Hubbry Logo
DenyenDenyenMain
Open search
Denyen
Community hub
Denyen
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Denyen
Denyen
Denyen
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Denyen[1] prisoners on a register from a graphic wall relief on the Second Pylon at Medinet Habu, c. 1150 BC, during the reign of Ramesses III.

The Denyen (Egyptian: dꜣjnjnjw) is purported to be one of the groups constituting the Sea Peoples.

They were raiders associated with the Eastern Mediterranean Dark Ages who attacked Egypt in 1207 BC in alliance with the Libyans and other Sea Peoples, as well as during the reign of Ramesses III.[2] The Twentieth Dynasty of Egypt allowed them to settle in Canaan, which was largely controlled by the Sea Peoples into the 11th century BC.[2]

Origin

[edit]
Map of Mycenaean cultural areas, 1400–1100 BC (unearthed sites in red dots).

It has been proposed that the Denyen and Tanaju of the Egyptian records may relate to the Greek ethnonym Danaoi (Ancient Greek: Δαναοί, romanized: Danaoí); also attested in the Homeric epics.[3] The earliest textual reference to Mycenaean Greece is in the Annals of Thutmosis III (c. 1479–1425 BC), which refers to messengers from the king of the Tanaju, c. 1437 BC, offering greeting gifts to the Egyptian king, in order to initiate diplomatic relations, when the latter campaigned in Syria.[3] Tanaju is also listed in an inscription at the Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III. The latter ruled Egypt in c. 1382–1344 BC. Moreover, a list of the cities and regions of the Tanaju is also mentioned in this inscription; among the cities listed are Mycenae, Nauplion, Kythera, Messenia and the Thebaid (region of Thebes, Greece).[3]

The Denyen have also been identified with the people of Adana in Cilicia, who existed in late Hittite Empire times. They are also believed to have settled in Cyprus. A Hittite report[4] speaks of a Muksus, who also appears in an eighth-century bilingual inscription from Karatepe bilingual stele in Cilicia, which also mentions the king of the "Danunians" (Phoenician: 𐤃𐤍𐤍𐤉𐤌 dnnym). A newly published early Luwian inscription from the notes of James Mellaart also mentions Muksus, but it turned out that this and other texts Mellaart owned were almost certainly forgeries.[5] The kings of Adana are traced from the "house of Mopsos," given in Hieroglyphic Luwian as "Moxos" and in Phoenician as "Mopsos", in the form mps. They were called the Dananiyim.[6] The area also reports a Mopsucrene ("Mopsus' fountain" in Greek) and a Mopsuestia ("Mopsus' hearth" in Greek), also in Cilicia.

It has also been suggested that the Denyen joined with Hebrews to form one of the original Twelve Tribes of Israel. A minority view first suggested by Yigael Yadin attempted to connect the Denyen with the Tribe of Dan, described as remaining on their ships in the early Song of Deborah, contrary to the mainstream view of Israelite history. It was speculated that the Denyen had been taken to Egypt, and subsequently settled between the Caphtorite Philistines and the Tjekker, along the Mediterranean coast with the Tribe of Dan subsequently deriving from them.[7] This theory has not been accepted, however.[8][9]

Footnotes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Denyen

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Denyen, also spelled Danuna or Dene in ancient records, were a seafaring people of the , recognized as one of the core groups within the confederation known as the , who conducted widespread raids and migrations across the circa 1200 BCE. Primarily attested in Egyptian inscriptions, they are depicted as skilled warriors and navigators who targeted , the , and during a period of regional upheaval. The earliest reference to the Denyen appears in the from the mid-14th century BCE, where they are identified as the kingdom of Danuna, whose ruler's death is noted during the reign of or , indicating their influence in the northern or . By the late 13th century BCE, under (r. 1186–1155 BCE), they joined a coalition including the , Tjeker, Shekelesh, and Weshesh in a major invasion of , as detailed in the temple inscriptions from his eighth regnal year (c. 1178 BCE), which describe their approach by sea and land with families in tow. claimed victory over them in naval and land battles, stating in the same inscriptions and that he "slew the Denyen in their isles" and resettled some as laborers in . Scholarly consensus places the Denyen's origins in the Aegean or western , with possible links to the Mycenaean (as the Danaoi in Homeric epics) or the region of in southeastern , where the name Danuna may correspond to the area around . The Karatepe bilingual inscription from the 8th century BCE retroactively connects them to post-Trojan War migrations led by figures like , suggesting involvement in the collapse of Hittite and Levantine polities around 1200 BCE. Later Egyptian texts, such as the Onomasticon of Amenope (c. 1100 BCE), list "Dene" among foreign peoples, implying their partial integration into the region's after the invasions. Their activities contributed to the broader collapse, marked by destruction layers at sites like and , though direct archaeological attribution remains elusive due to the migratory nature of the groups.

Etymology

Egyptian Designations

The ancient Egyptians referred to the Denyen using the hieroglyphic designation dꜣjnjnjw, a transliteration derived from phonetic signs approximating the foreign name, typically comprising biliteral and uniliteral hieroglyphs for the consonants dꜣ, jn, jn, and jw, concluded by determinatives indicating a foreign ethnic group (Gardiner signs T14 for foreign land and A1 for a seated man). This writing convention underscores their status as outsiders, often grouped with other maritime raiders in Egyptian records. The term's structure reflects the Egyptians' phonetic adaptation of non-native nomenclature, without semantic elements implying specific cultural traits beyond otherness. The earliest attestation of a related designation appears as Tanaju (transliterated tj-nꜣ-jw), in the Annals of from his 42nd , circa 1437 BCE, where envoys from this Aegean-associated delivered including silver and vessels to the during his Levantine campaigns. This form, denoting a region or people at the periphery of , marks the initial Egyptian contact with the group, predating their militarized portrayal. By the Ramesside period, the name had standardized to dꜣjnjnjw or variants like d3-n3-n3-w, appearing in inscriptions from the reigns of and , where it explicitly identifies them as invaders allied with Libyan forces around 1208–1176 BCE. In Ramesside iconography, particularly the monumental reliefs at temple under (circa 1175 BCE), the Denyen are visually represented as part of the coalition, distinguished by feathered headdresses evoking Aegean styles and armed with long swords, round shields, and spears in depictions of both land and sea battles. These carvings, from the pharaoh's year 8 and 12 campaigns, portray them in dynamic combat scenes alongside groups like the and Tjeker, emphasizing their role as seafaring warriors migrating with families in ox-drawn carts, though specific regimental identifiers for the Denyen blend into the collective enemy portrayal.

Linguistic Cognates

The name Denyen, rendered in Egyptian as dꜣjnjnjw, exhibits potential linguistic connections to terms in other ancient languages, particularly those suggesting Aegean or Anatolian affiliations. Scholars have frequently linked the Denyen to the Danaoi (Δαναοί), an used in the to denote the or Achaeans, based on close phonetic resemblance between Denyen and Danaoi. This identification posits a possible through intermediary forms like Danuna or Dainuna in Late records, potentially tracing back to Proto-Indo-European roots associated with Aegean nomenclature, though the exact phonetic pathway remains debated among philologists. Parallels in and Hittite texts further illuminate these cognates, with the term Dananiyim appearing in the 8th-century BCE Karatepe bilingual inscription from , where the Phoenician form Dananiyim directly corresponds to the Luwian Adana, referring to a regional or ethnic group. This inscription, serving as a key to deciphering Luwian hieroglyphs, suggests a continuity from earlier Danuna references in Hittite documents, linking the Denyen to Cilician contexts without implying direct migration but rather shared linguistic substrates in the and . Debates on Semitic influences propose minority connections to the biblical , analyzing forms like dan-u/ana as potentially shared with Danel or Hebrew dān (""), but these links lack direct archaeological or textual evidence tying the Denyen explicitly to Israelite origins. Proponents such as C. H. Gordon and Y. Yadin have argued for an identification between the biblical Dan and the Denyen/Danuna, yet most scholars emphasize the absence of corroborating inscriptions or genetic markers, viewing such ties as speculative rather than etymologically robust.

Ancient Sources

Egyptian Records

The earliest references to the Denyen in Egyptian records appear in the Annals of (c. 1479–1425 BC), where they are identified as the land of Tanaju (or Tinay), a distant sending during the pharaoh's 42nd (c. 1437 BC). Messengers from the king of Tanaju delivered greeting gifts, including precious metal vessels, to the Egyptian court while was on campaign in the , marking the initial diplomatic contact with this Aegean-linked entity as a subordinate tribute-bearing rather than an immediate threat. Subsequent inscriptions from the reign of (c. 1390–1352 BC) provide more detailed listings of the Denyen, rendered as Danaja or Tanaja, portraying them as a coastal Aegean integrated into 's sphere of influence. The , diplomatic correspondence archived in during the reigns of and (mid-14th century BCE), mention the kingdom of Danuna (EA 151), noting the death of its king and succession by his brother, indicating its status as a regional in the northern or . In the "Aegean List" on a base from 's mortuary temple at Kom el-Hetan (Thebes), Danaja appears as the second toponym after Keftiu (), among 15 foreign places depicted as conquered or tributary lands encircled by bound captives, emphasizing their maritime and island-based character. These records highlight ongoing exchanges, with Danaja positioned geographically toward mainland , reflecting heightened Egyptian awareness of Aegean networks during a period of prosperity and diplomacy. By the late , Egyptian sources depict the Denyen as formidable adversaries within the confederation, culminating in the detailed accounts of (c. 1186–1155 BC) at his mortuary temple. In the 8th regnal year (c. 1175 BC), the "Poem" inscription describes the Denyen (d-n-jw-n) allying with the , Tjeker, , and in a massive invasion by land and sea, originating from their "isles" and ravaging the before advancing on Egypt's Delta: "The Denyen in their isles were [the Peleset, Tjeker, Shekelesh, Denyen, and Weshesh], united peoples." The text portrays Ramesses III's divine intervention repelling them at the mouths, annihilating their forces and scattering their plans: "Their seed is not; their souls are made into heaps of the dead." Complementing this, the "Bulletin" inscription narrates the battle's chaos, with the Denyen's ships dragged ashore and warriors "hemmed in, prostrated on the beach, slain, and made into heaps," their captives presented to and as symbols of total victory. These narratives frame the Denyen as existential threats to Egyptian order, defeated through pharaonic might, with visual reliefs nearby depicting their feathered ships and warriors in distinctive attire to underscore their foreign menace.

Near Eastern References

Hittite texts refer to the Denyen as the Danuna, identifying them as a people and region in southeastern , particularly around in , which fell under Hittite during the Late . The Danuna appear in administrative and diplomatic records as vassals or local entities integrated into the Hittite administrative system, with their territory serving as a buffer against eastern threats. During the reign of Suppiluliuma II (c. 1207 BC), Hittite annals and prayers document intensified military activity in the western periphery, including naval engagements with fleets from and suppression of unrest in the of southwestern , amid broader disruptions by maritime raiders. These events reflect the precarious position of the Hittite Empire as groups, potentially including elements associated with the Danuna, contributed to regional instability. Fragments from the Baal Cycle, dated around 1200 BC, indirectly evoke themes of sea-borne conflicts and divine struggles over maritime domains that align with the activities of groups like the Denyen, though direct naming is absent. A key later reference appears in the Karatepe bilingual inscription (c. 8th century BC), a Phoenician-Luwian stela erected by the Cilician ruler Azatiwada, which explicitly mentions the "Dananiyim" as the inhabitants of the land of Adana. This text links the Dananiyim to the royal lineage of the region, with Azatiwada claiming descent from the "House of Muksus" (Mopsus), a figure attested in earlier Hittite records as a prominent ruler in Cilicia during the empire's final phases. The inscription underscores the enduring presence of Denyen-related populations in Cilician governance, portraying them as established settlers who maintained cultural and political ties to Anatolian traditions amid Iron Age transitions.

Role in the Late Bronze Age Collapse

Alliances and Invasions

The Denyen formed part of a multi-ethnic confederation known as the Sea Peoples, allying with groups such as the Peleset (later identified with the Philistines), Tjeker, Shekelesh, and Weshesh to conduct coordinated maritime raids across the eastern Mediterranean during the late 13th and early 12th centuries BC. These alliances facilitated synchronized attacks on key regions, including the Hittite Empire (Hatti) and the island kingdom of Cyprus (Alashiya), contributing to widespread disruptions between approximately 1207 and 1175 BC. Archaeological evidence, such as the sudden cessation of Mycenaean and Cypriot pottery imports to Levantine sites, underscores the scale of these joint operations, which targeted vital trade hubs and weakened imperial structures. While direct textual evidence naming the Denyen in these events is limited outside Egyptian sources, their inclusion in the broader Sea Peoples confederation implies involvement. The Denyen played a significant role in the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1200 BC, participating in the broader wave of invasions that overwhelmed Anatolian defenses and led to the abandonment of major centers like . A pivotal event was the sack of circa 1190 BC, where letters from the city's archives implicate maritime forces in the naval blockades and assaults that precipitated the city's fall; contemporary documents highlight the integration of such groups into raiding networks that exploited the empire's vulnerabilities amid internal strife and environmental stressors. Direct attribution to the Denyen specifically remains elusive due to the migratory and confederated nature of these groups. Evidence for the Denyen's migratory patterns points to origins in the Aegean or southeastern Anatolian regions, such as , from where they moved toward the coasts as part of the Late Bronze Age upheavals. This relocation is inferred from the synchronized collapse of networks around –1150 BC, marked by destructions at sites like and , alongside the appearance of Aegean-style Late Helladic IIIC pottery in Levantine settlements, indicating cultural and demographic shifts driven by these seafaring groups. Later inscriptions, such as the 8th-century BC Karatepe text, reference Danunians in , potentially linking these migrants to enduring coastal communities.

Conflicts with Egypt

The major confrontation occurred in Ramesses III's eighth regnal year (c. 1178 BC), when the Denyen, allied with groups such as the , , , and , launched a coordinated land and sea assault on . Inscriptions and reliefs at vividly depict the naval battle at the Delta's river mouths, portraying Denyen warriors on bird-prowed ships equipped with rounded shields, long swords, and spears, engaging in close-quarters combat while archers fired volleys from the decks to support boarding actions against Egyptian vessels. Egyptian countermeasures emphasized superior from larger ships and organized marine infantry, which overwhelmed the invaders by ramming and ensnaring their vessels, leading to the coalition's decisive defeat; accompanying land battles showed Denyen fighters in feathered headdresses advancing with ox-drawn carts carrying families, underscoring the migratory nature of the incursion. In the aftermath, numerous Denyen prisoners were captured and integrated into Egyptian society, with many conscripted into labor forces for temple and agricultural projects, as evidenced by administrative records like the Wilbour Papyrus from the mid-12th century BC that document foreign captives assigned to such roles. This assimilation reflected Ramesses III's strategy of repurposing defeated enemies to bolster Egypt's economy and military, preventing further threats from the Denyen while contributing to the pharaoh's proclaimed restoration of order.

Origins and Identity

Aegean Hypothesis

The Aegean Hypothesis proposes that the Denyen, one of the , originated from culture in the southern Aegean, drawing on linguistic evidence that identifies them with the Achaean Greeks known as the Danaoi. In the Homeric epics, the participating in the [Trojan War](/page/Trojan War) are collectively termed Danaoi, a name that scholars connect to the Egyptian rendering of the Denyen as northern invaders allied with other during the reign of around 1177 BC. This etymological link is further supported by the Egyptian term Tanaju, which appears in New Kingdom records as a toponym for a region proposed to be associated with the Denyen and interpreted as referring to the land of the Danaoi in the Aegean. A key piece of linguistic evidence supporting this hypothesis comes from tablets, the syllabic script used for administration, where the term *da-na-jo appears in records from (tablets Db 1324 and V 1631), denoting individuals or groups affiliated with the Danaoi or Achaeans. This attestation, deciphered as an early form of the Greek Δαναοί (Danaoi), is seen by proponents as aligning the Denyen chronologically and culturally with the Late Mycenaean world, suggesting they represented displaced Achaean populations. Hittite texts referencing Ahhiyawa as Aegean raiders provide a brief parallel, indicating Mycenaean involvement in disruptions contemporaneous with Denyen activities. Archaeological connections to post-Mycenaean migrations bolster this hypothesis, particularly through the Cape Gelidonya shipwreck off the Lycian coast, dated to approximately 1200 BC via radiocarbon analysis of organics and pottery typology. The vessel's cargo included Aegean-style bronze weapons, such as Naue Type II swords typical of Late Helladic IIIB-C contexts, alongside Mycenaean jars and Cypriot ceramics, evidencing maritime traffic from the Aegean during the onset of incursions. This assemblage suggests that groups like the Denyen may have participated in such voyages as part of broader population movements following the collapse of Mycenaean trade networks. The hypothesis aligns the Denyen's emergence with the timeline of Mycenaean palace destructions around 1200 BC at key sites including and , where fire and abandonment layers indicate violent ends to palatial administration. These events, part of the , are posited as potential catalysts for emigration from the Aegean, possibly driving Achaean factions—hypothesized as the Denyen—seaward in search of new territories, echoing traditions of the though without direct material confirmation of external invaders. The Denyen, also known as Danuna in some Hittite records, have been proposed to be associated with the region of Adana in southeastern Anatolia, corresponding to the kingdom of Kizzuwatna in Cilicia during the Late Bronze Age. Hittite texts portray Danuna as a semi-independent entity within or adjacent to Kizzuwatna, which was incorporated into the Hittite Empire under Suppiluliuma I around 1350 BC, though it maintained some autonomy amid regional tensions. This area experienced raids by the Lukka lands, a coastal Anatolian group known for piracy and incursions into Cilician territories, as documented in Hittite annals from the 14th–13th centuries BC, highlighting the volatile geopolitics of the region. Evidence for continuity into the Iron Age appears in the Karatepe bilingual inscription from the 8th century BC, where the Phoenician text refers to "dnnym" (likely Dananiyim), denoting the land or people under Luwian ruler Azatiwada, who served as viceroy to the king of Adanawa (modern Adana). Azatiwada's stele, inscribed in both Phoenician and Hieroglyphic Luwian, describes his fortification of the site and claims descent from the "House of Muksus" (Mopsus), suggesting a Luwian elite overlay on earlier populations possibly linked to the Danuna/Denyen. This inscription implies cultural persistence of the Danuna name in Cilicia, bridging Late Bronze Age upheavals with Neo-Hittite states like Adanawa/Ḫiyawa. This Anatolian-Cilician association is more widely supported in scholarship than the Aegean hypothesis. Potential Semitic influences on the Denyen are evident in Levantine contexts, where interactions with local populations may have incorporated Semitic elements into their identity. A posits a connection to the biblical , based on nominal similarities and migratory narratives, though this lacks robust linguistic or genetic support and is largely dismissed by scholars. More compelling archaeological evidence comes from Tel Dan in northern , where early strata (12th–11th centuries BC) yield Philistine bichrome pottery alongside local Canaanite wares, indicating overlaps in material culture possibly tied to settlements, including potential Denyen elements. These finds suggest hybrid Levantine-Anatolian interactions rather than direct ethnic continuity.

Legacy and Modern Interpretations

Settlements in the Levant

Following the invasions during the , direct evidence for Denyen settlements in the remains elusive, with scholarly speculation linking them more to northern regions rather than the southern coastal areas dominated by other groups like the (). Egyptian records indicate that resettled captured , potentially including Denyen, in fortified strongholds within his domain to bolster defenses and labor forces, though specific locations for the Denyen are not detailed. Some hypotheses suggest possible associations with northern coastal or inland sites, such as Tel Dan, where archaeological evidence shows Aegean-style influences in I layers, including pottery and architecture that may reflect migrations. While Mycenaean IIIC pottery appears at Philistine sites like Tel Miqne (ancient Ekron) and Ashkelon, these are primarily attributed to Philistine settlements rather than specifically to the Denyen. At Tel Miqne, locally produced Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery in strata dated to the 12th–11th centuries BCE, including stirrup jars and kraters, points to Aegean stylistic influences in Philistine contexts. Similarly, Ashkelon features monochrome pottery and Aegean-style hearths from the 12th century BCE, indicative of organized coastal enclaves by the Philistines. Dor, on the northern Carmel coast, yields Mycenaean IIIC:1b ceramics alongside Philistine bichrome ware in layers from the early 12th to 11th centuries BCE, suggesting mixed Aegean-Canaanite populations, but again without direct ties to the Denyen. By the transition to Iron Age I (ca. 1100–1000 BCE), Sea Peoples-related communities in the Levant showed signs of cultural assimilation into broader societies, including Israelite and Phoenician groups, as evidenced by hybridized pottery styles and architecture. The decline of pure Mycenaean forms after 1100 BCE, increased local Canaanite influences like collared-rim jars, and adoption of iron technology mark a shift toward stable, multi-ethnic societies, though specific Denyen contributions remain unconfirmed due to the migratory and confederated nature of the groups.

Scholarly Debates

Scholarly debates surrounding the Denyen primarily revolve around their ethnic origins and role in the Late upheavals, with scholars divided between those favoring an Aegean provenance and those advocating for more localized Anatolian roots. Mainstream interpretations, advanced by Robert Drews in his analysis of the Bronze Age collapse, identify the Denyen as seafaring raiders originating from the Aegean region, likely Mycenaean Greeks or related groups displaced by internal crises. similarly supports this view in his synthesis of Mediterranean interconnections, portraying the Denyen as part of a broader wave of Aegean migrants contributing to the era's instability through naval incursions. In opposition, Nancy K. Sandars emphasized a Cilician localism for the Denyen, linking them to the Danuna mentioned in and Hittite texts as inhabitants of southern , suggesting they were indigenous groups mobilized by regional turmoil rather than distant invaders. This minority perspective critiques the Aegean hypothesis for over-relying on etymological parallels, such as between "Denyen" and Homeric "Danaoi," without sufficient archaeological corroboration from itself. A related but more speculative theory, proposed by , equated the Denyen with the biblical based on phonetic similarities and maritime motifs in Judges 5:17, but this has been widely critiqued as unsubstantiated, hinging on tenuous linguistic connections without direct textual or material evidence tying the groups together. Post-2000 scholarship has increasingly incorporated genetic data to address these debates, particularly through studies of related groups like the . A 2019 genomic analysis of remains from revealed that early Philistines carried approximately 14-43% European-related ancestry, modeled as deriving from Bronze Age Greek or Sardinian-like populations, which appeared abruptly around the 12th century BCE and faded within centuries—evidence indirectly bolstering Aegean migration models for the broader confederation, including the Denyen. This admixture signal aligns with archaeological shifts in material culture, such as Mycenaean-style , but applies less directly to the Denyen due to their distinct textual mentions. Despite these advances, several unresolved issues persist in Denyen scholarship, notably the scarcity of inscriptions or artifacts uniquely attributable to them beyond Egyptian records, which limits precise ethnic mapping and fuels ongoing disputes over their homeland—whether in (as "Adana" in Hittite sources) or the Aegean. Furthermore, debates continue regarding the Denyen's primary function: were they opportunistic raiders exploiting weakened states, organized migrants seeking new territories, or professional mercenaries previously in Hittite or Egyptian service, as implied by their alliances in Ramesses III's campaigns? These questions highlight the challenges of reconstructing identities from fragmented ancient Near Eastern texts, with no consensus emerging on a singular model.

References

  1. https://www.salimbeti.com/micenei/sea.htm
  2. https://history.rutgers.edu/files/209/2009/234/The-Sea-People-and-Their-Migration-Peczynski-2009.pdf
  3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301894299_The_%27Sea_Peoples%27_in_Primary_Sources
  4. https://brill.com/downloadpdf/book/edcoll/9789004430112/BP000020.pdf
  5. https://repub.eur.nl/pub/7686/Woudhuizen%20bw.pdf
  6. https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/oip8.pdf
  7. https://berlinarchaeology.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/kelder-2009339-52-royal-gift-exchange.pdf
  8. https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/sidebar/invasions-of-the-sea-peoples/
  9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24668030
  10. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-hellenic-studies/article/teucrian-at-salamis-in-cyprus/6FCD57716593D8A62D8175231FF8A1E1
  11. https://www.jstor.org/stable/628459
  12. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1518990
  13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/596733
  14. https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/PLACES/Egypt-Libya/EgyptianRecords2-Breasted1906.pdf
  15. https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/aemw/amarna/P270915
  16. https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/AUTHORS/Cline2011-SailingGreatGreenSea.pdf
  17. https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/saoc12.pdf
  18. https://www.academia.edu/8427867/Where_Did_the_Kings_of_Danuna_of_EA_151_rule
  19. https://www.academia.edu/37858858/Ahhiyawa_and_Danu_na_Greek_ethnic_groups_in_the_Eastern_Mediterranean_in_the_Light_of_Old_and_New_Hieroglyphic_Luwian_Evidence_in_Niesio%25C5%2582owski_Spano_%25C5%2581_W%25C4%2599cowski_M_eds_Change_Continuity_and_Connectivity_2018_23_56
  20. https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/PLACES/Turkey/Hittites-Bryce2005.pdf
  21. https://www.academia.edu/18936805/The_Karatepe_Bilingual_Inscription_of_Azatiwata
  22. https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/AUTHORS/SeaPeoples/SeaPeoples-Mumford2018.pdf
  23. https://www.ancientportsantiques.com/wp-content/uploads/Documents/AUTHORS/SeaPeoples/SeaPeoples-Killebrew2013.pdf
  24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309896034_The_Battles_between_Ramesses_III_and_the_Sea-Peoples
  25. https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004430112/BP000020.xml
  26. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344378443_Sea_Peoples_from_the_Aegean_Identity_Sociopolitical_Context_and_Antecedents
  27. https://nauticalarch.org/projects/cape-gelidonya-late-bronze-age-shipwreck-excavation/
  28. https://webhelper.brown.edu/joukowsky/courses/maritimearchaeology11/files/18756378.pdf
  29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3854645
  30. https://archive.nyu.edu/jspui/bitstream/2451/63928/3/Trameri_2020_PhD_Kizzuwatna.pdf
  31. https://brill.com/display/book/9789004704312/BP000012.xml
  32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282491543_Phoenician_and_Luwian_in_Early_Iron_Age_Cilicia
  33. https://brill.com/downloadpdf/display/book/9789004729704/BP000004.pdf
  34. https://armstronginstitute.org/736-were-the-seafaring-denyen-the-tribe-of-dan
  35. https://blogs.bu.edu/aberlin/files/2011/09/Bloch-Smith-Nahkhai1.pdf
  36. https://www.academia.edu/36376363/Dan_Shall_Judge_The_Danites_and_Iron_Age_Israel_s_Connection_with_the_Denyen_Sea_People_Journal_for_the_Study_of_the_Old_Testament_44_3_2020_490_499
  37. https://courses.lsa.umich.edu/israel-palestine/wp-content/uploads/sites/142/2013/12/020a.pdf
  38. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272580973_A_Preliminary_Study_of_the_Mycenaean_IIIC1_Pottery_Assemblages_from_Tel_Miqne-Ekron_and_Ashdod
  39. https://www.academia.edu/1403840/A_preliminary_study_of_the_Mycenaean_IIIC_1_pottery_assemblages_from_Tel_Miqne_Ekron_and_Ashdod
  40. https://www.academia.edu/69317269/The_impact_of_the_Sea_Peoples_in_Central_Levant
  41. https://biblicalarchaeology.org.uk/pdf/ajba/01-1_009.pdf
  42. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax0061
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.