Jump to content

Talk:Denyen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Biblical Connections

There is just as much "evidence" connecting the tribe of Dan with the Denyen (or Danuna) as with Jacob, none; but the language I replaced was quite slanted. LarG (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archeology and antiquity

[edit]

Geographical manifestations

[edit]

Wheres Dan (talk) 13:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Sources

[edit]

I looked at two of the books above, both turned out to be self-published. And I suggest that Wheres Dan reads WP:NOR as well as WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're on the backpage.
Wheres Dan (talk) 18:11, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am watching this page now. Wheres Dan will not be allowed to provide any additions unless he cites a couple modern academic sources. Your sources were dated to the late 1800s.--Tataryn77 (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Back page? Dougweller (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Of Indo-European Origin"

[edit]

The statement linking Denyen to speakers of an Indo-European language appears to be suspect. If the Adana of Asia Minor left records in an Indo-European language, then the statement should be that there may be a link between the Denyen and the Adana, who left records in [an Indo-European language, if that is the case]. If the Adana left records which are in a non-Indo-European language, then there does not appear to be any support for the statement associating the Denyen with speakers of an Indo-European language. Furthermore, it would be better to identify the specific archeologist(s) reponsible for identifying the Denyen with an Indo-European language.

The Indo-European factoid in this context sounds very doubtful, and it is not very helpful because it is unimportant. The Sea Peoples are interesting because of their possible association with the Bronze Age collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean. But we don't have a lot of facts about them. There does appear to be an association between the Peleset and the Philistines, and there is evidence that the original language of the Philistines was a dialect of ancient Greek. There are credible linkages between Sea Peoples and the modern names given to Sardinia and Sicily, but that does not tell us anything about their languages. It is also credible that the Tyrrhenians should be associated with Etruscans, but the Etruscans spoke a non-Indo-European language.

As far as I know, other than the Adana mentioned in the article, there is no accepted association between Denyen and any historically identifiable group other than the Denyen component of the Sea Peoples. There are too many ancient peoples without any apparent relationship to each other who have a name that has a Dan- component for any quick associations to be made. The Dan- part of the name of the Danube River can also be seen in rivers farther East in the Dn- component of the Dnieper and the name of the Don River. Thus, something like "danu-" is believed to have meant "river" in the Proto-Indo-European language. So, if the Denyen did speak an Indo-European language, they may simply have called themselves the River People. Such a name may be taken by various people in various places without suggesting a strong connection between different groups.

Archeologically and historically, there is evidence that the Sea Peoples were pirates or mercenaries who were hired by Eastern Mediterranean cultures in their frequent wars. The Sea Peoples may or may not have seen themselves as allies. They could just as easily have seen themselves as competitors. For example, if there is a historic basis to the Trojan War, it may have been a conflict between two groups of pirates, both of which may have been considered Sea Peoples by the Egyptians and the urban societies of the 12th century Levant. (Homer's Iliad dates from 400 years or so after the events he narrates, so it should be viewed as being entertainment as much as (or more than) history.) -- Bob (Bob99 (talk) 19:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Identification of Denyen

[edit]

I've removed the IE claim as it wasn't in the source and the editor's other edits were dubious. Trevor R. Bryce is an excellent source, and wrote:

Denyen Late Bronze Age popularion group listed among rlie so-called Sea Peoples who swept through large parts of the western Asian world and attacked Egypt by land and sea in the reign of the pharaoh Ramesses III (1 184-1153). Their name is represented as Dnyn in the Egyptian record (*ARE IV: §§65-6, *ANET 262, *Gerrzen, 2008: 89, 91). Links have been proposed between them and one or more of the follow- ing: (a) The land of Danuna, mentioned in the mid Cl4 Amarna correspondence (*EA 151: 50), and for this reason sometimes located in Canaan, (b) The land of Adana, located in rhe region called Cilicia in the Graeco-Roman period. Adana is first arrested in Late Bronze Age I lit rite texts, and subsequently in two Luwian-Phoeiiician bilingual inscriptions from rhe region, the so-called Kararetepe and Cinekoy bilinguals (q.v.), dating to C8. The Phoenician versions of these inscriptions refer to the inhabitants of rhe land as Danunians. (c) The biblical tribe of Dan. (d) A Greek population group called the Danaoi. Of these possibilities, a Cilician origin for the Denyen seems the most plausible." The Routledge Handbook of the Peoples and Places of Ancient Western Asia [1]. No time now to edit it more. Dougweller (talk) 16:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denyen&oldid=1217254795"