The Seafaring Raiders / 2 – Who is Who ?

The Sea Peoples – Who is Who ?  [1 from 2]

The Danuna  – Denyen  – Danaos  -  Achaeans

The Danuna (or Denyen), a significant contingent of the “Sea Peoples,” are represented in Egyptian, Hittite and classical sources. The evidence for their origins, ethnic identity and eventual fate is complex and controversial.

The Danuna first appear in one of the Amarna letters (dating to the mid 14th. century BCE). The Danuna are mentioned in a letter from the king of Tyre, Abi-Milku, to the Pharaoh, possibly Akhenaten. The letter (EA 151) consists in part of a report on conditions in Canaan, composed at the request of the Pharaoh. Abi-Milku reports that: “The king of Danuna has died; his brother became king after his death, and his land is at peace” (Moran 1992: 238-239) [1].

Egyptian sources do not refer to the Danuna again until the early 12th century BCE during the reign of Ramesses III. The Danuna are listed among the northern conspirators who moved against Egypt in the war that took place in Ramesses III’s 8th regnal year. This attack is recorded on the walls of Ramesses III’s mortuary temple at Medinet Habu. The other major players in the event include the Philistines, Tjekker, Shekelesh, and Weshesh. This “confederacy” of “Sea Peoples” set out from their lands in the north (variously translated as “islands” or “coastal lands”) and moved down through Anatolia and the Levant, leaving destruction in their wake. They eventually arrived at the northern border of Egypt, where the Egyptians fought them off in joint naval and land battles (Pritchard 1969: 262-263) [2]. At Medinet Habu, the Danuna are also depicted visually in relief scenes of the battles and their aftermath. Interestingly, the Danuna are depicted as looking nearly identical to other “Sea Peoples” including the Philistines (Barnett 1953: 142) [3].

The Danuna appear again in the Papyrus Harris. The Papyrus Harris is an account of the significant events of Ramesses III’s reign, composed immediately after the king’s death. The text referring to Danuna describes the fate of the peoples defeated by Rameses:

I  slew the Denyen [Danuna] in their islands, while the Tjeker and the Philistines  were made ashes. The Sherden and the Weshesh of the Sea were    nonexistent, captured all together and brought in captivity to Egypt like  the sands of the shore (Pritchard 1969: 260-261).

The latest known Egyptian text to mention the Danuna is the Onomasticon of Amenemope, dating to approximately 1100 BCE (Redford 1992: 292) [4] . The text consists of a list of places and peoples, apparently in at least rough geographical order from north to south. The “Dene” are listed between the Keshkesh and Hatti (the land of the Hittites), both of which are situated in Anatolia (Gardiner 1968: 124-125) [5] .

The Danuna are also mentioned in an important Hittite text, dated tentatively to the 8th century BCE. The text, discovered at the site of Karatepe in Cilicia in the late 1940s, is a bi-lingual document written in Phoenician and Hittite. It was erected by Azitawadda of Adana to commemorate the building of a citadel. Azitawadda describes himself as the king and benefactor of the “Danunites.” He speaks at length of the peace and prosperity that he has brought to his kingdom, as well as his military prowess (Pritchard 1969: 653-654). The text also contains a number of references to the “House of Mupsh.” This “Mupsh” can be identified with Mopsus [6], a legendary figure of classical Greek texts. According to legend, Mopsus originated in Lydia and moved eastward, creating several settlements along the way, some of them in Cilicia (Barnett 1953: 142).

In 1997, another important text with relevance to the Danuna was discovered at the site of Çineköy, about 18 miles (30 km) to the south of Adana. The text is inscribed on a large basalt statue, and, like the Karatepe inscription, is bilingual (Luwian and Phoenician). The monument dates to the 8th century BCE. The text was recently translated and published by R. Tekoglu and A. Lemaire (2000) [7]  . This monument, apparently a commemorative inscription, was dedicated to one Urikki (or Awarikas), the king of Qué [8] . The text establishes Urikki as a descendent of Mopsus (or Muksas, in the Luwian/Hittite version of the text): “Myself, I am U[rikki, son of . . . ] of the lineage of Mopsos, [king of the Danuna?]” (Tekoglu and Lemaire 2000: 994). Later in the passage, the king boasts of the alliance between the Danuna and the Assyrians under his reign: “And the Danuna and the Assyrians were a single house” (Tekoglu and Lemaire 2000: 994).

Aside from the interesting Mopsus connection, there is a rich classical tradition surrounding the Danuna in the form of the legend of Io [9]  and the wanderings of her descendents. Danaos and the Phoenician Kadmos were said to have fled Egypt together, while Danaos eventually settled in Argos (Redford 1992: 413). The Greeks of Argos, called the Danaoi, were reputed to be named after Danaos (Leahy 2001: 257) [10] .

The origins of the Danuna are unclear—the ancient texts remain fairly obscure on this point. Historians and archaeologists have attempted to place their origins in Greece, Canaan, and Cilicia. The idea that the Danuna originated in Greece must be approached with caution. As A. Leahy (2001: 257) points out, the similarity in names may be coincidental. Furthermore, even if there is a connection, the Greek legends themselves claim that Danaus originated in the east and eventually settled in Greece (Barnett 1975: 365) [11] . Danaus was originally connected with the Phoenicians, and was even credited as the original source of the phonetic alphabet in Greece (Barnett 1953: 142).

Another theory proposed by A. Jones (1975: 23ff) [12]  suggests that the Danuna were Semitic in origin. They supposedly departed from the Levant with a number of other groups, only to return to the Levant during the migrations that took place at the end of the Bronze Age. However, this statement is strangely unsupported, and seems to rest mainly on classical and biblical legend.

Y. Yadin (1968: 9-23) [13]  attempts to connect the Danuna with the Biblical tribe of Dan. He bases this theory on several factors: (a) the close cultural and geographic association of the biblical Dan with the Philistines and the Tjekker (likewise, in Egyptian depictions, these groups are portrayed in nearly identical costume), (b) biblical descriptions of the Dan as great seamen, and (c) the lack of an early link between the tribe of Dan and the Covenant of the Tribes of Israel. He also attempts to correlate the wandering of the tribe of Dan with the destruction of Tel Qasile (Tell Qasile is an archaeological site over 3,000 years old. The site consists of the remains of a port city founded by the Philistines in the 12th. century BCE. It is located near the Yarkon River, between sites thought to have been inhabited by the Tjekker and the Philistines) ca. 1100 BCE (Yadin 1968: 20-21). Yadin’s theory is intriguing, but highly speculative. There is also no solid evidence, archaeological or historical, that the site of Tel Qasile was inhabited by the Danuna at any time. According to the Onomasticon of Amenemope, the Danuna were residing in Anatolia at the time of this destruction.

The Onomasticon of Amenemope and the Karatepe inscription make it clear that the Danuna were living in Anatolia (specifically eastern Cilicia) at least as early as the 10th century BCE. Barnett (1975: 365) suggests that the Danuna of the Amarna letter may have resided in the Amanus mountains, near modern Adana. This would place them on the border between Anatolia and Syria, and not far from Ugarit, one of the places that fell to the Sea Peoples during the turmoil at the end of the Bronze Age. According to Wainwright (1963: 149-150) [14], there is evidence of the Danuna living in eastern Cilicia dating to as early as the 16th century BCE, in the form of a reference to their capital city of Adaniya in a text by Telepinus.

From all of the evidence considered here, we can conclude that the Danuna (like the other Sea Peoples) were a mobile group, centered mainly in Cilicia and Anatolia, and eventually spreading into Greece and the Levant during the migrations of the Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age.

The Lukka  -  Lugga

Although the Lukka are not listed among the attacking peoples fended off by Ramesses III in the invasion of year 8 described on the walls of the mortuary temple at Medinet Habu, they are well attested in other Egyptian sources, often working together with other groups now classified as “Sea Peoples.” They are also mentioned in an impressive number of Late Bronze Age Hittite Texts, and one very important Ugaritic text. As with most of the Sea Peoples, the origins and eventual fate of the Lukka are obscure.

The earliest reference to the Lukka comes from the Temple of Obelisks in Byblos. One of the obelisks, dating to ca. 2000 BCE., is inscribed in Egyptian hieroglyphs with a dedication to “Kwkwn, son of Rwqq.” The “Rwqq” of this inscription has been identified with the Lukka (Bryce 1974: 395) [15] .

The Lukka began their career as raiders and troublemakers some time before the great movement of the Sea Peoples in the 13th-12th centuries BCE. Their activities are alluded to in one of the Amarna letters (EA 38 in Moran 1992: 111), a brief note from the king of Alashiya to a pharaoh, probably Amenhotep IV. The king of Alashiya composed the letter in response to some kind of allegation from the Pharaoh, apparently to the effect that the Alashiyans had been partners in crime with the Lukka in an unspecified offence:

Why does my brother say such a thing to me, “Does
my brother not know this?” As far as I am
concerned, I have done nothing of the sort.
Indeed, men of Lukki, year by year, seize villages
in my own country. (EA 38, 7-12 in Moran 1992: 111)

Later, the Lukka fought against Egyptian forces alongside the Hittites during the reign of Ramesses II in the famous Battle of Kadesh (ca. 1286 BCE). In his prose bulletin, the official record of the battle (Lichtheim 1976: 60-62) [16] , Ramesses states that the Hittites had gathered a massive collection of allies from the regions of Anatolia, Mesopotamia and Syria. The list of allies includes the Lukka, along with a number of other peoples now classified as Sea Peoples.

The Lukka are also listed among the conquered enemies in the commemorative poem that accompanied the bulletin (Lichtheim 1976: 62-72). The Lukka served the Hittites as chariot troops, working with the troops from various other countries. According to Ramesses’s account, these charioteers worked “three men to a team, acting together” (Lichtheim 1976: 65).

The Lukka fought Egypt once more during a joint attack on Egypt by the Sea Peoples and the Libyans, led by Meryey, king of the Libyans. This attack took place in the fifth year of the reign of Merenptah, Ramesses II’s immediate successor. Merenptah recorded this battle in a series oinscriptions, the longest of which were his Great Karnak Inscription (Breasted 1906: 240-252)  and a victory hymn recorded on what is now called the Israel Stele (Breasted 1906: 259-264) [17]. It is difficult to say to what extent the Lukka participated in this attack, since they are missing from the tallies of slain enemies.

The Lukka appear in a myriad of Hittite texts, dating back as early as the mid 15th century BCE (Bryce and Zahle, 1986: 8 ) [18] . The earliest of these is the Chronicle of Tudhaliyas IV (Garstang and Gurney 1959: 120-123) [19].  According to the chronicle, king Tudhaliyas was accosted by a large confederation of peoples (now known as the “Assuwan Confederacy“) while returning from a military campaign. At the head of the list of attackers is the “[Land of . .]ugga” (Garstang and Gurney 1959: 121). T. Bryce suggests that “Lugga” (Lukka) is the restoration of this name (Bryce 1986: 8).

The problem of the ethnic identity and geographic location of the Lukka people has been thoroughly addressed by T. Bryce (1974; 1986; 1992). As Bryce points out in this 1974 article, “The Lukka Problem — And a Possible Solution,” the ancient sources are confusing and contradictory. Lukka territory seems to jump from the Anatolian coast to the northern mountains of Syria, and the Lukka’s alliances fluctuate constantly.

The Karkisa

The name “Karkisa” appears sporadically in ancient texts, usually with other names now associated with the Sea Peoples. It is often unclear whether the name refers to a people or a geographic location.

The Karkisa first appear in texts from the reigns of Ramses II of Egypt and Muwatullis of the Hittite Empire. Ramses mentions the Karkisa in his account of the Battle of Kadesh. In both the Bulletin and the Poem about the Battle of Kadesh, the Karkisa are mentioned as a tribe that has joined forces with the Hittites (Lichthiem 1976: 57-71). The name Karkisa appears only in lists and no particular detail is given to the tribe.

The Hittite record of the Karkisa reinforces the idea that the Hittites and Karkisa were allied at the time. In the Annals of Mursilis, he mentions a person whom he sent to the people of Karkisa. Muwatullis paid the Karkisa to protect this man from his own brothers. The man then sides with an enemy of Muwatullis. Following the man’s recapture, he begs for vassalage from the Hittite emperor (Goetze 1933) [20] . In this story, the Karkisa are represented as an ally of the Hittites, which fits their description by Ramses II.

The Karkisa make one final appearance in ancient literature. In the Onamasticon of Amenope, the Karkisa are mentioned in reference to the Lukka (Gardiner 1947: 128) [21] . This reference is only geographical in nature and does not mention anything aside from the location of the people.

The geographical location of the Karkisa people is based on their relation to the land of the Lukka. D. Redford (1992: 249) places the Karkisa in southwest Asia Minor, and R. D. Barnett places them in the same area. Barnett mentions specifically that the Karkisa are associated with the Hittite area of Caria, which is on the south-western tip of Anatolia (Barnett 1975: 361).

NOTES:

[1] Moran, W. L. The Amarna Letters. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press 1992
[2]  Pritchard, J. B. The Ancient Near East, Supplementary Text and Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1969
[3]  Barnett, R. D. Mopsos. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 73: 140-145. The author discusses the significance of references to Mopsos in connection to the Danuna in the Karatepe inscription. 1953
[4]  Redford, D. B. Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton University Press. Discussion of the Sea Peoples, their origins, and their connections with peoples mentioned in Hittite and classical texts. 1992
[5]  Gardiner, A. H. -  Ancient Egyptian Onomastica. London: Oxford University Press 1968
[6]  Mopsus, a celebrated seer and diviner, was the son of Manto, daughter of the mythic seer Tiresias and Rhacius of Caria or of Apollo himself, the oracular god. Greeks of the Classical age accepted Mopsus as a historical figure, though the anecdotes concerning him bridge legend and myth.
[7]  Tekoglu, R. and Lemaire, A. La Bilingue Royale Louvito-Phénicien de Çineköy. Comptes Rendus de L’Academie des Inscriptions 2000: 961-1006. 2000
[8]  Quwê – also spelled Que, Kue, Qeve, Coa, Kuê and Keveh – was a “Neo-Hittite” Assyrian vassal state or province at various times from the 9th century BC to shortly after the death of Ashurbanipal around 627 BCE in the lowlands of eastern Cilicia, and the name of its capital city. According to many translations of the Bible, it was the place from which King Solomon obtained horses. (I Kings 10: 28, 29; II Chronicles 1:16).
[9]  In Greek mythology, Io (pronounced /?a?o?/ or /?i?o?/) was a priestess of Hera in Argos who was seduced by Zeus, who changed her into a heifer to escape detection. Her mistress Hera set ever-watchful Argus Panoptes to guard her, but Hermes was sent to distract the guardian and slay him. Heifer Io was loosed to roam the world, stung by a maddening gadfly sent by Hera, and wandered to Egypt, thus placing her descendant Belus in Egypt; his sons Cadmus and Danaus would thus “return” to mainland Greece.
[10]  Leahy, A. Sea Peoples. Pp. 257-260 in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, ed. Donald Redford. London: Oxford University Press. A brief summary of the Sea Peoples’ attacks on Egypt with discussion of the origins of the various peoples 2001
[11]  Barnett, R. D. The Sea Peoples. Pp. 362-366 in The Cambridge Ancient History, vol. II, part 2, ed. J. B. Bury, S. A. Cook, F. E. Adcock. Cambridge University Press. Includes a brief discussion of the Danuna, focusing on the connection with Mopsus. 1975
[12]  Jones, A. Bronze Age Civilization: The Philistines and the Danites. Washington, D. C.: Public Affairs Press. Discussion of the Danuna and Philistines and their connection with classical and biblical sources. 1975
[13]  Yadin, Y. “And Dan, Why Did He Remain in Ships?” Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology 1: 9-23. The author postulates a connection between the Danuna and the Biblical tribe of Dan. 1968
[14]  Wainwright, G. AA Teucrian at Salamis in Cyprus. Journal of Hellenic Studies 83: 146-151.  1963
[15]  Bryce, T. The Lukka Problem—And a Possible Solution. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 33: 395-404. 1974
[16]  Lichtheim, Miriam Ancient Egyptian literature: a book of readings. Vol.2. The New Kingdom. Berkeley/London. 1976
[17] Breasted, J. H. Ancient Records of Egypt. Vol. III. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1906/2001
[18]  Bryce, T., and Zahle, J. The Lycians, vol. 1. Copenhagen. Museum Tusculanum Press. 1986
[19]  Garstang, J., and Gurney, O. R. “Chronicle of Tudhaliyas IV,” pp. 120-123
[20]  Goetze, A. Die Annelen des Mursilis. Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatisch-Aegyptischen Gesellschaft, 38 Heft VI 23. 1933
[21]  Gardiner, A.H. Ancient Egyptian Onomastica. Vol.1. London: Oxford University Press 1947.