c c c

cc
c


cc  
c

c Like many events in history, the origins of the Israelites and Philistines have become

quite fuzzy throughout the ages. There has been no universally agreed upon theory of the

origin of the Israelites, but not for lack of trying as there have been several prevailing

theories on the topic, some militaristic while others peaceful. The addition of religious texts

has also muddied historians view on their origins as they base their understanding of the

event on the Book of Joshua, considering it more or less the true story. While the followers

of the unified military conquest theory have the backing of biblical texts on their side, the

theory tends to fall apart under the weight of so much opposing evidence. This gives rise to

the peaceful infiltration theory which presents a completely different perspective on the

situation. Having less conflicting evidence this has gained traction, which differs with how

the Philistines came to the land: conquering it with advanced weaponry.Whatever their

methods of acquiring the land what is clear is that both races became formidable forces

during their reigns.

For the centuries after the Israelis and Philistines ruled the land the only source that

historians had to base their views on the past was the Book of Joshua. This served as the

foundation of the unified military conquest theory DzThis approach adhered closely to the

description of the conquest of Canaan in the first chapters of the Book of Joshua, whereby

the Canaanite city-states throughout the country were subjugated in a series of battles and

many of them were destroyed by firedz (Finkelstein 1988, 295). Developed by William

Albright and his students during the 1930s, the theory was supported by three main things:

the Book of Joshua, archeological evidence at places like Bethel and Hazor that attribute

destruction levels to Israeli settlements, and historical parallels of other nomadic tribes
c c c
c

defeating greater forces. The evidence looked compelling at first; however the evidence

against the theory was even more compelling. For example many of the cities supposedly

conquered in Joshua, such as Gezer, were never actually conquered based on archeological

findings. In addition to that the Israeli settlementswere mostly found in the sparsely

populated central hill, and itǯs quite difficult to conquer the land from someone who isnǯt

there. Finally the Bible actually contradicts itself in the Book of Judges which comes right

after Joshua and mentions that the Canaanites control cities that are supposed to be

controlled by Israelis DzAnd his master said to him, ǮWe will not turn aside into the city of

foreigners, who do not belong to the people of Israel; but we will pass on to Gib'e-

ah.ǯ"(Judges 19:12). These flaws in the theory are big enough to question its accuracy and

point to a different theory for the Israelites origins.

The peaceful infiltration theory, created by Albrecht Alt in 1925, is the main

opposition to the unified military conquest and has less of the glaring flaws. Alt Dzdescribed

Israelite Settlement as the peaceful infiltration of pastoral groups into the sparsely

populated regions of Canaan, part of the routine pattern of transhumance between the

desert fringe and the central hill countrydz (Finkelstein 1988, 302). The Israeli tribes would

travel between Transjordan and the central hill depending on the seasons and would

eventually form ties with the permanent population although initially did not interfere with

them since they presided in the mostly unoccupied central hill. Eventually the tribes

switched over to mainly agriculture from shepherding and took control over the entire

central hill. Once this occurred they affected the trade and commerce of the Canaanite city-

states and caused them to shrink and allowed for the expansion of the Israelite tribes into

the more populated areas, this expansion period consisted of more aggressive actions by
c c c
c

the tribes which have come to overshadow the peaceful cohabitation of the Canaanites and

Israelites. DzWhen the biblical descriptions were redacted during the Monarchy, memories

of the wars of expansion were still fresh. And since most of the territory was acquired in

those campaigns, they were associated with the initial stage of Israeli Settlementdz

(Finkelstein 1988, 304). The infiltration theory seems more plausible than the military

theory asit explains that the settlement of the land by the Israelites took a long period of

time, a few hundred years, rather than the fourteen stated in Joshua. In addition to that, the

first cities supposedly conquered by the tribes, Jericho and Ai, were not, according to

archeological evidence, conquered and didnǯt even exist at the time in Joshua contradicting

any claims of a siege of Jericho before its destruction. The lack of destruction and the fairly

long amount of time of expansion points to a more peaceful settlement of the Israelites that

was only later turned aggressive after the nomadic tribes settled and gained a firm hold on

mostly unoccupied land.

The peaceful infiltration theory of Israeli origin differs greatly from the origin of the

Philistines, who came to land of Israel as a major military threat. The Philistines are

believed to have come from the Aegean Sea during the 13th century BCE which was a period

when the ruling Egyptian and Hittite empires were in a state of decline. The Philistines

Dz
 
c c

cccc

c

 c
cccc
c


 c  c cc

ccc
c

cccc  c
cc



c
c ! "#c$
c  
c





ccc
c
c

cc
cc


c


cc
c
ccc


c c


c
c


cc%
cc c 
c
c

c

cc
c

c c

cc

#c& 
c
cc

cc

c
c

  
c

c

c cc
c
c
c


c c c


#c$
c
c c c
c


c


c'(c) 
c) c' cc
c

ccc


c c



c 
c

c
#c)

  c


c c c
c  
c
cc

c) cc
c

c*+ c

c,-c c
ccc
 c


c

.-

c


c cc
c
c c c cc#c) ccc
c


cc/  c
c0

c-1*c

c)

cc
ccc



cc
c



c  
c

c

c ! "#c$
cc

c
c c
c

cc


c


c c
c  
c c
c 
c

cc
c
c 
c c
c
c


 c
c
c
c)

c

#c2


c
c 
c c c
c  
c


c

 c
cc
 c
c
 
c
#c$ c
cc
 cc
cc 
c
c
c

cc
cc
c.-
c
cc 

c
c


c
c
c c

c

ccc
 
c
 cc
 #c


c

c
c


c
c



c

  c


c 
c c
c  
c

cc
c

c


c
c
c*3 c

c,-ccc
c 
cc
c-
c (cc c

c
c

cc
c 
cc
c

#c

c $
c
cc
c


cc
c  
c

cc
c 
cc c

c



cc




#c$
c


c c
c

 cc
c c
 cc
c

c

 
c

 c  cc

c
c c
c-
#cc4c c 

cc

c



c
c
c


 c

cc
c

 c  cc
cc
cc


c  cc
c

c c

c
cc

c


c
c

c


c
c
c
 
cc


c-
cc
#c$
c  
cc
c

c c

cc


cc

c


c
 c
cc5

c
ccc) cc

#ccc 

c c
c

  
c

 c 
cc
c cc 
c c
c-
c
c c c
c

 c 
cc

c

c


c#c6 
c
c  
c c

 c



ccc  c

c

c

c

cc
c cc


ccc
c

c c

 c cc 

ccc
c

c c
 c

c
cc

cc 
 cc


   c



c c c 
c 
#c

Works Cited

! c0#cc2

c!#c7#c*89:#c
Ë

r


#c

2

c$
c)
 
 cc
c


c


cr


c*8;;c#c+8<.=*>#c
c c c
c

7 c- cc- 


cc-
cc)

#c?,
c%

c
c@

#?c






 #c6
#c3=c2
#c+3**#cA 1BB5# # #
BB
B
B
.

C
D!@*E
D**3<:+:F#c