Philistine Ship attacked by Egyptians.
On the other hand, it has been held by Ewald (i, 330) and others that the Cherethites and Pelethites (2 Sam. xx, 23) were Cherethites and Philistines. The objec- tions to this view are : (1) that it is highly improbable that David would select his officers from the hereditary foes of his country, particularly so immediately after he had enforced their submission ; (2) that there appears no reason why an undue prominence should have been given to the Cherethites by placing that name first, and altering Philistines into Pelethites, so as to produce a paronomasia ; (3) that the names subsequently applied to the same body (2 Kings xi, 19) are appellatives; and
1'IIIUSTIXK
104
PHILISTINE
1 4) thai the term- admil of a probable explanation from Hebrew roots. See Pklb hiitk.
3. A still more importanl poinl to be decided in con- nection with the early history of the Philistines is th tunc when they settled in tin land of Canaan, [fwe were to re8tric( ourselves to the statements of the Bible, we should conclude that this took place before the time of Abraham; for they are noticed in his day as a pastoral tribe in the neighborhood of Gerar (Gen. xxi. 32, :il ; xxvi. 1,8); and this position accords well with the Btatemenl in Deut ii, 23 thai the Avira dwelt in Ha- zerim, i. o. in nomad encampments ; for Gerar lay in the south country, which was just adapted to such a life.
At the time of the exodus they were still in the same
neighborhood, but grown sufficiently powerful to inspire the Israelites with fear (Exod. xiii, 17: w, 11). When the [sraelites arrived, they were in full possession of the Shephelah from the "river of Egypt" (el-Arish) in the smith to Ekron in the north (Josh, xv, -1. 47), and had formed a confederacy of five powerful cities Gaza, Ash- dod, Ashkelon, < rath, and Ekron (Josh. xiii. 3). At what period these cities were originally founded we know not, Imt there arc good grounds for believing that they were of Canaanitish origin, and had previously been occupied by the Avim. The name Gath is certainly Canaanitish ; so mo.-t probably are Gaza, Ashdod, and Ekron. Ash- kelon is doubtful ; and the terminations both of this and Ekron may be Philistine. Gaza is mentioned as early as in Gen. x, 19 as a city of the < tanaanites; and this as well as Ashdod and Ekron was in Joshua's time the asylum of the Canaanitish Anakim (Josh, xi, 22). The interval thai elapsed between Abraham and the exodus seems sufficient to allow for the alteration that took place in the position of the Philistines, and their trans- formation from a pastoral tribe to a settled and powerful nation. Bui such a view has not met with acceptance among modern critics, partly because it leaves the mi- grations of the Philistines wholly unconnected with any known historical event, and partly because it does not serve to explain the great increase of their power in the time of the Judges. To meet these two requirements a double migration on the part of the Philistines, or of the two branches of that nation, has been suggested. Knobel, for instance, regards the Philistines proper as a branch of the same stock .as that to which the llyksos belonged, and he discovers the name Philistine in the Opprobrious name I'hililim or I'hilili.<. heslowed on the Shepherd kings | lleroil. ii. L28); their tirst entrance into Canaan from the Casluhim would thus be subsequent, to the patriarchal age, and coincident with the expul- sion of the llyksos. The < 'herethites he identities with the Caphtorim Who displaced the Avim; and these he
regards as Cretans, who did not enter Canaan before the
period of the Judges. The former part of his theory is inconsistent with the notices of the Philistines in the 1 k of! lenesis; these, therefore, he regards as additions
of a later .late i VdUcert. p. 218 sq.). The view adopted by Movers i-. thai the Philistines were carried west- ward from Palestine int.! Lower Egypl by the stream oft he 1 1 \ ksos movement al a period subsequent to Ahra- ham : from Egypl thej passed to Crete, and returned to Palestine in the early period of the Judges I Phoniz, iii,238), This is inconsistent with the notices in Joshua. Ewald, in the second edition of his Gesckichte, propounds the hypothesis of a double immigration from Crete, the lirst of which took place in the- ante-patriarchal period, as a consequence either of the < lanaanitish - ttl< menl
or of the Hyk80S movement, the second in the time of
the Judges ( Gesch. i. 329 '■'■'•\ I. We cannot regard the above views in any other light than as speculations, built up on very Blight data, .and unsatisfactory, inasmuch as they fail to reconcile the statements of Scripture. For they all imply (1) thai t he not ice of the ( 'aphloiim in Gen. \, 1 1 applies t . . an entirely distinct tribe from the
Philistines, as Ewald (i, 331, note) himself allows ; (2)
that either the notices in Cell. \\. xxvi, or those in
Josh, sv, 15 17. or perchance both, .are interpola is;
and (3) that the notice in Deut. ii. 23, which certainly hears marks of high antiquity, belongs to a late date, and relets solely to the ( 'herethites. Uut. Levond these