1M 



PHILIP-PHILISTINES 



number of manufacturing establishment within the 

 city in 1SS2 wa> ,.' l-.i hand*, and 



paving wages amounting to 983,965. '> is. The gross 

 value of the nrodu.-t in that y.-ar was $481.226,309. 



In isss dan Spreckels, of San Francisco, erected 

 an extensive sugar-refinery on the Delaware Kiver, 

 covering between 9 and 10 acres. The works will have 

 a capacity .if 2.<XH>,000 Ibs. of sugar daily, employing 

 from TOO to 1000 hands. 



.. On Sept. 26, 188S, the county commis- 

 sioners made return of 232,:ill registered voters, an 

 increase of 3219 over the number in 18K7; the total 

 vol.- 114. (J. ii.) 



PHI UP. Kt\<; </. 1670), an Indian chief noted 

 i Knjlatid history, was the son of Massasoit, 

 sachem of t In' Wauipanoaga, who had formed a league 

 with the Pilgrims, at Plymouth, Mass., in 1'ii'l. 

 MaWMiit continued friendly to the end of his life in 

 Tlii-n his two eldest sons, Mooanuni and Po- 

 metacon. going to Plymouth, requested English names. 

 and the court called them Alexander and 1'hilii). 

 Alexander dying within a year, Philip became sachem. 

 He resided .-i- Pokanokct. and for a time maintained 

 friendship with the whites as his father had done, but 

 in 1C70 there were rumors of his disaffection, so that 

 in the nest year an attempt was made to disarm the 

 Indians. Sassamon, a converted Indian, who had 

 given information of the hostile movements of the 

 tribe, was killed, and, when his murderers were tried 

 and executed, the Indians slew several whites. Philip, 

 seeing that the steady advance of the whites was due 

 to their unity of action, prevailed upon the Narragan- 

 setts and other tribes to form an alliance to exter- 

 minate the English settlers. But the colonies of 

 Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Plymouth made still 



onncction to repel the common danger. 

 Winslow, in December, 1675, inar.-lied with 1000 men 

 against the stronghold of the Narragansetts, and 

 destroyed it with all their provisions for the winter. 

 The war raged with greater fury in the following 

 spring. Altogether, 13 towns, with 600 buildings, were 

 yed, and 600 colonists slain. Hut the Indians 

 were overpowered, and Philip, deserted, sought refuge 

 at Mount Hope. It. I. Even here he was pursued by 

 ('apt. Benjamin Church, and slain Aug. 12, 1676. 

 His body was qiiartcrc 1. and his head was long ex- 

 posed on a gililiei at Plymouth. Church published a 

 11',-ilnni of the war (1716; republished ISIo). 



PIIIUPP1 \.N-V See Ito.MANS. Kl'ISTI.E TO THE. 



PHIUPPOTKM X 1-Ki.ix KMMANIKI. HKNKI, 

 I-'rcnch historical painter, was born at Paris, April '.',, 

 is 15. Me studied under Cogniet, and in 1833 ex- 

 hibited his first painting, a scene from the American 

 revolutionary war. Ills next was The Retreat from 

 Moscow (1835), then followed The Taking of Ypres 

 and The Death of Turenne (1838). After a 

 visit to Algiers in 1K40, he painted many scenes nl 

 Algerian lite. Among his noted works are Ixmis XV. 

 Id of Font. -nny (I sin); The Last Banquet 

 of the (lin.ndins (1S50) ; Charge at Balaklava ( 



if Puebla (1865); Meeting of Henri IV. and 

 Sufly (1875). lie ,-d-o produced (he remarkable pano- 

 rama of the Siege of Paris. His works have achieved 

 L'reat popularity, due to their exhibition of the pomp 

 and circumstance of war and to their precision in de- 

 tails, hut he cannot be said to display in any high 

 true arti.-tie leelini:. 



;'\i i. Piiiui'iMiTKAfX, born in Paris, Jan. 

 27. 1 >!,. after studying in the Eeole des Beaux Arts 

 and with Cogniet and Calnncl. :. i-ted his father in 

 ''yclorama of the Sicire of Paris, and 

 afterwards exhibited it in several Amciican cities 1 1> 

 made a similar representation of the Battle of (Jeltys- 

 burg. which has been exhibited at New York. Phila- 

 delphia, and ot':' He also prepared < 'yelo- 

 Mina- cif the l'':ill- o( Niagara and of MM Battle of Tel- 

 el -Kebir for exhibition in l/mdon. and of the Siege of 

 PleuiaforSt. Peter-burg. Several of his paintings of 



war scenes and historical subjects have been exhibited 

 at the Paris Salon. In Iss.s he exhibited in V< 

 t' thirty large paintings illustrating the cat 

 (Jen. (Irani. His recent works have been illustrative 

 of American hi.-tory. 



P 11 1 1 , 1 ST I N ES. The valuable article on this sub- 



v win Jectint"eKscvri.oi'.i)i.\ BKITANNK A 



Irs* 7,, MO correctly says that the Bible represents 



Am Ren ' the Philistines to 1, ax e been immigrants 



(Am. ix. 7 ; Jcr. xlvii. 1; IVut. u. 23 ; 

 Gen. x. 14). Its correctness is open to question, how- 

 ever, when it affirms, on the strength of 1 Sam. xxx. 

 14; Ezek. xxv. li'i; Xeiih. ii. 5; 2 Sam. viii. IS ; xv. 

 18, etc., that " the Philistines, or a part of them, are 

 also called in the Bible Cherethites." and that 1'avid's 

 celebrated "Cherethites and Pelethites" were Philis- 

 tines. It is at least as natural to understand these 

 passages as representing that the Cherethites were a 

 different people, living to the south of the Philistines. 



The statements found in Hen. xxi. 32, 34: xxvi. 1, 

 8, 14, 15, 18; Exod. xiii. 17; xxiii. 31 ; Josh. xiii. 2, 

 3; Jud. iii. 3, etc., to the effect that the Philistines 

 were already in their seats in the Mediterranean low- 

 land in the time of Abraham, and that they lived there 

 from that time on, are indeed "inconclusive" from 

 the point of view or those who reject these statements 

 as unhistorical ; but from any other point of view we 

 uiust regard this evidence as dating the Philistine 

 immigration at a time not later than Abraham. The 

 Book of Joshua says that Joshua conquered all this 

 lowland region, but specifies the Philistine cities as ex- 

 ceptions (x. 40, 41 ; xi. 16; x. 29-34; xii. 11-15: xv. 

 11, 38-47, etc. ; cf. xi. 22 ; xiii. 2, I!). Except, there- 

 fore, on the basis of the wholesale rejection of the 

 existing evidence, it is a mistake to say that " the first 

 real sign of the presence of the Philistines is when the 

 Danites, who in the time of Deborah were seated on 

 the sea-coast (Jud. v. 17), were compelled obviously 

 by the pressure of a new enemy to seek another home 

 far north, at the base of Mount Ilenuon (Jud. xviii.). " 

 There is nothing in the history to justify the infer, nre 

 that the migration of the Danites to Laisb was C 

 "by the pressure of a new enemy ; " the enemy which, 

 at some (late or other, pressed the Danites to the hill 

 country, is expressly said to have been not the Philis- 

 tines but the Amorites (Jud. i. 34, 35) ; and the 

 migration to Laish occurred before the death of Phine- 

 has, the high-priest (Jud. xx. I, 2S). and consequently 

 a general ion or more earlier than the times of Deborah. 

 The first real sign of the presence of the Philistines, 

 according to the testimony of the Bible, which is all the 

 evidence we have in the case, is in the times of Abra- 

 ham ; the first appearance of the Philistines as the 

 oppressors of Israel is in the times of Deborah herself. 

 and not in the earlier times when the Danites took 

 Laish. 



The careful reader of the Bible will find the following 

 statements to be true, though they differ alike from 

 those made in the article in the BlUTANNICA and from 

 most of the opinions currently held. The Biblical 

 records represent that there were four periods of 

 Philistine oppression of Israel before the reign of 

 l>avid. The first was in the time of Shamgar and 

 Deborah (.hid. iii. 31 ; v. (i, N). It is again mentioned. 

 by way of reminiscence, in Jud. x. 11. The accounts 

 of it are very meagre, but the statement that Shut, 

 weapon was an ox-goad, and Deborah's asking whet bo- 

 there was shield or spear among 40,000 in Ism. ' 

 gest the existence of a state of things like that whieh 

 existed afterward in the time of Saul (1 Sam. xiii. 

 l'.t-22); and thu- :hat the Philistine oppres- 



sion of Shamgar's tim was very effective and severe. 

 The fact of such an oppression over the southern tribes 

 existing at that time affoids a better explanation than 

 those commonly given for the absence of Jodah from 

 Deborah's roll-call of the tribes (Jud. y. 1 I 



The M'cond Philistine oppression is mentioned in 

 Jud. x. 7, in connection with the administration of 



