Two apparently contradictory statements are found in the Bible respecting this point. While the genealogical table in Genesis (x. 13, z4), in the enumeration of the Egyptian colonies, reads, And Mizraim begat . . . the Casluhim, from whence (ntjp) came Philistines, and [begat, viz.] the Caphtorites ;' Amos, on the other hand. makes the Philistines come forth from Caphtor (ix. 7). This latter view is also taken in Deut. ii. 23, which speaks of the Caphtorim who came forth from Caphtor' as the destroyers of the Avvim, the people who held the south-western sea-coast before the Philistines supplanted them. Again, in Jer. xlvii. 4, the Philistines are called the remnant of the t't (maritime country ? island ?) of Caphtor.' Among the various solutions of this difficulty that have been attempted, we have to mention first of all the transposition of the word Caphtorim (Gen. x. 14) before the phrase whence [not out of whom'] came the Philistines :' thus making either the Caphtorim alone, or both them and the Casluhim the progenitors, as it were, of this people ; which, indeed, exhibits many 'signs of being a com pound race. Again, it has been assumed that the Caphtorim were originally a powerful neighbouring tribe of the Casluhim : the latter being the primitive denomination of the Philistines (before they`emi grated'), and that in the course of time these Caph torim subjected their less powerful neighbours, the Casluhim or Philistines, who by some means re gained their liberty and left the country of Caphtor. Thus they might afterwards not only have been said to have come from Caphtor—indeed, to have been 'brought out' from there, as were the Israelites from Egypt, with whose exodus Amos compares theirs—but by a further stretch even been called Caphtarites.
Whether, however, or not, any of these or similar conciliatory explanations is accepted, or whether, simply, as in other instances, the genealogical table in Genesis is at variance with other ethnographical traditions of the Bible, the overwhelming evidence traces the Philistines to Caphtor. And here a new difficulty, not easy to solve with our as yet very scanty records, arises. Where was Caphtor ? The Targum, LXX., Vulg., and the ancient commenta tors, followed by authorities like Bochart, Gesenius, etc., render it—palpably misled by the apparent similarity of sound—Cappadocia ('Npultp). The real name of that country, however, as found upon cuneiform inscriptions, being Katapatuka in early times, this hypothesis falls to the ground ; quite apart from the term island or maritime country being applied to Caphtor, which does not apply to Cappadocia—not to dwell upon many further objections. Another opinion, which makes it Cyprus (1M] being transposed into KuIlPoE, or the supposition of a fictitious lb?), is disposed of by the existence of the special name of ?onn for Cyprus in the Bible. A further utterly untenable notion, based on a vague simi larity of sound between Pelishtim and Pelusiurn, identifies the latter with the lost Caphtor. One of the most widely-adopted notions, however, is, that Caphtor represents the island of Crete ; and for this hypothesis many and weighty reasons are given. The Kretim' are in several passages (Ezek. xxv.
; Zeph. ii. 5 ; i Sam. xxx. 14) identified with the Philistines. As the Cretans were famous for their skill in handling the bow among the Greeks, so were the Philistines in Palestine ; and the corps of the Crethi who constituted David's bodyguard may have been formed after the model of the skilled Philistine archers—as, indeed, the Targum renders
.111Ln by wrIvp, archer. There are, further, some traditions recorded in Greek and Roman writers pointing to the ancient connection between the Cretans and the Philistines. Tacitus speaks of the Jews—confounding them with the Philistines or Palazstinians—as having fled from Crete. Stephanus of Byzantium mentions that the ancient name of Gaza was Mwoia, so called from Minos, king of Crete. There also he records a temple of Jupiter Cretensis, worshipped under the name of Mamas (? Nnto our Lord ; Hitzig, Varuna, Sanscr.) Against this hypothesis it has been properly urged that Crethi in the Bible hardly means anything else but a Carian (as shown under the heading CARlA). Nor have the various other items alleged as proofs stood the test of close scrutiny, so that we are obliged still to look elsewhere. Passing over all further suggestions—also that of Caphtor = pomegranate, being l'inS (which has the same signification, and is the name of a town in Pam phylia, where an .1Eolian colony is known to have dwelt once)—we arrive at that which seems the most probable (as it is likewise the one contained in the primeval Biblical tradition), viz., that the Casluhim and Caphtor must both be looked for in Egypt. Medixval writers, Saadia, Benjamin de Tudela, and others, render Caphtor by Damietta, while other indications seem to point to a some what different direction in that country. Ety mologically, Caphtor was brought together with Koptos (Kebt), and = (At) 7tarros. A still exist ing place, Akifour (Kafar), in the Nile-Delta, is supposed to contain a faint trace of the ancient name. Herodotus speaks of pyramids erected by a shepherd of the time of Cheops and Chephrea, named Philition (Philitis), in which again the Phi istines are recognised by some. According to Stephanus of Byzantium, Ashdod ("ANTos) was founded by a refugee from the Red Sea. Ma netho's account in Josephus (c. .4j5. i. 26, 27) of the shepherds—identified by him as the Jews —is supposed by some to refer in reality to the Philistines, or rather to that portion of then which the Bible emphatically called Casluhim. These—to sum up with the least improbable (but still very precarious) hypothesis—are supposed to have been aborigines of Cassiotis (1=1DUlt, Targ.), a region lying on the borders of Egypt to wards Arabia Petrzea, south of the Serbonian bog, and to have emigrated to Colchis, whence their spe cial name. From there they would have wandered into Palestine, where they were joined at a later period by the affinitive Egyptian tribe of the Caph torites, who may, when they first lett Egypt, have settled in Crete for a time, and in consequence of some unknown events either left that island as a body, or only sent a colony as a kind of reinforce ment to their kindred tribe. Their first immigra tion from Egypt would thus have to be placed subsequent to Amenoph, the third king of the r8th dynasty, or about 197o; the second at about the time of the Judges.—We need hardly add, that widely different views are held on every single item of this final hypothesis,* but it seems to offer the greatest facility for a reconciliation of our widely-contradic tory and palpably-defective sources of information.