JoyJuice

and have they anything to do with the Israelites, the Tempest Stele, and how does the latter come to play with regards to the Exodus account?

Thanks in advance

Amlodhi

Various alleged recensions of Manetho notwithstanding, the term Hyksos is likely derived from the Egyptian words "Heqau-khasut" as exampled in the "Story of Sinuhe", manuscripts of which date back to c. 1800 B.C.E. This phrase, "Heqau-khasut" is usually translated as "rulers of foreign countries".

(Ancient Near Eastern Texts, James B. Pritchard ed., Princeton Univ. Press, 1969)

These "Hyksos" were likely of the northwest Semitic language group, which would include Akkadian, Ugaritic, Canaanitic, etc. The Hebrews were likely a later kindred tribal group which coalesced from these Semitic foundations.


Amlodhi

jbernier

A lot of theories have been advanced to connect the Hyksos with the Israelites; however, I think that most fail to really make a definitive and clear connection. The thing is that the evidence from the period in question are fragmentary which makes it hard to really understand how one thing connects to the other. I think that it is likely that the Joseph story - a foreign ruler over Egypt - may be somehow connected to the Hyksos history and tradition but I am not sure that we can clearly define that connection (indeed, that there is a connection at all is very dubious).

Discretion being the better part of valour I prefer to give a resounding "Don't know" to this one.

Amaleq13

Here is a recent thread on the same subject with a link to an earlier thread that provide some good information.

spin

I don't think they were. The Hyksos were a horse culture, effectively ruling out Semitic groups. I'd go for an Indo-European group such as the Hurrians, though of course the Hyksos were ultimately a mixed group, which probably included various people from Semitic cultures, though predominantly non-Semitic. One interesting thing that this would explain are the Hurrian names of kinglets from Palestine found mentioned in the Amarna letters. Where did the Hyksos go after being ejected? Into Lower Syria of course and there are destruction levels to reflect their arrival, so some of them seem to have produced lines which survived until the Amarna era, as shown by the Hurrian names from Palestine.


spin

Amlodhi

Hi spin,

I have no reason to argue with that. It is quite possible and there are some good reasons to think that it might be so.

In fact, on both the Amada and the Elephantine Stelae, there even appears to be a definite distinction made between the Hequa-khasut (Hyksos) and the princes of Syria/Palestine (Retenu).


However, according to Manfred Bietak, the Hyksos were of primarily Asian/Amoritic origin. An assessment which he bases on the Semitic origin of their names and on studies of pottery fragments found at Tell el-Daba/Avaris.

(Bietak, Manfred, Avaris, Capital of the Hyksos Kingdom: New Results of Excavations, in The Hyksos; New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, Eliezer D. Oren ed.; Philadelphia: the University Museum, Univ. of Pennsylvania. 1997 p. 113.)


I tend to think, then, that there may have been a confusion of terms. It has, for instance, been suggested that "Hequa-khasut" originally referred to the ruling elite of these occupying forces; while the (subsequent?) general Asiatic population was referred to by the term "Aamu".

Thus, while there are certainly indications of a possible Indo-European or Hurrian element, I would have to stop short of saying that they were (or, at least, remained) "predominant". Since, according to the assessments of Manfred Bietak and others, the (eventual?) overall population of those who came to be known generally as "Hyksos" appear to have been primarily NW Semitic.

It is a long way from certain in any case.


Good to hear from you again spin,

Amlodhi

Peter Fletcher

To alkech

I support spin and amlodhi - yesterday, see above, in their suggesting that the Hyksos could have been a mixed group with Indo-European connections.

I raised this hypothesis in my posting of July 2004 (see link to a recent Thread "Hyksos and Hebrew", three above, provided by Amaleq 13, moderator), August 24, 2004, 04:55 PM

For me it is more than a coincidence that these chariot using aggressors appeared at the eastern end Mediterranean around the same few hundred-year time window as the Hurrians, Hittites, Mycenae, Cassites and many other Indo-European speaking people (climate?).

But such an opinion raises prompt reactions from the "they were totally Semitic" experienced member. See for example:

"Peter, It seems from reading your posts that you are searching for signs of Indo-European superiority in the region at the time. I would like to disabuse you of that thought right now. That said, let us proceed to addressing the Hyksos vs. the Hebrews:" - capnkirk August 5, 2004, 08:19 PM

For me, I'm not so confident that this middle eastern melting pot of c. 4000 BP was so divided, like two football teams, into Semitic and Indo-European speaking people.

Further, the Phoenicians who were clearly of a Semitic tongue (and perhaps also somewhat related to the Hyksos as, possibly, were the Hebrew) also arrived on their narrow sea-facing strip of land we call Phoenicia. These people did not come from the supposed eastern Semitic homeland but from the sea with there advanced marine skills already well developed.

Are the experts right in dividing this ancient middle-eastern world into Semitic and Indo-European speaking lots? I think the picture was far more complex than what we are being told.

Peter Fletcher