But where was Caphtor? The LXX uniformly either transliterate the name or make it Cappa- docia. Some have identified Caphtor with Cyprus. This finds some support in the fact that the Egyp- tian monuments associate the Philistines with the Zakkal, a rene from Cyprus, and portray the two as scarcely distinguishable. Ebers, Halévy, and others have strongly held that Caphtor was a region in or near the Egyptian Delta. There is a strong recent trend toward the opinion that Caphtor was Crete. See CAPHTOR, CARITES, CHERETHITES AND PELETHITES, CRETE.
The argument for identifying Caphtor with Crete connects itself closely with the phenomena presented by another biblical name. In two rela- tively late places (Zeph 2°, Ezk 251-18) the Philis- tines are identified, wholly or in part, with the Chéréthim, whom the LX, in these places, make to be the Cretans. In both passages the word Chéréthim is used in a punning way, effecting a play on words. The name does not occur else- where in the plural, but, in the singular, ‘the Cherethite’ is once mentioned (1 S 30") as living in or near the Philistine country, and six or seven times in connexion with ‘ the Pelethite,’ as forming a part of king David’s military force (1 Ch 18", 2S 8,8 1518 207 and Keré of 33, 1 K 1), On the basis of these facts it is affirmed that Cherethite is another and earlier name for the Philistines, that they were Cretans, that Pelethite is merely a
PHILISTINES
variant form of Philistine, and that David’s sue. cesses were largely due to his having Philistine troops. These conclusions are lausible, though they lack something of being sufhciently proved.
The evidence, however, amounts to a strong probability in favour of the more general fact that the Philistines were originally Aryan pirates, whether from Crete or Cyprus or elsewhere, who forced a settlement for themselves among the Semites and Rephaim of the Mediterranean low- land, and adopted the language, and in part the religion and civilization, of the Semites whom they conquered. Of this we shall find many confirma- tions as we proceed to consider the evidence as to the date when the migration took place.
Ramses Ul. of Egypt, contemporary, in part, with Joshua, says that in his eighth year he repulsed an invasion made by six or seven hostile nations. Most or all of these nations have Greek names. They are kin to other Greek peoples, settled on the African coast west of the Delta, who made trouble for Ramses in his fifth and his eleventh years, and who had previously made trouble for his predecessors. The invaders who came in his eighth year came by land and by sea. Those who came by land plundered the Syrian regions, ‘beginning with the people of
eta, of Kadi (Galilee), and Carchemish, Aradus, and Alus,’ established a rendezvous ‘in the land of the Amorites,’ and were defeated by Ramses on the frontier between Egypt and the land of Zahi, that is, the region that we know as the land of the Philistines (Insc. in the Ramesseum at Luxor, as cited by Brugsch, Lgypt under the Pharaohs, p. 329). Those who came by sea entered the mouths of the Nile, and were there defeated, large numbers of them being captured.
Of these six or seven peoples, two are many times mentioned together, to the extent of being somewhat distinguished from the others. In the sculptures they closely resemble one another. They are, of course, Greek in features and equip- ment. These two are the Zakkal and the Pulu- sata, Pulsata, Pulista, Purusata, Purosatha, as the name is variously transliterated. Scholars seem to agree that the Zakkal came from Cyprus. The Pulsata have been identified with the Pelasgi, with the Prosodite of Cyprus, and with the Philistines. Some of those who believe that they were the Philistines hold that they came at this time from Crete or Cyprus, and were settled by Ramses, after their defeat, in the cities of Zahi. But it is more in accord with the whole of the evidence to hold that the Pulsata and the Zakkal had then been on this coast for some
enerations, keeping in communication with their
indred in the various Greek regions, and now making themselves leaders in the movement of the hordes that sought the spoils of Egypt. If the Pulsata of Ramses had then just come from Crete, he would surely have designated them by their Greek name, and not by a Semitic descriptive word. If they had just come from Crete, it is difficult to account for the resemblance which the Beyptians found between them and the Cypriote Zakkal, while this is easily accounted for if the two had long been dwelling among Semitic neigh- bours on the coast. Other Greek invaders Ramses describes as ‘ kings,’ or as ‘peoples of the sea,’ but he speaks of the ‘leaders of the hostile bands’ of the Pulsata and the Zakkal, just as he does in the case of the Edomites (‘ Effigies at Medinet-abu,’ as cited in Brugsch, Egypt under the Pharaohs,
. 332). Sayce (HHH p. 291) cites Hommel as
aving found a mention of the Zakkal on the coast near Dor, in a Babylonian document (WAZ iv. 34, No. 2, lines 2, 6) of the 15th cent. B.c. The writers of the history in the OT certainly thought of the