FACT #7: Were the Hyksos Israelites; Identifying the Hyksos
According to Mantheo, the Hyksos’ conquest of Egypt was a brutal, armed invasion which met little resistance from the indigenous populations. Temples were burned; cities were destroyed; and women and children were led into slavery. However, in recent years the idea of a violent horde of barbarian Asiatics infiltrating Egypt has fallen out of favor. There is little evidence, archeologically, that suggests battles were fought in the Nile Delta during this period. Also, no chariots have been found in Avaris, despite extensive excavations. The new theory of a “creeping conquest” or a peaceful take-over has gained support.
Some hypothesize that the Hyksos who gained control of the Nile Delta around 1650 BC were the Israelites. The reasons are these: 1.) they were Semitic people; 2.) they were known as “Shepherd Kings”; 3.) they migrated into Egypt around the proper time for an Exodus, 4.) and the Egyptians later ran them out.
Hyksos Pharaoh Apepi or Apophis, (depending on translations) sent a letter to Pharaoh Seqenenre Tao c. 1560-1558, complaining that the hippopotamus in Thebes were so noisy they were disrupting his sleep, (despite Avaris being 700 miles away).
The indignant letter appears to have been the final straw to breaks the hippo’s back, so to speak, and Seqenenre who had had enough of foreign rulers, made war against Apophis. His war-campaign was unsuccessful, however. He fulfilled a short term of about two years, before the enemy inflicted five blows to his head, killing him.
Seqenenre Tao’s son and successor, Kamose continued in his father’s footsteps. Although, his plans for military engagement was meet with opposition from his council and courtiers.
His council then intends to dissuade him from entering into conflict with the neighboring Hyksos:
For the sake of diplomatic relations, Kamose’s courtiers advise against war in favor of a defensive position rather than an offensive one. Kamose rules his allotted territory uncontested, and it appears as though there were transit rights and pasturage rights, allowing them to send their cattle to graze in the Nile Delta.
Pierre Montet’s, an Egyptologist, speculated that the Priesthood of Amun may have funded the war against the Hyksos; hence ‘by the command of Amun’ Kamose sailed north on the Nile and sacked Egyptian garrisons who were loyal to the Hyksos. Whether religious motivations were involved or not, Kamose’s reasons were sure to be based in nationalism and continuing in the aggressive policies of his predecessor.
Kamose’s reign, like his father’s, was short-lived. He was buried in a coffin of modest design, suggesting that he didn’t have time to make preparations for the afterlife since he was engaged in warfare on two fronts: Hyksos to the north and the Kushites to the south.
His brother Ahmose I ascended the throne, and it was under Pharaoh Ahmose that the Hyksos were run out and the whole of Egypt was unified after almost 30 years of intermittent conflict.
There is an inscription carved at a temple in Thebes of what the gods had supposedly told Ahmose I. “Oh, my son, Ahmose. I am thy father. I set terror in the northlands, even unto Avaris, and the Hyksos are slain beneath thy feet.” - Egypt’s Golden Empire: The Warrior Pharaohs, Documentary, Directed by Ciara Byrne; James Hawes [2001] Time-stamp 17:15
The Egyptians under Ahmose I, laid siege against Avaris in c. 1530 B.C. However, the Egyptians had not taken up the horse and chariot as a standard method of warfare. Rather, the Egyptians fought the Hyksos using naval force. This is in part due to the geography of Avaris, which was located “on the two rivers”.
The following is an excerpt from a soldier who fought under Pharaoh Ahmose: “Now when I had established a household, I was taken to the ship "Northern", because I was brave. I followed the sovereign on foot when he rode about on his chariot. When the town of Avaris was besieged, I fought bravely on foot in his majesty's presence.
The Kamose Steles recounts an earlier battle between Pharaoh Kamose of Upper Egypt and the Hyksos Pharaoh Apophis of Lower Egypt:
There is no record of naval fighting recorded in the Exodus story, let alone the Egyptians besieging the Israelites at Avaris.
After the fall of Avaris, the Egyptians pursued the Hyksos across the northern Sinai Peninsula and into the Negev desert (near Gaza), located in the southern Levant. This route of flight does not coincide with the Exodus route taken by the Israelites who fled across the Sinai Peninsula and into Midian.
In contrast to the Israelites who were let go peacefully (but fled), and were later pursued with boldness when Pharaoh came to his senses [Exodus 14:4-9], the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt with deadly force and then they were besieged in the Negev desert for three to six years. Whereas the Egyptians drowned in the red sea, having no further contact with the Israelites from thence forth.
Psalm 78:52-53 But made his own people to go forth like sheep, and guided them in the wilderness like a flock. And he led them on safely, so that they feared not: but the sea overwhelmed their enemies.
When analyzing the battles between the Hyksos and Theban Dynasty, the account does not match the Exodus narrative. What does match, however, is that the Hyksos controlled Egypt, imposed import taxes on Upper Egypt, and had formed alliances with Kush. As Yul Brynner said in the Ten Commandments “He holds Ethiopia in his left hand, Goshen in his right, and you, my Pharaoh, are in-between them.”
In fact one of them, Sheshi by name, who was either a pharaoh or vassal to the Hyksos formed a dynastic marriage with a Nubian princess named Tati. Similar to Moses who made war with the Ethiopians and formed a marriage with king’s daughter Tharbis.
In fact, Sheshi is the best attested ruler of the Second Intermediate Period with 396 seals and two seal impressions bearing his nomen or prenomen. Seals bearing his name have been found throughout Egypt, Nubia and Canaan, showing there was extensive trade and diplomatic relations during his twenty to forty year reign. However his name is absent from the Turin king’s list, raising questions on his actual role in the Hyksos kingdom.
So, the Hyksos not only were enslaving the Israelites, but to a greater extent they held all of Egypt under their thumb. Because of their vast political power throughout the land of Egypt, Nubia and the Levant¾as evident by the seals of Sheshi--their adoption of Egyptian names and customs, the Bible is true in calling a Hyksos king, ‘King of Egypt’. With ‘Pharaoh’ being the Egyptian translation of ‘king’; the way Kaiser and Tsar are all imperial titles translated from the Roman ‘Cesar’.
For example, Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna was of German and English descent. She was not Russian, though she married the Russian Tsar (who, himself, was only 1/128th Russian). Despite this, she still held the Russian title Tsarina. - Nicholas and Alexandra pg. 231 by Robert Massie
Continuing: Pharaoh Khamudi was the last of the Hyksos Pharaohs mentioned on the Turin Canon. Seeing that the list was composed by Egyptians, the fact his name is mentioned on the papyrus means he was indeed seen as a legitimate king. Only two scarab seals have been attributed to him--both found in Jericho. Scholars give him a reign lasting a minimum of one year but as long as eleven years. If his reign was short, he didn’t inherit much, and may have ruled from Avaris or from Sharuhen. His death is obscure, however. This author hasn’t been able to find anything on the narrow scope of the internet that documents his death or his stand off against Pharaoh Ahmose I. There is one brief commentary on the back of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus which suggests he was in year eleven when Ahmose I gained control of Tjaru, an Egyptian fortress. Otherwise, there’s no clear altercations between the two.
It is true, however, that the Egyptians destroyed many records of the Hyksos dynasty. So any papyrus or stone relics that may have given enlightenment on the subject may no longer exist or are so fragmented they cannot be deciphered.
This may be why archaeologists can’t find any concrete evidence of Israelites being enslaved in Egypt: the Hyksos had them enslaved and the Egyptians later destroyed those records.
On the topic of the identity of the Hyksos: Kim Ryholt furthermore observes the name Hayanu is recorded in the Assyrian king-lists for a "remote ancestor" of Shamshi-Adad I (c. 1813 BC) of Assyria, which suggests that it had been used for centuries prior to Khyan's own reign.
Interestingly, in the book of Jubilee’s (47:9) Amram teaches Moses how to write; according to Gill's Exposition Acts 7:22, Moses was learning Akkadian cuneiform, or the Assyrian Language.
The Hyksos true identity remains obscure, yet this obscurity may be a clue. Manetho writes in his Aegyptiaca: “For what cause I know not, a blast of the gods smote us; and unexpectedly, from the regions of the East, invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land.”
The Hebrews were a known race since the Egyptians wouldn’t eat with them. Even the Hittites were descendents of Canaan, whose brother was Mizraim. Therefore the Hitties and the Egyptians were distant cousins.
It is true that Manetho wrote the Hyksos account in the early third century BC, and by then, time may have veiled the true identity of the Asiatics, especially since the Egyptians destroyed as much evidence regarding their dynasty as possible.
However, if God spoke to Moses regarding the Amorites; Hitties; Hivites; Jebusites; Perizzites and Canaanites, it might be safe to say that these clans were not the Hyksos, since all these people and their territories were well identified in ancient days. /author’s speculation.
Contemporary with the Hyksos, was an Indo-Aryan expansion. Archaeologists theorize the introduction of the Indo-Aryan languages in modern day India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan was a result of peoples within the Sintashta culture migrating away from the Eurasian steppe.
The earliest known chariots have been uncovered at the Sintashta archeological site in Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russia, near the Kazakhstan border. Along with the chariot burials, horse sacrifices have been unearthed as well, with as many as eight having been found in a single grave.
The Proto-Indo-Iranians, from which the Indo-Aryans arose, are identified with the Sintashta culture.
The Indo-Aryans were closely related to the Iranians but split-off from them in c. 1800-1600 BC. Around that time the Indo-Aryans migrated into the Levant (Mitanni) and north-western India (Vedic peoples) and possibly China (Wusun), and the Iranians migrated into Iran. The Indo-Aryans who ruled Mitanni from roughly 1500-1300 BC are believe, by scholars, to be the early Medes.
During the old and middle Assyrian empire, the Assyrians ruled over Pre-Iranic north and west Iran.
Whomever the Hyksos were, their identity may have originated further east than Canaan, such as Iraq, Iran or possibly the Eurasian steppes, which may be why they were “of obscure race”.
This author speculates that the Hyksos were, indeed, Assyrian and is convinced scripture tells us so: “For thus says the Lord God, ‘My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrian oppressed them without cause.” [Isaiah 52:4]
God has even stated that he uses Assyria to punish Israel: “O Assyria, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation. I will send him against an hypocritical nation and against the people of my wrath will I give him charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.” [Isaiah 10:5-6]
However, as we see through history, when God sends Assyria against Israel it is always with a cause, [i.e Isaiah 1:2-5; 3:8-9, 16; & 10:1-2] which makes the Isaiah 52:4 verse different when compared to other scriptures which discuss Assyria coming against Israel.
This verse is blatantly calling the Pharaoh of the Exodus an Assyrian and according to Kim Ryholt the names of some of the Hyksos appear Assyrian in origin; the Hyksos are from the east--from the same direction where the Assyrian empire had been established and even oral tradition suggests Moses was learning the Akkadian cuneiform--the writing system of the ancient Assyrians.
Next point: Ex. 13:17 “And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:
About year and half after the children were liberated from Egypt, Moses sent spies into the land of Canaan to seek out its strongholds and fertility. [Num. 9:1 & Num. 13] The spies went up ‘southward’ according to the KJV or ‘into the Negev’ according to NIV, NLT, ESV etc.
If Israel was to fight the inhabitants dwelling in the Negev desert anyway, and Israel was gathered together according to their armies, why would God avoid taking them along the Way of the Philistines?
We know that God’s ultimate plan was to lead them through the wilderness to the Red Sea where he parted the waters and the whole congregation was baptized under Moses, but let us set aside that reasoning for just a moment. Instead, the Israelites go around to the east-side of the Levant. After leaving the Desert of Sinai they go to the Desert of Paran [Num. 10:12], and the spies go as far as Hebron.
If the Egyptians had run the Hyksos out shortly after the Israelites left Egypt, then the Egyptians may have been in south-western Canaan besieging the Hyksos’ fortifications.
In fact Ahmose I entered Heliopolis and then headed straight for the Way of Horus, ignoring Avaris completely. He broke into Tjaru, an ancient Egyptian fortress and created a barricade, cutting off supplies coming from Canaan into Egypt.
The Way of Horus was a vital military and commercial route. It was called the Way of the Philistines while it was under Philistine influence and Via Maris when under Roman influence.
After gaining control of the fortress, Ahmose I launched four campaigns against Avaris before finally capturing the city around year 18 or 19 of his reign.
Is this the war that God didn’t want the children of Israel to witness, lest they change their minds and return to Egypt? If Ahmose I had blockaded the main route out of Egypt, the only way to get pass the Egyptians may have been by aggressive tactics: war.
However, we see in Numbers 20:14-21 when the Israelites seek permission from the Edomites to pass through their land via the King’s Highway, they are denied passage and “Israel turned away from them”.
If the Israelites turned away from the Edomites, would they have done the same thing and turned away if the Egyptians at the blockade denied them passage into Canaan?
A military blockade might have been a psychological deterrent to the Israelites, the way the Red Sea was, and to repeat the above: would the Israelites have give up and returned to Egypt seeing that Goshen wasn’t far away?
There also seems to be a consensus among the Israelites that serving the Egyptians was better. To the point, that while they were in Egypt they told Moses so:
While it’s possible that the Israelites developed a battered-wife mentality and developed a learned helplessness it is also possible that the oppression waxed and waned in severity.
For example: When blacks gained their freedom after the American civil war, many stayed in the old South and lived near their masters. In part due to the uncertainty of what lay ahead in the north.
Many slaves actually regretted the end of slavery because slavery gave them a stable family structure, they were loved, were cared for and received the things they needed.
Not saying there wasn’t oppression or abuse, archaeological evidence shows malnourishment in the bones of Semites and indicates death came at an early age of 32 to 34 years old. But just like the slavery of the American South, for every bad taskmaster in Egypt there may have been at least two good ones.
Indeed, malnourishment leads to poor health and if a mother’s health suffers, the consequence is a higher infant mortality rate.
Skeletons dating to the 6th century AD in Teotihuacan were exhumed in part of one of the cities suburbs. 70% of the skeleton samples were of babies, children and individuals under twenty-five years of age. The bones revealed that the babies had suffered from various forms of infection and diseases. Compared to the earlier period, children only made up 40%-45% of the skeletal samples.
This came at a time when the population reached 125,000 individuals. If we go by this author’s crude calculations regarding the Israelite population at the time of the oppression, the Israelites would have numbered at least four times more the Teotihuacán. Yet: Ex. 1:12 “the more they afflicted them the more they multiplied and grew, and they were grieved because of the children of Israel.”
To multiply and grow means that despite enduring harsh forced-labor, the mothers were still healthy enough to conceive, bear children, and nurse them.
Numbers 11:5 "We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic."
The following is a list of foods available in Egypt, cited from Ancient Egypt: Everyday Life in the Land of the Nile by Bomb Brier & Hoyt Hobbs chapter 5.
A majority of the Israelites even had homes that they could return to.
Since there is comfort in predictability, leaving their variety of available foods behind, as well as their houses which they came to call home, saying good-bye to the Egyptians who had shown them kindness and favor, obviously wasn’t something all of them were eager to do. Indeed, when the Israelites asked to borrow gold and silver and costly things from the Egyptians to plunder them, the Egyptians freely gave them the things they needed.
Perhaps those who preferred to stay behind were a minority, but by time the Israelites got to the wilderness, regret permeated through the masses.
There’s no record of Ahmose I army drowning in the red sea. And as stated in an earlier part, despite extensive excavations no chariots have been unearthed in Avaris, where the Hyksos--who were chariot masters--were reigning. So where did these chariots go?
It took four military campaigns for Ahmose I to rid the Hyksos from Avaris. However, these campaigns are poorly documented but hands, two women and one man were taken away as plunder.
Along with destroying the Hyksos stronghold, Ahmose I subdued Nubia and reasserted Egyptian control over the province.
What changed from the beginning of these war campaigns with Sequenere Tao and Ahmose I, that allowed Ahmose I to succeed where his father and brother could not?
Historically speaking, many conquests of nations have been made when one belligerent is weakened, sometimes by the war itself, also from natural disasters, famines, diseases, internal rebellions, or just straight up poor leadership.
Ahmose I was not yet thirty years old when he reunified Egypt, by conquering the Nile Delta. The Hyksos dynasty went approximately 15 years from its first encounter with Kamose to its first encounter with Ahmose I and then subsequent destruction thereafter.
Avaris was a thriving trade center, with Aegean artifacts found in temples built during the Hyksos dynasty. Minoan frescoes have also been unearthed at the site.
A 500 meter wall (1,640 feet) was discovered running along a depression believed to be a river harbor. Such a harbor could cater over 300 ships during trade season.
Having once been the most populous city in the world from 1670-1550 BC and being a major trade city, could Avaris have been the same as Pharaoh’s storage city?
If Avaris was strong economically as it appears it was, the government would have invested a lot in their military and a heavily invested military is a strong force to reckon with. So what happened to their power?
Ex. 10:7 “And Pharaoh's servants said unto him, How long shall this man be a snare unto us? let the men go, that they may serve the LORD their God: knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed?”
By time the children of Israel had crossed the Red Sea, Lower Egypt would have had much of their livestock destroyed; their crops; their first born and the army. Without enough food, the inhabitants would have been in a weakened state physically unless they had reserves, and without an army to protect them they would have eventually surrendered to any external force.
According to Mantheo, the Hyksos’ conquest of Egypt was a brutal, armed invasion which met little resistance from the indigenous populations. Temples were burned; cities were destroyed; and women and children were led into slavery. However, in recent years the idea of a violent horde of barbarian Asiatics infiltrating Egypt has fallen out of favor. There is little evidence, archeologically, that suggests battles were fought in the Nile Delta during this period. Also, no chariots have been found in Avaris, despite extensive excavations. The new theory of a “creeping conquest” or a peaceful take-over has gained support.
Some hypothesize that the Hyksos who gained control of the Nile Delta around 1650 BC were the Israelites. The reasons are these: 1.) they were Semitic people; 2.) they were known as “Shepherd Kings”; 3.) they migrated into Egypt around the proper time for an Exodus, 4.) and the Egyptians later ran them out.
- Exodus 6:1 “Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land.”
Hyksos Pharaoh Apepi or Apophis, (depending on translations) sent a letter to Pharaoh Seqenenre Tao c. 1560-1558, complaining that the hippopotamus in Thebes were so noisy they were disrupting his sleep, (despite Avaris being 700 miles away).
The indignant letter appears to have been the final straw to breaks the hippo’s back, so to speak, and Seqenenre who had had enough of foreign rulers, made war against Apophis. His war-campaign was unsuccessful, however. He fulfilled a short term of about two years, before the enemy inflicted five blows to his head, killing him.
Seqenenre Tao’s son and successor, Kamose continued in his father’s footsteps. Although, his plans for military engagement was meet with opposition from his council and courtiers.
His council then intends to dissuade him from entering into conflict with the neighboring Hyksos:
For the sake of diplomatic relations, Kamose’s courtiers advise against war in favor of a defensive position rather than an offensive one. Kamose rules his allotted territory uncontested, and it appears as though there were transit rights and pasturage rights, allowing them to send their cattle to graze in the Nile Delta.
Pierre Montet’s, an Egyptologist, speculated that the Priesthood of Amun may have funded the war against the Hyksos; hence ‘by the command of Amun’ Kamose sailed north on the Nile and sacked Egyptian garrisons who were loyal to the Hyksos. Whether religious motivations were involved or not, Kamose’s reasons were sure to be based in nationalism and continuing in the aggressive policies of his predecessor.
Kamose’s reign, like his father’s, was short-lived. He was buried in a coffin of modest design, suggesting that he didn’t have time to make preparations for the afterlife since he was engaged in warfare on two fronts: Hyksos to the north and the Kushites to the south.
His brother Ahmose I ascended the throne, and it was under Pharaoh Ahmose that the Hyksos were run out and the whole of Egypt was unified after almost 30 years of intermittent conflict.
There is an inscription carved at a temple in Thebes of what the gods had supposedly told Ahmose I. “Oh, my son, Ahmose. I am thy father. I set terror in the northlands, even unto Avaris, and the Hyksos are slain beneath thy feet.” - Egypt’s Golden Empire: The Warrior Pharaohs, Documentary, Directed by Ciara Byrne; James Hawes [2001] Time-stamp 17:15
The Egyptians under Ahmose I, laid siege against Avaris in c. 1530 B.C. However, the Egyptians had not taken up the horse and chariot as a standard method of warfare. Rather, the Egyptians fought the Hyksos using naval force. This is in part due to the geography of Avaris, which was located “on the two rivers”.
The following is an excerpt from a soldier who fought under Pharaoh Ahmose: “Now when I had established a household, I was taken to the ship "Northern", because I was brave. I followed the sovereign on foot when he rode about on his chariot. When the town of Avaris was besieged, I fought bravely on foot in his majesty's presence.
The Kamose Steles recounts an earlier battle between Pharaoh Kamose of Upper Egypt and the Hyksos Pharaoh Apophis of Lower Egypt:
There is no record of naval fighting recorded in the Exodus story, let alone the Egyptians besieging the Israelites at Avaris.
After the fall of Avaris, the Egyptians pursued the Hyksos across the northern Sinai Peninsula and into the Negev desert (near Gaza), located in the southern Levant. This route of flight does not coincide with the Exodus route taken by the Israelites who fled across the Sinai Peninsula and into Midian.
In contrast to the Israelites who were let go peacefully (but fled), and were later pursued with boldness when Pharaoh came to his senses [Exodus 14:4-9], the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt with deadly force and then they were besieged in the Negev desert for three to six years. Whereas the Egyptians drowned in the red sea, having no further contact with the Israelites from thence forth.
Psalm 78:52-53 But made his own people to go forth like sheep, and guided them in the wilderness like a flock. And he led them on safely, so that they feared not: but the sea overwhelmed their enemies.
When analyzing the battles between the Hyksos and Theban Dynasty, the account does not match the Exodus narrative. What does match, however, is that the Hyksos controlled Egypt, imposed import taxes on Upper Egypt, and had formed alliances with Kush. As Yul Brynner said in the Ten Commandments “He holds Ethiopia in his left hand, Goshen in his right, and you, my Pharaoh, are in-between them.”
In fact one of them, Sheshi by name, who was either a pharaoh or vassal to the Hyksos formed a dynastic marriage with a Nubian princess named Tati. Similar to Moses who made war with the Ethiopians and formed a marriage with king’s daughter Tharbis.
In fact, Sheshi is the best attested ruler of the Second Intermediate Period with 396 seals and two seal impressions bearing his nomen or prenomen. Seals bearing his name have been found throughout Egypt, Nubia and Canaan, showing there was extensive trade and diplomatic relations during his twenty to forty year reign. However his name is absent from the Turin king’s list, raising questions on his actual role in the Hyksos kingdom.
So, the Hyksos not only were enslaving the Israelites, but to a greater extent they held all of Egypt under their thumb. Because of their vast political power throughout the land of Egypt, Nubia and the Levant¾as evident by the seals of Sheshi--their adoption of Egyptian names and customs, the Bible is true in calling a Hyksos king, ‘King of Egypt’. With ‘Pharaoh’ being the Egyptian translation of ‘king’; the way Kaiser and Tsar are all imperial titles translated from the Roman ‘Cesar’.
For example, Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna was of German and English descent. She was not Russian, though she married the Russian Tsar (who, himself, was only 1/128th Russian). Despite this, she still held the Russian title Tsarina. - Nicholas and Alexandra pg. 231 by Robert Massie
Continuing: Pharaoh Khamudi was the last of the Hyksos Pharaohs mentioned on the Turin Canon. Seeing that the list was composed by Egyptians, the fact his name is mentioned on the papyrus means he was indeed seen as a legitimate king. Only two scarab seals have been attributed to him--both found in Jericho. Scholars give him a reign lasting a minimum of one year but as long as eleven years. If his reign was short, he didn’t inherit much, and may have ruled from Avaris or from Sharuhen. His death is obscure, however. This author hasn’t been able to find anything on the narrow scope of the internet that documents his death or his stand off against Pharaoh Ahmose I. There is one brief commentary on the back of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus which suggests he was in year eleven when Ahmose I gained control of Tjaru, an Egyptian fortress. Otherwise, there’s no clear altercations between the two.
It is true, however, that the Egyptians destroyed many records of the Hyksos dynasty. So any papyrus or stone relics that may have given enlightenment on the subject may no longer exist or are so fragmented they cannot be deciphered.
This may be why archaeologists can’t find any concrete evidence of Israelites being enslaved in Egypt: the Hyksos had them enslaved and the Egyptians later destroyed those records.
On the topic of the identity of the Hyksos: Kim Ryholt furthermore observes the name Hayanu is recorded in the Assyrian king-lists for a "remote ancestor" of Shamshi-Adad I (c. 1813 BC) of Assyria, which suggests that it had been used for centuries prior to Khyan's own reign.
Interestingly, in the book of Jubilee’s (47:9) Amram teaches Moses how to write; according to Gill's Exposition Acts 7:22, Moses was learning Akkadian cuneiform, or the Assyrian Language.
The Hyksos true identity remains obscure, yet this obscurity may be a clue. Manetho writes in his Aegyptiaca: “For what cause I know not, a blast of the gods smote us; and unexpectedly, from the regions of the East, invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land.”
The Hebrews were a known race since the Egyptians wouldn’t eat with them. Even the Hittites were descendents of Canaan, whose brother was Mizraim. Therefore the Hitties and the Egyptians were distant cousins.
It is true that Manetho wrote the Hyksos account in the early third century BC, and by then, time may have veiled the true identity of the Asiatics, especially since the Egyptians destroyed as much evidence regarding their dynasty as possible.
However, if God spoke to Moses regarding the Amorites; Hitties; Hivites; Jebusites; Perizzites and Canaanites, it might be safe to say that these clans were not the Hyksos, since all these people and their territories were well identified in ancient days. /author’s speculation.
Contemporary with the Hyksos, was an Indo-Aryan expansion. Archaeologists theorize the introduction of the Indo-Aryan languages in modern day India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan was a result of peoples within the Sintashta culture migrating away from the Eurasian steppe.
The earliest known chariots have been uncovered at the Sintashta archeological site in Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russia, near the Kazakhstan border. Along with the chariot burials, horse sacrifices have been unearthed as well, with as many as eight having been found in a single grave.
The Proto-Indo-Iranians, from which the Indo-Aryans arose, are identified with the Sintashta culture.
The Indo-Aryans were closely related to the Iranians but split-off from them in c. 1800-1600 BC. Around that time the Indo-Aryans migrated into the Levant (Mitanni) and north-western India (Vedic peoples) and possibly China (Wusun), and the Iranians migrated into Iran. The Indo-Aryans who ruled Mitanni from roughly 1500-1300 BC are believe, by scholars, to be the early Medes.
During the old and middle Assyrian empire, the Assyrians ruled over Pre-Iranic north and west Iran.
Whomever the Hyksos were, their identity may have originated further east than Canaan, such as Iraq, Iran or possibly the Eurasian steppes, which may be why they were “of obscure race”.
This author speculates that the Hyksos were, indeed, Assyrian and is convinced scripture tells us so: “For thus says the Lord God, ‘My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrian oppressed them without cause.” [Isaiah 52:4]
God has even stated that he uses Assyria to punish Israel: “O Assyria, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation. I will send him against an hypocritical nation and against the people of my wrath will I give him charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.” [Isaiah 10:5-6]
However, as we see through history, when God sends Assyria against Israel it is always with a cause, [i.e Isaiah 1:2-5; 3:8-9, 16; & 10:1-2] which makes the Isaiah 52:4 verse different when compared to other scriptures which discuss Assyria coming against Israel.
This verse is blatantly calling the Pharaoh of the Exodus an Assyrian and according to Kim Ryholt the names of some of the Hyksos appear Assyrian in origin; the Hyksos are from the east--from the same direction where the Assyrian empire had been established and even oral tradition suggests Moses was learning the Akkadian cuneiform--the writing system of the ancient Assyrians.
Next point: Ex. 13:17 “And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:
About year and half after the children were liberated from Egypt, Moses sent spies into the land of Canaan to seek out its strongholds and fertility. [Num. 9:1 & Num. 13] The spies went up ‘southward’ according to the KJV or ‘into the Negev’ according to NIV, NLT, ESV etc.
If Israel was to fight the inhabitants dwelling in the Negev desert anyway, and Israel was gathered together according to their armies, why would God avoid taking them along the Way of the Philistines?
We know that God’s ultimate plan was to lead them through the wilderness to the Red Sea where he parted the waters and the whole congregation was baptized under Moses, but let us set aside that reasoning for just a moment. Instead, the Israelites go around to the east-side of the Levant. After leaving the Desert of Sinai they go to the Desert of Paran [Num. 10:12], and the spies go as far as Hebron.
If the Egyptians had run the Hyksos out shortly after the Israelites left Egypt, then the Egyptians may have been in south-western Canaan besieging the Hyksos’ fortifications.
In fact Ahmose I entered Heliopolis and then headed straight for the Way of Horus, ignoring Avaris completely. He broke into Tjaru, an ancient Egyptian fortress and created a barricade, cutting off supplies coming from Canaan into Egypt.
The Way of Horus was a vital military and commercial route. It was called the Way of the Philistines while it was under Philistine influence and Via Maris when under Roman influence.
After gaining control of the fortress, Ahmose I launched four campaigns against Avaris before finally capturing the city around year 18 or 19 of his reign.
Is this the war that God didn’t want the children of Israel to witness, lest they change their minds and return to Egypt? If Ahmose I had blockaded the main route out of Egypt, the only way to get pass the Egyptians may have been by aggressive tactics: war.
However, we see in Numbers 20:14-21 when the Israelites seek permission from the Edomites to pass through their land via the King’s Highway, they are denied passage and “Israel turned away from them”.
If the Israelites turned away from the Edomites, would they have done the same thing and turned away if the Egyptians at the blockade denied them passage into Canaan?
A military blockade might have been a psychological deterrent to the Israelites, the way the Red Sea was, and to repeat the above: would the Israelites have give up and returned to Egypt seeing that Goshen wasn’t far away?
There also seems to be a consensus among the Israelites that serving the Egyptians was better. To the point, that while they were in Egypt they told Moses so:
- Ex. 14:12 “Is not this the word that we did tell thee in Egypt, saying, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians?”
While it’s possible that the Israelites developed a battered-wife mentality and developed a learned helplessness it is also possible that the oppression waxed and waned in severity.
For example: When blacks gained their freedom after the American civil war, many stayed in the old South and lived near their masters. In part due to the uncertainty of what lay ahead in the north.
Many slaves actually regretted the end of slavery because slavery gave them a stable family structure, they were loved, were cared for and received the things they needed.
Not saying there wasn’t oppression or abuse, archaeological evidence shows malnourishment in the bones of Semites and indicates death came at an early age of 32 to 34 years old. But just like the slavery of the American South, for every bad taskmaster in Egypt there may have been at least two good ones.
Indeed, malnourishment leads to poor health and if a mother’s health suffers, the consequence is a higher infant mortality rate.
Skeletons dating to the 6th century AD in Teotihuacan were exhumed in part of one of the cities suburbs. 70% of the skeleton samples were of babies, children and individuals under twenty-five years of age. The bones revealed that the babies had suffered from various forms of infection and diseases. Compared to the earlier period, children only made up 40%-45% of the skeletal samples.
This came at a time when the population reached 125,000 individuals. If we go by this author’s crude calculations regarding the Israelite population at the time of the oppression, the Israelites would have numbered at least four times more the Teotihuacán. Yet: Ex. 1:12 “the more they afflicted them the more they multiplied and grew, and they were grieved because of the children of Israel.”
To multiply and grow means that despite enduring harsh forced-labor, the mothers were still healthy enough to conceive, bear children, and nurse them.
Numbers 11:5 "We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic."
The following is a list of foods available in Egypt, cited from Ancient Egypt: Everyday Life in the Land of the Nile by Bomb Brier & Hoyt Hobbs chapter 5.
A majority of the Israelites even had homes that they could return to.
- Ex. 12:23 "When the LORD passes through to strike down the Egyptians, He will see the blood on the top and the two side posts and pass over the door; so He will not allow the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you down."
Since there is comfort in predictability, leaving their variety of available foods behind, as well as their houses which they came to call home, saying good-bye to the Egyptians who had shown them kindness and favor, obviously wasn’t something all of them were eager to do. Indeed, when the Israelites asked to borrow gold and silver and costly things from the Egyptians to plunder them, the Egyptians freely gave them the things they needed.
Perhaps those who preferred to stay behind were a minority, but by time the Israelites got to the wilderness, regret permeated through the masses.
- Ex. 14:12 “For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness. [13] And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever. [14] The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace.
There’s no record of Ahmose I army drowning in the red sea. And as stated in an earlier part, despite extensive excavations no chariots have been unearthed in Avaris, where the Hyksos--who were chariot masters--were reigning. So where did these chariots go?
It took four military campaigns for Ahmose I to rid the Hyksos from Avaris. However, these campaigns are poorly documented but hands, two women and one man were taken away as plunder.
Along with destroying the Hyksos stronghold, Ahmose I subdued Nubia and reasserted Egyptian control over the province.
What changed from the beginning of these war campaigns with Sequenere Tao and Ahmose I, that allowed Ahmose I to succeed where his father and brother could not?
Historically speaking, many conquests of nations have been made when one belligerent is weakened, sometimes by the war itself, also from natural disasters, famines, diseases, internal rebellions, or just straight up poor leadership.
Ahmose I was not yet thirty years old when he reunified Egypt, by conquering the Nile Delta. The Hyksos dynasty went approximately 15 years from its first encounter with Kamose to its first encounter with Ahmose I and then subsequent destruction thereafter.
Avaris was a thriving trade center, with Aegean artifacts found in temples built during the Hyksos dynasty. Minoan frescoes have also been unearthed at the site.
A 500 meter wall (1,640 feet) was discovered running along a depression believed to be a river harbor. Such a harbor could cater over 300 ships during trade season.
Having once been the most populous city in the world from 1670-1550 BC and being a major trade city, could Avaris have been the same as Pharaoh’s storage city?
If Avaris was strong economically as it appears it was, the government would have invested a lot in their military and a heavily invested military is a strong force to reckon with. So what happened to their power?
Ex. 10:7 “And Pharaoh's servants said unto him, How long shall this man be a snare unto us? let the men go, that they may serve the LORD their God: knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed?”
By time the children of Israel had crossed the Red Sea, Lower Egypt would have had much of their livestock destroyed; their crops; their first born and the army. Without enough food, the inhabitants would have been in a weakened state physically unless they had reserves, and without an army to protect them they would have eventually surrendered to any external force.
- Psalm 78:44-51 And had turned their rivers into blood; and their floods, that they could not drink. He sent divers sorts of flies among them, which devoured them; and frogs, which destroyed them. He gave also their increase unto the caterpillar, and their labor unto the locust. He destroyed their vines with hail, and their sycamore trees with frost. He gave up their cattle also to the hail, and their flocks to hot thunderbolts. He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, by sending evil angels among them. He made a way to his anger; he spared not their soul from death, but gave their life over to the pestilence; And smote all the firstborn in Egypt; the chief of their strength in the tabernacles of Ham:
