en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples
3 corrections found
Dated to about 1100 BC (at the end of the 22nd dynasty)
The parenthetical dynasty dating is wrong: around 1100 BC is not the end of Egypt’s 22nd Dynasty. The 22nd Dynasty began much later, around 943/945 BC, while the Onomasticon is generally placed in the late 20th or early 21st Dynasty context.
Full reasoning
The phrase combines an approximately correct absolute date (around 1100 BC) with an incorrect dynastic label.
- University College London describes the Onomasticon of Amenemipet as attested from the Ramesside Period to the late Third Intermediate Period, not as a text originating at the end of the 22nd Dynasty.
- Independent chronology for Egypt’s 22nd Dynasty places that dynasty much later, beginning around 943/945 BC and ending around 720/715 BC. So 1100 BC cannot be “the end of the 22nd dynasty”.
- Academic summaries indexed on the web place the Onomasticon of Amenope around the end of the 20th Dynasty / around 1100 BC, which fits the absolute date but contradicts the article’s dynastic parenthesis.
So the error is specifically the claim that c. 1100 BC was “at the end of the 22nd dynasty.”
3 sources
- Onomasticon of Amenemipet
The Onomasticon of Amenemipet is ... known from the greatest number of sources, from Ramesside Period to late Third Intermediate Period.
- Egyptian Dynasties | Twenty-Second Dynasty of Egypt
The Twenty-Second Dynasty of Egypt ... ruled ... from around 943 BCE and 720 BCE ... Duration and Context: The Twenty-Second Dynasty lasted from approximately 945 BCE to 715 BCE.
- Ashkelon 4
The Onomasticon of Amenope was dated by Gardiner to the end of the 20th Dynasty, around 1100 ...
also took part in the Battle of Perire against the Egyptians
The Tjeker are attested in Ramesses III’s Year 8 Sea Peoples coalition, not in Merneptah’s Battle of Perire. Standard listings of the Perire coalition name Ekwesh, Sherden, Lukka, Teresh, and Shekelesh instead.
Full reasoning
This sentence places the Tjeker in the Battle of Perire under Merneptah, but the standard ancient-Egyptian evidence for that battle does not list them there.
- A summary of Merenptah’s enemies at Perire lists the northern allies as Ekwesh, Sherden, Lukka, Teresh, and Shekelesh.
- By contrast, a summary of Ramesses III’s Year 8 coalition at Medinet Habu lists Tjeker, Shekelesh, Denye(n), Wehesh, and Peleset.
So the article appears to have conflated two different Sea Peoples groupings from two different reigns. The Tjeker belong with Ramesses III’s Battle of the Delta material, not with Merneptah’s Battle of Perire.
2 sources
- Sea People - Livius
In his fifth regnal year ... king Merenptah fought against Libyan invaders who were supported by northern allies... From all this, we can deduce that Ekweš, Lycians, Šerden, Šekeleš, and Tereš were bands of seaborne warriors.
- Ramesses III and the Philistines, 1175 BCE | Center for Online Judaic Studies
Their confederation was the Tjeker, Shekelesh, Denye(n), Wehesh and the Peleset (Philistines). The Philistines and other Sea Peoples invaded by sea and were defeated in a great battle called the Battle of the Delta.
The fact that several civilizations collapsed around 1175 BC has led to the suggestion that the Sea Peoples may have been involved at the end of the Hittite, Mycenaean and Mitanni kingdoms.
Including Mitanni here is anachronistic. The Mitanni kingdom had ceased to exist as an independent state well before 1175 BC, so it was not one of the kingdoms collapsing ‘around 1175 BC’.
Full reasoning
This sentence groups Mitanni with states that fell in the broader Late Bronze Age crisis around 1175 BC, but Mitanni had already disappeared as an independent kingdom much earlier.
- The Encyclopedia of the Bible states that “An end was put to the Mitannian kingdom as an independent state by the Hittite emperor Suppiluliuma I (c. 1345 b.c.)”.
- World History Encyclopedia likewise dates Mitanni’s floruit to roughly 1500–1240 BCE and says Assyria and the Hittites had already reduced and then absorbed it, with Shalmaneser I and Tukulti-Ninurta I finishing the process by about 1250 BCE.
So while the Hittite and Mycenaean collapses belong to the late-13th/early-12th-century crisis, Mitanni does not belong in a list of kingdoms ending around 1175 BC.
2 sources
- Mitanni - Encyclopedia of The Bible - Bible Gateway
An end was put to the Mitannian kingdom as an independent state by the Hitt. emperor Suppiluliuma I (c. 1345 b.c.), who recognized as a vassal ruler of the conquered state a certain Kurtiwaza.
- Mitanni - World History Encyclopedia
The Kingdom of Mitanni ... thrived between 1500 and 1240 BCE ... His son and successor, Shalmaneser I, completed the conquest of Mitanni c. 1250 BCE ... obliterating the now greatly reduced Kingdom of Mitanni, which then became part of the Assyrian Empire.