Electric                    Astral               Pre-historical
Universe              Catastrophism        Reconstruction


Articles & Products Supporting the Pre-historical Reconstruction and Plasma Cosmology
 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store       used books        contact

Site Section Links

Introduction Material
The Third Story

Cosmology, Origins
The Nature of Time
Nature of Time video
The Nature of Space
The Neutrino Aether
Nature of Force Fields
Relativity Theory

Geophysical Material
Origin of Modern Geology
Niagara Falls Issues
Climate Change Model
Climate Change Questions

Philosophy Material
Philosophy Links

Reconstruction &
Mythology Material
Modern Mythology Material
Language/Symbol Development
1994 Velikovsky Symposium
Horus Journals TOC
Kronos Journals TOC
Pensee Journals TOC
Velikovskian Journals TOC
Selected Velikovskian Article

Miscellaneous Material
Modern Mythology
State of Religious Diversity
PDF Download Files
Open letter to science editors


KRONOS Vol II, No. 4

Professor of Anthropology and Linguistics
Drew University, Madison, N. J.

In Peoples of the Sea,(1) Immanuel Velikovsky continues to stimulate his readers and to invite reconsideration of conventional historical assumptions. Among the most provocative of his reformulations of antiquity is his assertion that the PRST(2) who led the sea-borne assault on the Egypt of Ramses III were Persians rather than, as has generally been supposed, Philistines.

In purely linguistic terms, there is little question that the equation of PRST with Philistines (or Palestinians) causes fewer difficulties than with Persians (or Farsis), since in the former case the t is part of the base, while in the latter it must be interpreted as a suffix. To be sure, Classical (Middle Kingdom) Egyptian(3) had a commonly used nominal t-suffix, and if it had functioned to convert place names into ethnic designations, there would be no problem. Unfortunately, however, it served to mark feminine nouns and pronouns.(4)

One way to support the Velikovskyan interpretation here is to note that, in some cases, personal names of non-Egyptian origin were, at least in Hellenistic times, Egyptianised by the addition of a -t. An example is BRNKT for the Macedonian name Berenike.(5) But since all such names are those of females, the t-suffix here may not be onomastic, as it at first seems, but feminine.

On the other hand, if we may interpret PRST as an ethnic slur, Velikovsky's reading can be buttressed. For it would not have been unreasonable for non-Iranians to deride the long skirts of Persian archers by labelling such warriors "Persian women."

Yet the ambiguity of Egyptian spelling, when considered in conjunction with the acknowledged ethnic diversity of the incursive "Sea Peoples," leads me to feel that an either/or choice between Persians and Philistines constitutes a premature foreclosure of options. If the PRST originated in Perusia(6) (modern Perugia, in Italy), they could have been Etruscans; if in the valley of the Porsuk (or Pursak) river of Turkey(7), they could have been Anatolians; and if in Pharos or in Pelusium from the Nile Delta, they could have been anything from Libyans to Levantines.

In the Aegean area, moreover, there were a plethora of potentially related place names: Pharsalos in Thessaly, Palaeste in Epirus, Pras(s)o on Rhodes, and Paros among the islands.(8) What is more, Hellenic mythology contains a Series of legendary personages, such as Perse, Perses, Perseis, and Perseus, which might reasonably have led, at least in pre-Achaemenid times, to the use of a term like *Perseans for Greeks. The attested alternative ethnonym Danaans, coupled with the Greek heroic names Danaus and Danae, makes this possibility far from remote.


1. Doubleday and Co., Garden City, N. Y. 1977
2. Since early Egyptian scribes wrote no vowels, it seems less prejudicial, especially in cases of uncertain reference, to cite unvocalised forms. (For details see Alan Gardiner, Egyptian Grammar, 3rd ed., Griffith Institute, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, U.K., 1957, reprinted 1976, p. 26.)
3. Formal inscriptions continued to be written - though with decreasing accuracy - in Classical Middle Egyptian long after this form of the language had ceased to be the vernacular of the Nile Valley (Carleton T. Hodge, "Egyptian Language," Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, Ill., 1971, p. 90B.)
4. Gardiner, op. cit. (fn. 2), p. 34.
5. E. A. Wallis Budge, Egyptian Language, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, U.K., 1910 (reprinted by Dover Publications, N.Y., 1970), p. 23. Other examples offered by Budge are "A.R.R.S.N.A.T., i.e., Arsinoe and T.R.A.P.N.T., ie., Tryphaena"
6. N. G. Hammond, ed., The Oxford Classical Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, U.K., 2nd ed., 1970, p. 806.
7. Arthur J. Stevenson, editorial director, Webster's New Geographical Dictionary, G. and C. Merriam Co., Springfield, Mass., 1972, pp. 966 and 986.
8. E. H. Blakeney, ed., A Smaller Classical Dictionary, J. M. Dent and Sons, London, U.K., 1910 (reprinted 1949), passim.

 home       features       science/philosophy       wholesale store        policies        contact
Mikamar Publishing, 16871 SE 80th Pl,  Portland  OR  97267       503-974-9665