Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 18.djvu/793

 P H I P H I 757 Delta. Ancient tradition gives no help ; for it takes Caphtor to be Cappadocia, led, it would seem, merely by a super ficial similarity of the names. Of the two main theories the former is that which has recently found most support, and it has a definite point of attachment in the fact that the Philistines, or a^ part of them, are also called in the Bible Cherethites (1 Sam. xxx. 14; Ezek. xxv. 16; Zeph. ii. 5), while David s Philistine guards are in like manner called the Cherethites and Pelethites (2 Sam. viii. 18, xv. 18, &c.). Cherethites (Kretlm) can hardly be anything but Cretans, as the LXX. actually renders it in Ezekiel and Zephaniah, and Caphtor would thus be the island of Crete, an identification which seems to satisfy the conditions of a reasonable hypothesis. For, though the points of contact between Crete or Cretan religion and the Philistine coast which have been sought in Greek and Latin writers (chiefly in Steph. Byzant., s.v. &quot; Gaza &quot;) are very shadowy, there is no doubt that Crete had an early connexion with Phoenicia and received many Semitic inhabitants and a Semitic civilization before the Greeks gradually asserted themselves in the ^Egean and forced back the tide of Semitic influence (for details, see the article PHOENICIA). These facts give a reasonable explanation of the settlement on the Philistine coast within historical times of a mari time people, cognate to the Phoenicians in so many points and yet having certain distinct characters, such as would naturally be produced in a place like Crete by the grafting of a Semitic stock and culture on ruder races not Semitic (the Eteocretans). 1 The opposite view, which places Caphtor in the Delta, rests on more complicated but less satisfactory arguments. There were certainly many Semites in the Delta of Egypt, and so long as the history of the Hyksos (who were no doubt Semites) remains in its present obscurity it is always possible to suppose that their ex pulsion from Egypt explains the settlement of the Philis tines in Canaan. But it is very questionable if the dates will fit ; the name Caphtor is connected with the Delta by no historical testimony, but only by elaborate hypotheses, as that Caphtor may mean in Egyptian Great Phoenicia, and that this again may have been a name for the Egyptian coast, where there Avas a large Semitic population ; 2 and the characteristic Philistine peculiarity of uncircumcision, intelligible enough on the Cretan theory, is scarcely con ceivable in a race Avhich had been long settled in Egypt. The mainstay of the Egyptian hypothesis is found in Gen. x. 13, 14, verses which belong to the older part of the chapter (see NOAH), and reckon in the very obscure list of descendants of Mizraim or Egypt &quot; Casluhim (Avhence came forth Philistim) and Caphtorim.&quot; This account places Caphtorim in some relation to Egypt, but not necessarily in a very close relation, for the Luclim, Avho are also made descendants of Egypt, are scarcely different from Lud or Lydia, Avhich appears at ver. 22, in the later part of the chapter, in another connexion. But further, if the text as it stands is sound, it gives a neAV account of the origin of the Philistines, Avhich can be reconciled Avith the other Biblical eAddence only by making Casluhim a halting-place of the Philistines on their way from Caphtor to Canaan. Accordingly the advocates of the Egyptian theory propose to identify Casluhim Avith the arid district of Mount Casius on the coast of the Egyptian desert. But this is false etymology. Mount Casius is named from the temple of Jupiter Casius, that is, the Avell-knoAvn Semitic 1 In 2 Sam. xx. 23, Ktib, and 2 Kings xi. 4, 19, the foreign mercenaries are called not Krethim but Kan, perhaps Carians. The Carian seamen and pirates had also a strong Semitic strain, and were at bottom the same race with the Eteocretans. 2 So Ebers, A egypten und die Biiclier Mosis, where the theory is supported by a very long and complex argument. Another etymology in support of the theory is giveii by Dietrich in Jfcrx s Archiv, i, 313 sq. God Vp, 3 AA hose name as Avritten in Semitic letters has no possible affinity to Casluhim. And in truth the statement that the Philistines came from Casluhim, presented Avith- out a hint as to their connexion Avith Caphtorim, which is mentioned immediately afterAA ards, lies under strong suspicion of being a gloss, originally set on the margin by a copyist Avho meant it to refer to Caphtorim. 4 In this case the original author Avill have meant Caphtorim to denote, or at least include, the Philistines (AA r ho, as they are not Canaanites, and had close relations with Egypt in historical times, fall readily enough under the Egyptian group), and tells us nothing about the origin of the race. Literature. Hitzig, Urgeschichte. . . der Philistder, 1845, where the now untenable hypothesis of a Pelasgic origin of the Philistines is maintained ; Ewald, Gesch. des V. Israel, i. 348 sq. ; and in general the books on Hebrew history and commentaries on Gen. x. and on Amos. A useful monograph is Stark s Gaza und die philistaische Kiiste, Jena, 1852. For the Assyrian evidence see especially Schrader, Keilinschriften und Altcs Testament, 2d ed., Giessen, 1883. (W. R S.) PHILLIP, JOHN (1817-1867), subject and portrait painter, Avas born at Aberdeen, Scotland, on 19th April 1817. His father, an old soldier, was in humble circum stances, and the son became an errand-boy to a tinsmith of the place, and Avas then apprenticed to a painter and glazier. Meanwhile he AA-as employing in the pursuit of art all the time he could spare from his daily duties, and, having received some technical instruction from a local artist named William Mercer, he began, at the age of about fifteen, to paint portraits. In 1834 he AA r as enabled to make a very brief visit to London, where he studied Avith delighted interest in the Koyal Academy Exhibition and the National Gallery. At this time, or shortly after- Avards, he became assistant to James Forbes, an Aberdeen portrait-painter, under Avhose tuition he made considerable progress. Previously, hoAvever, he had gained a valuable patron. Having been sent to repair a AvindoAv in the house of Major P. L. Gordon, his interest in the works of art Avhich hung on the Avails attracted the attention of their OAvner. He brought the young artist under the notice of Lord Panmure, who bought several of his productions, and in 1836 sent the lad to London, pro mising to bear the cost of his art -education. At first Phillip Avas placed under T. M. Joy, but he soon entered the schools of the Royal Academy, Avhere he Avorked dili gently, but Avith no exceptional promise or success, for two years. In 1839 he figured for the first time in the Iloyal Academy Exhibition Avith a portrait and a landscape, and in the following year he was represented by a more ambitious figure -picture of Tasso in Disguise relating his Persecutions to his Sister. For the next ten years he supported himself mainly by portraiture and by painting subjects of national incident, such as Presbyterian Catechizing, Baptism in Scotland, and the Spaewife. His productions of this period, as well as his earlier subject- pictures, are reminiscent of the practice and methods of Wilkie and the Scottish genre-painters of his time, often possessing considerable grace of form, executed in a thin delicate style of painting, inclining to brownish tones of colour, and Avith the more powerful pigments introduced cautiously and Avith reserve The Letter-Avriter of Seville, shoAvn in the Pioyal Academy of 1854, marks a distinct change of both style and subject. Three years previously the artist s health had shoAvn signs of delicacy, and his medical advisers had recommended a residence in a warmer climate. Spain Avas selected, and a fresh potency came to his art as well as to his physical frame. He Avas brought face to face for the first time Avith the brilliant sunshine and the splendid colour of the South, and it Avas in coping 3 See De Vogue, Syrie Centrale : Inscr. Sem., p. 103 sq, 4 So Olshausen, and Budde, BiUische Urgeschichte, p. 331, note. A mere transposition (so Ewald, Tuch, &c. ) is much less probable.