the 9th or the time of Omri(4)
This bad attempt at rewriting history carries a Finkelstein trademark, no proof. He has to invent another migration to make his theory work. The problem is that the ancient texts are silent on such an event. (5)
This is the problem with dealing with a group of people whose major influence on the Levant, and surrounding area, lasted, in comparison to the scope of history, a very short time. Possibly only a few hundred years at best.
This brief emergence on to the world stage does not allow the Philistines to leave any lasting evidence of who they were, where they came from and where they went; for they disappeared as quietly and quickly as they came.
They did not have the luxury that the Egyptians had, where they were able to enjoy longevity in one place and remain independent of other nations, building monuments, leaving inscriptions and memorials detailing their exploits or history. In fact we have virtually next to nothing when it comes to their original tongue.
For instance, relatively little is known about the original Philistine language except that, upon arriving in Canaan, it seems they quickly adopted the Semitic language of the area while retaining words from their original Indo-European tongue, including personal names. In November 2005, a small pottery shard bearing an inscription containing two names linguistically resembling "Goliath" was found in the ruins of Gath. There is no evidence that it refers to the biblical Goliath, but it confirms the general historicity of the story in I Samuel 17.(6)
With such little information there is little to do but return to what Dr. Macalister said and rely on ‘guess work’. Yes we have archaeological discoveries that are fleshing out the culture of the Philistines:
The artifacts being dug up from the ruins of Philistine cities reveal that Philistine culture was as advanced as their weaponry. Their art was refined, being heavily influenced by typically Mycenaean motifs with Egyptian and later Canaanite styles added to their repertoire. While its roof may not have been redundantly supported (see Judges 16:23-30), their Temple of Dagon in Gaza—similar in design to Cretan architecture—supported about three thousand people on its roof, making it an imposing edifice. The evidence found in the tells of the Pentapolis bears out that, for the time, the Philistines built large, planned cities complete with fortresses, palaces, temples, and markets, all of which were surrounded by thirteen-feet-thick walls.(7)
Unfortunately, none of this sheds any light as to their origins, or their original language, it just tells us how they lived in their adopted land. This paper is going to focus on several aspects of these people, the controversial Biblical inclusions, their origins, and their disappearance.
The last is quite interesting as their exit from history was far quieter than their assumed appearance in the Promised Land. There is no smoking gun on this issue or people. There are no hidden pieces of evidence that can be pulled out which answers all the questions asked about these people.
Thus this paper will try to illuminate the controversies, provide a different perspective on some of the important issues and take a look at why they went out so meekly from the historical record and international scene.
It is not going to be a definitive treatise on these people, given the amount of space and time allotted for this work combined with the fact that new revealing research is lacking. With no new discoveries, the author is left to re-examine the old evidence and put a fresh set of eyes on the mystery surrounding the Philistines.
The order in which I will look at the Philistine people will be the controversial encounters will be dealt with first, as chronologically they are far more important than the origins at this point in time. Second, will be a look at their origins including the Biblical passages which provide a clear statement as to their original lands.
Finally, this paper will deal with their disappearance, for having gone out quietly, in contrast to their war like reputation and not fighting to the last man, their exit deserves examination to see why such a tough people would leave without a sound.
II. Biblical Controversy
The Bible mentions the Philistines many times, with the most familiar passages coming from the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel and so on. Very few of these passages of scripture cause any concern as the Philistine people are well attested archaeology for this time period:
A new document from Calah (Nimrud), sheds considerable light on the background of the early Assyrian relations with Philistia. It is a letter from an Assyrian official stationed near Tyre, perhaps at Simirra, to Tiglath-pileser, stating that he had sent orders to the people of Sidon not to trade with the Egyptians and the Philistines(8)
This letter being but one piece of the myriad of evidence that has been discovered in Palestine concerning the Philistine people for their existence in Canaan. There are excavations that have uncovered their cities and more is learnt about them every day but little is learned about their origins. I will address different controversial issues separately and not in any particular order.
A. Philistine Mercenaries.
There is one theory out there that the original philistines arrived in Egypt as mercenaries to work as soldiers of fortune, much like professional soldiers do today. Their country is at peace but they cannot live life in that manner and need to fight so they immigrate to other countries selling off their talents to the highest bidder.
This has led Prof. Dothan to conclude that the people buried at Deir el-Balach were probably non-Egyptians employed as mercenaries, and under heavy Egyptian cultural influence.
This theory is consistent with the increasingly well-supported view that the Philistines originally came to Palestine as Egyptian mercenaries. According to this view, when Egyptian power waned, other Philistines joined the mercenaries to occupy the five coastal cities comprising the Philistine pentapolis.(9)
The problem with this thinking is that no self-respecting citizen has ever followed a soldier of fortune to another country. Nor has any large group of people done the same. Most abhor the attitude of these men and do not want to associate themselves with such uncivilized behavior or character.
Soldiers of fortune are usually independent people who are looked upon as having a problem, they are usually outcasts of regular society and not looked upon:
The tendency to revile mercenaries as ‘the dogs of war’ is an ancient one. Sir Walter Ralegh wrote 400 years ago that they were ‘Seditious unfaithful disobedient destroyers of all places and countries whither they are drawn as being held by no other bond than their own commodity’.(10)
And,
Many soldiers of fortune were political or religious exiles. The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes forced Huguenots to leave France in their thousands, and many of them took service in the armies of the states they fled to(11)
Thus the above theory by Dr. Dothen and others just does not hold any merit, which means that the Philistines that Abraham encountered were not ruthless men seeking a war where it may be found but actual leaders of an army who served their king who ruled a people long established in the land.
B. The Philistines as Many People
Mr. David M. Howard writes in his article, Philistines and Israel, that because the Bible tells us that the Philistine are a descendent people from Ham and not from Japheth that these people are ‘not a product of a single group but a combination of many different people.(12). His words:
Genesis 10 links the Philistines with various Hamitic peoples, including Canaanites (10:6-20), and not the Indo-European sons of Japheth from the coastlands or islands (10:2-5). This suggests that the "Philistines" not a single group with a single origin or living only in one sort period of time in southwestern Canaan. They appear rather to have been an amalgamation of several different peoples, and the Philistines descended from the Casluhites would thus have been different from those who came from Caphtor. This fits with the current picture of the Philistines being revealed by archaeological discoveries.13
The problem with this thinking is that the Bible gives NO such indication that the Philistines were anything BUT a single entity. All the references to these people regard them as a whole, one nation. Amos 9:7 has God referring to them as ‘the Philistines from Caphtor’. There is nothing here that allows one to speculate that they were an amalgamation of different people from different nations.
Also, I know of no archaeological evidence that supports such a claim made by Mr. Howard nor does he provide any examples to back up his ideas. He simply makes a generic, unsubstantiated statement and then leaves it at that.
We have no Philistine writings, no books, no manuscripts, no monuments nothing so there is no written record available which would provide any evidence for Mr. Howard’s or others assertion that the Philistines were of different peoples. In fact, in the same article Mr. Howard defeats his own point by relating some archaeological discoveries yet none point to any influences from different cultures which would be necessary for this theory to work.
A few Philistine temples have now been excavated, which have several distinctive features setting them off from Canaanite temples. The Philistines had soothsayers and diviners, like most peoples around them (Isa 2:6; cf. 2 Kgs 1:2).
Many discoveries have been made of Philistine cultic apparatus that give glimpses into some Philistine religious practices. These include various types of ceramic cups, rings, and figurines. Even their burial coffins reflected some sort of religious awareness. Many Philistines were buried in "anthropoid clay coffins," which were similar to large storage jars, into which bodies were placed. The top third or half of the coffin was cut away so that the body could be inserted and the top replaced. Over the face a rough and somewhat grotesque likeness of the deceased was molded in the clay (see Howard, "Philistines," 246-49 and references there for more on Philistine religious customs).(14)
This lack of influence provides more proof that the Philistines were their own people, a single entity, with their own cultural practices separate from other nations. Since we lack information concerning their origin, we also lack any archaeological evidence supporting this theory as an earlier act, and that this different culture matured prior to the arrival of the Philistines in Canaan.
C. The Genesis Philistines Were Not Real Philistines
This theory is recorded by Dr. Bryant Wood in his article, The Genesis Philistines, and he summarizes it down to the idea that the Philistines Abraham and Isaac met were “are all anachronisms”, that is, material that is chronologically out of place”(15)
The problem with this thinking is that it ignores the fact of immigration. All over the modern world, we have pockets of people in different lands who are not native. They have migrated, individually or in groups, from their own lands for a various number of reasons: employment, marriage, hardship, persecution, seeking a better life, and so on. None were done by invasion or violent means and would merely be recorded as a matter-of-fact move by governmental records.
After 3,000 years those records would be lost, if any were kept at all as the ancient world may not have had strict immigration laws which aliens had to meet, and nothing official would remain to validate the unofficial native records discovered which talked about interacting with people from other nations.
Would those records be considered falsified or out of place? Possibly, but such conclusions do not over-rule the reality of life or what took place. In trying to look back over time, it is difficult to know what really happened because information is lost, destroyed, or not recorded or the ground is just silent:
“How unreliable such ‘gaps’ in the record canbe may also be illustrated at a biblical site across the Jordon in the land of Moab. One of the most famous towns of ancient Moab was Dibon…where the renowned inscription of King Mesha of Moab was found over a century ago. Excavations at Dhiban produced definite traces of the early bronze age township, then practically nothing for the entire 2nd millennium. From the first millennium parts of the citadel of the dynasty of Mesha was unearthed, plus remains of later epochs. Now from such a gap for the late Bronze age, the unwary might be led to conclude that biblical mentions of Dibon no later than the 13th century BC….were in fact errors or anachronisms. But they would be mistaken. Because, in that very period, the pharaoh Ramesses II conquered Dibon a few decades before the Israelites reached it, and celebrated his victory in sculpted reliefs in his temple at Luxor in Upper Egypt. Thus, Dibon certainly existed in the late Bronze Age according to first hand inscriptional evidence, evidence which supplements and corrects the quite inadequate results obtained from digging at Dibon itself.” (16)
Archaeological evidence is not a true measure of the past’s activities and due to its incompleteness, which is then coupled with the ignorant speculation and assumptions made by modern archaeologists, the modern person is given a very distorted and biased view of history.
There is no archaeological record which clearly states that immigration did not take place in the ancient world, we know it did even if we simply use Abraham as an example. Such movements would not be recorded on monuments, or temple walls, nor made with such fanfare that scribes would record them in the most important annals of the times, they would take place quietly with only a few with knowledge of its happening.
It is quite possible that the Philistines quietly moved into the area and established themselves and developed like a normal group of immigrants would do naturally.
D. The Philistine Attitude
Another theory that is being used to say that the Genesis Philistines are not the same people as later renditions is the difference between the descriptive characters of both sets of people.
“we have to consider the possibility that the various Old Testament references to Philistines do not in fact refer to the same ethnic group. There are numerous important differences between the group mentioned in the Genesis accounts, and those mentioned in Judges/Samuel. The Genesis group are friendly, largely well-disposed to Abraham and his household, and for the most part have Semitic names(particularly Abimelech and Ahuzzath, though Phicol is of uncertain derivation). The main city they are mentioned as inhabiting is Gerar. The later group are warlike, hostile and expansionist, and have Hurrian names. Gerar is within their sphere of influence, though a little to the south-east, but the main cities are (from north to south) Ekron, Ashdod, Gath, Ashkelon, and Gaza(17)
This theory is weak at all points, for it ignores so much and imposes assumptions without any fact at all. First off it assumes that only ‘friendly’ people make treaties. We know from history and the modern world that that is not so and because a group of people makes a treat doesn’t mean that they have changed their personalities.
A warlike nation can be friendly to some and remain warlike to others. We have too many modern examples to dispel this idea as the cold war alone showed how warlike people remain enemies with some nations while befriending others.
The idea that the early group was not the latter simply because they seem to maintain different outlooks on life and people are further dispelled by the example of the American nation. It is clear that the people of the 17th, 18th centuries America are different from their 20th and 21st century counterparts yet all would be considered American and neither would be attributed to being people from a different nation of people.
As for the discrepancy between cities, the author of that piece forgets that nations grow, they abandon previous cities to meet their needs or find better protection. We would not have the field of archaeology if nations maintained each and every city from their inception. The authors of this theory rely on very limited thinking when it comes to trying to disprove the Bible.
To use America as an example once again, their first permanent settlement was named Jamestown and it was an important city in the days of the first settlers into the colonial period until the capital was moved to Williamsburg. (18) It then declined and disappeared from history, only to remain today as a park.
Of the 17th-century settlement, only the old church tower (built c.1639) and a few gravestones were visible when National Park Service excavations began in 1934. Today, most of Jamestown Island is owned by the U.S. government and is included in Colonial National Historical Park(19)
Thus to say that the Genesis Philistines are not the same as the Judges, Joshua, etc., people is ridiculous and shows a very blatant attempt to re-write history to fit one’s biased views and unbelief. The reasons given in the quoted passages do not hold up and are another weak attempt to distort the past and change the reality.
We also need to make note that with the lack of written records from the Philistines themselves and a lack of external recordings of their movements it is not right to say that these people are different and that it is correct to say that the Bible has it right, they are all the same Philistine people.
III. Origin
Much is said concerning the origins of the Philistines yet little is new material and certainly no new evidence has been discovered since Dr. Macalister wrote the words quoted in the Introduction of this paper. The scholarly world is not in agreement pertaining to the original land of these people.
Scholars are divided concerning the location of Caphtor. The most probable location is the island of Crete, together with the nearby Aegean isles. The Septuagint, however, reads Cappadocia, a province in eastern Asia Minor, instead of Caphtor (Deut. 2:23; Amos 9:7). The Caphtorim (Gen. 10:14; Deut. 2:23; 1 Chr. 1:12) were people who came from Caphtor(20)
No one seems to have any idea where the Philistines originated nor do they have any idea where and what is Caphtor. The latter alone has caused some debate and it merits being mentioned here.
A. What and Where is Caphtor
Dr. Macalister in his 1914 book discusses the possibility that Caphtor could mean ‘sea coast’ and does not refer to a nation or land mass. He writes;
The connexion of the Philistines with a place called Caphtor is definitely stated in Amos ix. 7: 'Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?' It is repeated in Jeremiah xlvii. 4, where the Philistines are referred to as 'the remnant of the ̕ī of Caphtor'. The word ̕ī is rendered in the Revised Version 'island', with marginal rendering 'sea coast': this alternative well expresses the ambiguity in the meaning of the word, which does not permit us to assume that Caphtor, as indicated by Jeremiah, was necessarily one of the islands of the sea. Indeed, even if the word definitely meant 'island', its use here would not be altogether conclusive on this point: an isolated headland might long pass for an island among primitive navigators, and therefore such a casual mention need not limit our search for Caphtor to an actual island.(21)
Yet his theory and translation of the word Caphtor can be discounted because of the other pieces of evidence which support the idea that Caphtor mentioned in the Bible is a geographical area;
An Egyptian inscription of the most recent period has been found, however, which, copying an earlier geographical list, enumerates "K(a)ptar" among Asiatic nations, insuring thus the correctness of the Hebrew tradition as against the versions(22)
And Kitchen agrees with the latter’s conclusion when he writes:
Caphtor is ancient Kaptara, well attested from the early second millennium, when the Mari archives actually mention a king of Hazar sending gifts to Kaptara. (23)
Thus Macalister’s theory would only be useful if it were applied to the sea coasts of an island and would remain consistent with the idea that Caphtor was modern Crete. There is no evidence, at this time, to suggest that Caphtor is referring to a mainland area as it is commonly accepted that Caphtor refers to an island.
B The Philistines and Cyprus
Another location for the source of the Philistine people is the island of Cyprus, it would fit some of the Biblical references, it is an island and it has a sea coast but like these pieces of evidence, other proofs are just circumstantial.
If you really want to know about Philistine origins, come to Cyprus. Not that the Philistines originated here, but here the evidence seems clearest.(24)
Here we have a statement but no details. The author refers to the evidence for a Cyprus origin but for some reason fails to provide any to support his contention. The next quote goes a bit further:
Cyprus is named as the homeland of the Philistines especially in recent literature. J. Strange points out that both Cyprus and the Philistines were familiar with metallurgy at a high level and that pottery from Cyprus strongly resembles pottery from Philistia (Mycenaean III C:1b). It is furthermore known from literary references that Cyprus, like Crete, was inhabited in the 13th and 12th centuries B.C. by a variety of
Peoples.9 However, the many different names given to the island in the various cultures of that time make it very difficult to identify Cyprus as Caphtor.10
V. Karageorghis adds to the arguments in favour of Cyprus the evidence from excavations on the island (near Pyla and Maa): a mixed population (from Crete, Greece and Anatolia) appears to have lived here in fortified villages during 25 years. The inhabitants were wealthy, but clearly preferred a defendable place over a location that favoured trade and agriculture. After these 25 years both places were abandoned or burnt down. Maa was rebuilt by the conquerors who also manufactured type Myc. III C:1b pottery.11 Karageorghis moreover refers to Cypriotic myths about Greek heroes who founded cities on the island.12 Finally, Raban and Stieglitz showed that the architecture on the island was comparable with that of Philistia as far as the use of ashlars (large building blocks) was concerned.
Another argument in favour of Cyprus is a definite resemblance between Philistine and Cypriotic - Minoic writings from that period.13
The presence, though perhaps temporary, of Philistines in Cyprus or Crete is given wider perspective if the contemporary events in this part of the Mediterranean are also taken into consideration. Literary references and excavations from the Late Bronze period only demonstrate the great importance of such a widened perspective.(25)
The problem with this idea is that all the evidence is circumstantial and means that any group of people could have achieved such advances in civilization. There is nothing here that excludes all others save for the Philistines.
It also fails because there is no recorded catastrophe in ancient annals that require God to save the Philistine people taking place on the island of Cyprus, especially on the grand scale of Santorini on Thera with the Minoans.
Even the pottery record is inconclusive and does not help but confuses the issue. (26)
C. The Sea People
This is a group of people who invaded the Levant and were so ferocious that they were able to bring the demise to different empires yet were never so strong that they could establish their own in replacement and remain known for millennia. In fact as little is known about the Sea People as the Philistines except with the Philistines we have a place of origin.
Surprisingly for such a pivotal moment in world history, the events which took place at that time are not well understood and are widely debated. Many theories have been advanced to explain these times, and their participants have been declared to come from Anatolia, or the Aegean, or even Atlantis. We will consider the various theories, as well as a new composite view which does not appear to have been considered previously.(27)
The Philistines are often included in this group
Finally, of course, the Peleset eventually became the Philistines and gave their name to Palestine, but they too probably originated somewhere in Anatolia(28)
But the problem is we have no ancient records confirming this idea or theory, at best it is speculation that makes them a part of these invaders. Their participation does not answer the questions that arise concerning the results obtained by the invasion;
‘If they invaded with such force, why did they only remain in 5 cities in a small area?’ ‘Why were their people not known in the records of other nation’s texts?’ ‘Why was their influence on culture and other areas of life so limited?’
Such questions are but a sample of the myriad of illogical explanations that permeate the discussion on the origins of the Philistines. Invasion is not usually the method that God uses to preserve a people, usually, when someone is saved they are provided humble refuge and given another chance to live right not to be warlike and slaughter innocent people along the way to re-development.
We must be content with the Biblical statement that the Philistines originated in Caphtor, and in the words of Dr. Charles Pellegrino,
“ Jeremiah, who lived in about 620 BC, defined the Philistines as a remnant from the coasts of Crete…”(29)
Knowing their point of origination has no bearing on the believer’s life and salvation and they must rely on God’s word, for as it was once said, ‘when the books of the Bible were written, the people of the time knew who, where and what the ancient names were and referred to and did not need to question or research to find their locations’ (30)
IV. Disappearance
There seems to be conflicting ideas amongst scholars about the demise and disappearance of the Philistine people. If one looks at the biblical record we find that as the Israelite kingdoms went on, the Philistines were mentioned less and less until they were no more, quietly going out in direct contrast to their emergence.
What happened to these people? Where did they go? To address these questions three options will be discussed.
A. The Assyrian Conflict
To return to 1914 we read in Dr. Macalister’s book that the Philistines did not go quietly but fought to the bitter end. He states:
At this point we glean some welcome details of history from the annals of the Assyrian kings. Hadad-Nirari III (812-788) enumerates the Philistines among the Palestinian states conquered by him about 808 B. C., but miters into no particulars… The next king, Sennacherib (705-681), had trouble with the remnant of the Philistines. Mitinti's son Rukipti had been succeeded by his son Sarludâri, bat it seems as though this rater had been deposed, and a person called Zidka reigned in his stead. Sennacherib found conspiracy in Zidka, and brought the gods of his father's house, himself, and his family into exile to Assyria, restoring Sarludgri to his former throne, while of course retaining the suzerainty. In this operation he took the cities of Beth-Dagon, Joppa, Bene-Berak, and Azuri, which belonged to Zidka… At the same time the Ekronites had revolted against the Assyrian, Their king, Padi, had remained a loyal vassal to his overlord, but his turbulent subjects had put him in fetters and sent him to Hezekiah, king of Judah, who cast him into prison. The Ekronites summoned assistance from North Arabia and Egypt, and met Sennacherib in EL-Tekeh. Here they were defeated, and Sennacherib marched against Ekron, slaying and impaling the chief officers,(31)
So according to Macalister, the Philistines were a proud lot who rebelled quite often down through the centuries until they were completely gone. One has a hard time accepting this theory because Macalister at another point, claims that the scribes of Sargon said that the people they fought were Hittites but Macalister claims they are Philistines.(32)
He offers no textual or monumental evidence to support this change of history and does not provide even a weak source to back his claims. He does provide enough material to support his claim that the Philistinian people were not completely exterminated as he says their ancient language was used into Nehemiah’s time and their gods were still worshipped into the Maccabean period. (33)
If so then why do we not have any records of their ancient tongue and why do we know so little about them? These are questions that Dr. Macalister does not answer when he moves on to his next point.
B. The Disappearance Theory
Here we have some scholars who felt that the Philistines just disappeared quietly into the sunset as they diminished over time and from a result of their wars with King David.
What then happened to the Philistines? According to scholarly speculation, they were overwhelmed by, and eventually assimilated into, the major population groups of Israelites or Phoenicians. It is true that distinctive Philistine cultural markers—architectural and artifact traditions that the Philistines had brought with them from their Aegean homeland—disappeared. After about 1000 B.C.E., for example, distinctive Philistine anthropomorphic figurines, like the famous Ashdoda are absent from the archaeological record(34)
Yet that was only part of the answer. It seems that they survived in smaller groups, moved from one location to another, though only a short distance and had lesser influence than before. The neighboring countries were far too overwhelming for the Philistines to make a comeback.(35)
It does seem that the Philistines made down into the 7th century BC as an independent people so to speak but were no threat to anyone:
Philistia then fell under Egyptian influence, and olive-oil production at Ekron declined. This marked the beginning of the final chapter in the history of Philistine Ekron, which ended in 604 B.C.E. As documented by the Babylonian Chronicles, when the Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar—the same Babylonian leader who destroyed Jerusalem and brought an end to the kingdom of Judah in 586 B.C.E—in the course of preparing to conquer Egypt, burned the Egyptian-allied cities of Philistia to the ground. Even a last-minute appeal by the last king of Ekron, Adon, to his patron, the Pharaoh of Egypt, which is documented in an Aramaic papyrus, could not save Ekron. The population of Ekron, the great seventh-century B.C.E. industrial center, was apparently carried off into Babylonian captivity, as were the inhabitants of the other destroyed Philistine cities—as would be, only a few years later, the inhabitants of Judah.
So overwhelming were the cumulative effects of the trauma of being uprooted from their homeland, and of the long process of acculturation, which was greatly accelerated during the Assyrian control of Philistia, that by the time of the Babylonian conquest, the Ekronites no longer had a sufficiently strong core culture to maintain themselves in exile. Thus, after a long period in captivity, they eventually disappeared from the pages of history.(36)
This theory seems to be the better fit for the demise of the Philistines as they did go very quietly in the end, as they were continually overwhelmed by superior forces over the years since their 10th century defeat. There seems to be no other alternative for their relinquishing the world stage, the Assyrian war theory does not annihilate the Philistines and the archaeological and textual records just seem to let them go without any notice or acclaim.
C. The Prophecies of God
We now that God is in control of all things in this world and that he has the final say on who will continue and who will be removed from the history or memory of other people. He did so with the Amalekites and He did it to the Philistines as we will see by the following verses.
Ezekiel 25:15-17 15 ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Because the Philistines dealt vengefully and took vengeance with a spiteful heart, to destroy because of the old hatred,” 16 therefore thus says the Lord GOD: “I will stretch out My hand against the Philistines, and I will cut off the Cherethites and destroy the remnant of the seacoast. 17 I will execute great vengeance on them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I lay My vengeance upon them.”’”
Amos 1:6–8 6 Thus says the LORD: “ For three transgressions of Gaza, and for four,
I will not turn away its punishment, Because they took captive the whole captivity
To deliver them up to Edom. 7 But I will send a fire upon the wall of Gaza,
Which shall devour its palaces. 8 I will cut off the inhabitant from Ashdod,
And the one who holds the scepter from Ashkelon; I will turn My hand against Ekron,
And the remnant of the Philistines shall perish,” Says the Lord GOD.
Zephaniah 2:5,6 5 Woe to the inhabitants of the seacoast, The nation of the Cherethites!
The word of the LORD is against you, O Canaan, land of the Philistines:
“ I will destroy you; So there shall be no inhabitant.”
And there are more verses which provide God’s judgment against the Philistine people. So for the believer, it was not the Assyrians or the quiet disappearance But God’s judgment upon a sinful people which caused the demise of the Philistine nation.
V. Conclusion
As we have seen if one believes the secular world, then the Philistine people are a mystery, not only in their origin, but in their migration, their language and basically almost all of their cultural aspects and interaction with others.
Most of what we know is pure guess work as the lack of Philistine records leave to many gaps to fill plausibly. Researching the Philistine people is like working blind because we only gets bits and pieces here and there and we have no way of knowing how to connect them together to create a credible analysis of their existence.
As a case in point, here is what the Dothans do when they are faced with little information:
Trude and Moshe Dothan have suggested that the Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery was the
Precursor that influenced and led to Philistine bichrome pottery of subsequent
Occupation levels(37)
The bolding is mine and is used to highlight what takes place in archaeology. The Dothans ‘suggest’. In other words they have no clue and without any written record all we can do is suggest, guess, theorize or speculate. There is no way to tell which came first the Mycenean IIIC pottery or the bichrome. But this is what takes place when dealing with the past and the Philistines are no exception.
It is best not to be too confident when dealing with ancient people for far too much is lost, overlooked, or missed when an archaeologist conducts a dig. As K.A. Kitchen has written:
At periods when a town-site was deserted, driving winds, sand and rains would often erode away the uppermost levels of the abandoned houses and walls. Thu, at Ur, the town of Neo-Babylonian times was largely swept away, while 20 feet depth of human occupation remains had been lost from ancient Babylonian Eshnunna before it was excavated(38)
So it comes as no surprise that what we know about the Philistines is next to nothing. We have clues but clues are not always enough, for we need confirmation and that confirmation is just not available at this time. Even the best discoveries, the Phaistos disk (discovered 100 years ago) and the pottery sherd with the name Goliath on it, only provide a scant amount of vocabulary and nothing else to help discover more about the Philistines.
At best we can conclude from what we have discovered that the Philistines were actually the Minoans, displaced from Crete and other islands when Santorini exploded and from previous migrations.
Abimelech, the Philistine king or kings Abraham and Isaac had dealings with, ruled at Gerar (Gn 26:1). Ancient Gerar has been identified as Tel Haror, 17 miles east of Gaza in the western Negev. The Middle Bronze urban settlement there is one of the largest in southern Canaan, occupying an area of about 38 acres. It was enclosed by an elaborate system of earthen ramparts fronted by a deep ditch. Within the city a sacred precinct was excavated, including a “migdol temple,” remains of animal sacrifice, and cultic and imported pottery. Also found within the fortified enclosure was a 10 foot diameter well, excavated to a depth of 38 feet. The wells of Gerar were a major issue between both Abraham (Gn 21:25) and Isaac (Gn 26:17–22), and the Philistines.
Of particular interest is a Minoan graffito found in the sacred precinct dating to ca. 1600 BC. Analyses of the sherd determined that it originated in Crete, most likely the south coast. There are four Minoan signs on the graffito, inscribed prior to firing, which represent a bull’s head, cloth, branch and figs. In addition to the graffito, an unusual chalice of Canaanite shape and fabric was found in a room on the east side of the sacred area. What makes the chalice unusual is its high arching handles, a well-known feature of Minoan chalices, but not of Canaanite(39)
They were world sailors thus it is no stretch of the imagination that they would have citizens move to other parts of the world, or even sought to expand their territory but without real historical records, we will never confirm their origins.
The same goes for the controversial passages of the Bible. The secular world usually dismisses the Bible but in reality one needs to side with scriptures as it is the one that is true, not the archaeological professionals. The Bible is written by the only Eye-witness to all events thus it has the advantage of observation while the modern archaeological professional only has limited, partial, and corrupted pieces to fit together.
Thus if the Bible says that Abraham met Philistines, then he met with Philistines, not some other culturally different people. It has been shown that it is possible and probable that an early group of people could have migrated over to the new area as reports sent back from established outposts or trading centers were favorable, sparking an interest in other citizens to change their locales.
Such happens all the time and it cannot be disallowed for the ancient people for there is no reason for them not to travel like their modern counterparts. They had needs and desires, just like the people of today and they would set out for a different or better way of life, or they just traveled to see the world and found a place they liked. The options are endless.
As for the demise of the Philistines, we can see God’s hand in it all and the Christian scholar needs to put aside the secular academic methods and focus on that aspect of life. The philistines did not just disappeared; they met their demise because God had had enough of their sinful behavior and directed their end as punishment for their sins.
The believing scholar needs to take note and write about this for God has provided an example of what happens when people do wrong in His sight. They cannot let it slide by in pursuit of academic acceptance by secular scholars, for such people are not the ones who need to be pleased, God is.
The truth needs to be told, not the same old mindless regurgitation of the same old facts or lack of information.
