The Pentateuch - Fact or Fable?

Hyksos - Children of Israel?

The Hyksos were an important influence on Egyptian history, particularly at the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period. Most of what we know of the nature of the Hyksos depends upon written sources (of the Egyptians), such as the Rhind Papyrus. Also of considerable importance is the systematic excavation of their capital, Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a). 

Aamu was the contemporary term used to distinguish the people of Avaris, the Hyksos capital in Egypt, from Egyptians. Egyptologists conventionally translate aamu as "asiatics" The Jewish historian, Josephus, in his Contra Apionem, claims that Manetho was the first to use the Greek term, Hyksos, incorrectly translated as "shepherd-kings". Contemporary Egyptians during the Hyksos invasion designated them as hikau khausut, which meant "rulers of foreign countries", a term that originally only referred to the ruling caste of the invaders. However, today the term Hyksos has come to refer to the whole of these people who ruled Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period of Egypt's ancient history, and had to be driven out of the land by the last ruler of the 17th Dynasty and the earliest ruler of Egypt's New Kingdom.

Josephus claims to quote directly from Manetho, who's original history is lost to us, when he describes the conquest and occupation of Egypt by the Hyksos:

"By main force they easily seized it without striking a blow; and having overpowered the rulers of the land, they hen burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of gods...Finally, they appointed as king one of their number whose name was Salitis."

Some of this rings true, while other parts seem not to be. It appears that the Hyksos left much of Egypt alone. It is clear that Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a) was occupied by a people who exhibited specifically non-Egyptian cultural traits. We find this in the layout of the town itself, the houses, and particularly the burials, which were intermixed with the living community, unlike those of the Egyptians. While we know that the Hyksos established centers, as their influenced gradually moved towards Memphis along the eastern edge of the Delta, at Farasha, Tell el-Sahaba, Bubastis, Inshas and Tell el-Yahudiyas, very little of this particular culture has been found at other Egyptian sites.  At the same time, the Hyksos living in Egypt have been described as "Peculiarly Egyptian". They were great builders and artisans. And little seems to have changed between the Egyptian style of governing, and that of the Hyksos. While the Hyksos imported some of their own gods, they also appear to have honored the Egyptian deities as well, such as Seth, who became assimilated with some Hyksos deities. Of course, we must also recall that Egypt already had somewhat of a history with the "Asiatics", including wars and considerable trade, so it would not be surprising to find some mix of cultures even among the Egyptians of the Delta. 

The Hyksos were basically a Semitic people who were able to wrestle control of Egypt from the early Second Intermediate rulers of the 13th Dynasty, inaugurating the 15th Dynasty. Their names mostly come from the West Semitic languages, and earlier suggestions that some of these people were Hurrian or even Hittite have not been confirmed. However, it is not easy to determine their origins within that Asiatic region, and at Tell el-Dab'a, the culture of the people was not static, but rapidly developed new traits and discarded old ones. Yet the reason for, and method of  the cultural mixing and rapid development of Asiatics at Tell el-Dab'a remains unclear.

One hypothesis is that the basic population of Egyptians allowed, from time to time, a new influx of settlers, first from the region of Lebanon and Syria, and subsequently from Palestine and Cyprus. The leaders of these people eventually married into the local Egyptian families, a theory that is somewhat supported by preliminary studies of human remains at Tell el-Dab'a. Indeed, parallels for the foreign traits of the Hyksos at Tell el-Dab'a have been found at southern Palestinian sites such as Tell el-Ajjul, at the Syrian site of Ebla and at Byblos in modern Labanon.

Hence, the Hyksos rule of Egypt was probably the climax of waves of Asiatic immigration and infiltration into the northeastern Delta of the Nile. This process was perhaps aided by the Egyptians themselves. For example, Amenemhat II records, in unmistakable language, a campaign by sea to the Lebanese coast that resulted in a list of booty comprising 1,554 Asiatics, and considering that Egypt's eastern border was fortified and probably patrolled by soldiers, it is difficult to understand how massive numbers of foreign people could have simply migrated into northern Egypt. These people migrated, or otherwise moved to the region from the 12th Dynasty onward, and by the 13th Dynasty, this migration became widespread. 

The Hyksos did eventually utilize superior bronze weapons, chariots and composite bows to help them take control of Egypt, though in reality, the relative slowness of their advance southwards from the Delta seems to support the argument that the process was gradual and did not ultimately turn on the possession of overwhelming military superiority. Hence, by about 1720 BC, they had grown strong enough, at the expense of the Middle Kingdom kings, to gain control of Avaris in the northeastern Delta. This site eventually became the capital of the Hyksos kings, but within 50 years, they had also managed to take control of the important Egyptian city of Memphis.

Given this slow advance by the Hyksos rulers into southern Egypt, it seems reasonable to infer that the superior military technology of the Hyksos was but an adjunct to their exploitation of the political weakness of the late Middle Kingdom. 

However, the Hyksos never really ruled Egypt completely. Their expansion southwards was eventually checked. In fact, at least early on, this may have been the result of a massive plague, for at Tell el-Dab'a we find mass graves with little attention to the burials. Though the ruler of Avaris claimed to be King of Upper and Lower Egypt, we know from a stelae dating to the 17th Dynasty king Kamose, that Hermopolis marked the Avaris' king's theoretical southern boundary, while Cusae, a little further south, was actually the specific boarder point. Yet Southern, or Upper Egypt was reduced to a vassaldom, probably as a result of the effectiveness, eventually, of the Hyksos military forces, at least until the reign of Kamose. Therefore, we do regard them as the legitimate rulers of the whole country during parts of the Second Intermediate Period, considered a chaotic time which the Hyksos at least partially helped to create in Egypt. 

Eventually, the Hyksos tolerance of rival claimants to the land beginning in the 15th Dynasty would spell their expulsion by the end of the 17th Dynasty, beginning with the reign of Kamose. By now, the baleful experience of foreign rule had done much to shatter the traditional Egyptian mindset of superiority in both culture and the security of the Egyptian state in the face of external threats. 

Yet, Egypt would eventually benefit considerably from their experience of foreign rule, and it has been suggested that the Hyksos rule of Egypt was far less damaging then later 18th Dynasty records would lead us to believe. It would make Egypt a stronger country, with a much more viable military. Because of Egypt's strength and ability to isolate herself from the outside world, cultural and technological growth was often stagnant. Until the Hyksos invasion, the history of Egypt and Asia were mostly isolated, while afterwards, they would be permanently entwined. The Hyksos brought more than weapons to Egypt. It was due to the Hyksos that the hump backed Zebu cattle made their appearance in Egypt. Also, we find new vegetable and fruit crops that were cultivated, along with improvements in pottery and linen arising from the introduction of improved potter's wheels and the vertical loom. 

Perhaps one of the greatest contribution of the Hyksos was the preservation of famous Egyptian documents, both literary and scientific. During the reign of Apophis, the fifth king of the Great Hyksos, scribes were commissioned to recopy Egyptian texts so they would not be lost. One such text was the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus. This unique text, dating from about 3000 BC, gives a clear perspective of the human body as studied by the Egyptians, with details of specific clinical cases, examinations, and prognosis. The Westcar Papyrus preserved the only known version of an ancient Egyptian story that may have otherwise been lost. Other restored documents include the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, the most important mathematical exposition ever found in Egypt. 

But it was the diffusion of innovations with more obvious military applications, such as bronze-working, which went far to compensate for the technological backwardness of Middle Kingdom Egypt, and it was these advantages that eventually allowed the kingdom at Thebes to gain back control of the two lands and expel the Kyksos.

Hyksos Kings

If the historical Hyksos, who were known as the Desert Kings of Egypt, were the Biblical Children of Israel then one would expect the names and stories of some of the Hyksos kings to mirror notable people in the early history of the Children of Israel as detailed in the Bible. Not only do many of the Hyksos kings have a familar ring to them for Bible students, there are a number of surprise names thrown in for good measure. Among them is the name of Jehovah, not that Jehovah was the name of the God of the Hyksos, but the actual throne name of two particular kings of the Hyksos. The reason for that is that the people of those times believed their kings were actually lesser Gods among the multiplicity of Gods they believed existed. When they spoke the king's name, they were also speaking their God's name. Thus, when we see a phrase in the Bible such as Psalms 83:18, "That men may know that you, whose name alone is Jehovah, are the most high over all the earth", it would have been spoken during the reign of King Jehovah II, and would therefore be a song of praise to that king and not to the Almighty God who lives in Heaven.

Another kingly name used to describe God is Yahweh or Yah which corresponds to the Phoenician God Yam (Yaw, Ieuo or Pontus) the son of El, who was probably a Hyksos period king of Egypt, ether Yakubher (c.1674) or Yakobaam (c.1650). He was later made into the Phoenician Sea God, Yam, by later generations. The biblical God Elyon, from whom God's "El" names are derived, eg. El Shaddai, corresponds to Elioun who was the 18th century BC Phoenician king of Byblos and the father of Epigeius (Uranus/Baal-Shamen). He was made into a god by the Phoenicians after he was killed by wild beasts. When the Phoenicians of that nation's southern regions became part of the Northern Kingdom spoken of in the Old Testament, their brought their names of God - El Shaddai etc. - with them and it was interchanged with the names those of Egyptian origin had brought with them - Amen, Adoni, Jehovah, Yah and Yahweh. Elohim (the Gods), El (God), Shaddai (the Destroyer), Elyon (the Most High), Adonai (Lord), Yahweh/Yah, Tseboath (Lord of Hosts) - these names or their variants appear to be the names of different Gods in the Phoenician Pantheon as given by Philo (who is quoted by Eusebius in “Preparation for the Gospel”), and are also recorded in the Ras Sharma Tablets.

This all accounts for the multiplicity of names for God found in the Old Testament. It also makes it difficult for us today, when reading the Bible, to know whether a reference to God which uses one of the many "names of God" was actually a reference to the reigning monarch of that time, or to the Almighty God. Centuries later when the latter books of the Old Testament and the New Testament were written, names such as Jehovah were no longer used as a reference to a king but to almighty God, therefore they should be read as a reference to God and not an earthly king. To be determine which is which, the neader needs to know the time in which these names were written, whether there was a king reigning at or around that time, or whether the worship of past kings as Gods was practiced at the time of writing.

See also: The Hyksos kings and their Biblical counterparts

The Hyksos and the Exodus

The Bible is adamant that the promise to Abraham had a "PRECONDITION FROM GOD," that Israel or the Hebrews would FIRST serve 400 (Ge 15:13) or 430 years (Ex 12:40) in an Egyptian bondage, ONLY then, would God intervene and break Egypt's resolve and power, allowing his people to "take by conquest" the Promised Land of Canaan. Most scholars understand the rise of Israel occured AFTER Egypt withdrew ca. 1140/1130 BCE, and that Iron I is the settling of the Hill Country with hundreds of unfortified villages and hamlets. If we add 400 or 430 years of bondage to the ca. 1140/1130 BCE date that Egypt left the scene, and the rise of Israel began, we arrive at a bondage date of ca. 1540/1530 or 1570/1560 BCE, falling in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos and who enslaved ALL of Canaan to the Euphrates, including the `Apiru occupants of the land, some of whom later Pharaohs captured and took into captivity, to Egypt. History therefore argues that the 400+ year bondage is of the land of Canaan, not Hebrews in Egypt, although there is a corollary in that `Apiru are slaves in Egypt during this period.

Some scholars associate the Hyksos expulsion of the 16th century BCE with the Exodus. Details of the expulsion have been preserved for almost 2000 years in the writings of an Egyptian priest/historian called Manetho. He wrote a history of Egypt in the 3rd century BCE for his Hellenistic Greek overlord Ptolemy II. He noted that TWO EXPULSIONS occurred in Egypt's history, of Asiatics. The first was of the Hyksos of the mid 16th century and then another in the Ramesside era. He understood that the Hyksos fled to and settled at Jerusalem, but that 500 years later (Josephus' reckoning) "their descendants" reinvaded Egypt, resettling at the town they had been expelled from earlier called Avaris. After 13 years of "lording it" over the eastern delta, the Ramessides expelled the Hyksos' descendants a second time, and they eventually again settled at Jerusalem. The Jewish historian Josephus (1st century CE) was adamant that the 16th century expulsion was the Exodus of the Bible's chronology and furious that Manetho had said the Exodus was preserved in a Ramesside expulsion! Modern archaeology has established the Israelite settlement of the Canaanite Hill Country from Galilee to the Negev as portrayed in the Bible, was in Ramesside times. If Manetho is correct, that Avaris was resettled by Canaanites in Ramesside times, and expelled again in that era.

The hypothesis dating the Exodus to the mid-sixteenth century BCE puts paramount importance on historical data and relies least on biblical narrative. Since the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt is the only recorded historical occurence of a collective movement of Asiatics out of Egypt prior to the first millennium, it is also the only occurence that could be equated with the Exodus, except perhaps for Pharoah Akhenaten and his followers who left Egypt after his expulsion from the Egyptian throne.

It is my understanding that the Bible's 400+ year "iniquity of the Amorites" or "oppression of Hebrews" is preserving a real historical event, New Kingdom Egypt's 400+ years oppression of Syria-Palestine (ca. 1540/1530-1140/1130 BCE). The biblical narrator understands that God has set a "precondition" to the Abrahamic promise, a 400/430 year wait before Israel claims the land. God will first break Egypt's power, setting free his people. Then, after breaking Egypt's power, Israel is to settle the Promised Land. Mainstream scholars understand that Egypt's power remained unbroken until ca. 1140 BCE when under the reign of Phraoh Ramesses VI, Egypt withdrew from Canaan and the Sinai. The Bible knows nothing of Israel fighting Egyptians for control of Canaan, Israel fights Amorites, Hittites, Canaanites and Philistines, not Egyptians.  The only "historical setting" for Israel to begin the Conquest of Canaan, without Egyptian interference is after 1140-1130 BCE when Ramesses VI withdraws from Canaan. Now, lets add the 400/430+ mandatory wait of the Bible, for the end of the "Amorite iniquity" and we have 1140/1130 BCE plus 430/400 years, which suggests an Exodus in 1570/1540/1530 BCE, aligning with the Hyksos expulsion.