The term Hyksos (Ὓκσωζ), the Greek rendering of Egyptian ḥḳʒw-ḫʒswt, means “rulers of the foreign countries” and should not be confused with “Shepherd Kings” (a popular etymology according to the first-century CE Roman-Jewish historian Flavius Josephus). “Hyksos” was originally a common designation for foreign rulers, but it became—according to the Turin Canon and to inscriptions on scarabs and the royal protocol on a doorjamb—the official designation of at least the first three of the six kings of the fifteenth dynasty (although the Turin Canon lists all six with this designation). After King Khayan, this strange title was possibly dropped, which could be seen as a sign of a political trend toward a more thorough Egyptianization.

Egypt's fifteenth dynasty was of Near Eastern origin. According to the Turin Canon, it ruled Egypt for 108 years (c.1664–1555 BCE). Strictly speaking, the term Hyksos should be used only for these kings and not as an ethnic designation, as introduced by the third-century BCE Greco-Egyptian historian Manetho.

Memory about the Hyksos.

Other than the Hyksos kings of the fifteenth dynasty, some Theban kings of the sixteenth and seventeenth dynasties were designated “Shepherd Kings.” They also ruled at the same time as, and were more or less dependent on, the fifteenth dynasty for their lineage. The seventeenth dynasty was again of Egyptian descent. The kings of the sixteenth dynasty were considered to be a minor Hyksos dynasty and were probably vassals of the fifteenth dynasty.

The Hyksos takeover of Egypt is presented here (see Wadell 1956) according to Manetho, and following Josephus, as an invasion during the reign of the ephemeral king Tutimaeus,

"In his reign … invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land. By main force they easily seized it without striking a blow; and having overpowered the rulers of the land, they then burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of the gods, and treated all the natives with a cruel hostility, massacring some and leading into slavery the wives and children of others. Finally they appointed as king one of their number whose name was Salitis. He had his seat at Memphis, levying tribute from Upper and Lower Egypt, and always leaving garrisons behind in the most advantageous positions. Above all he fortified the district to the east, foreseeing that the Assyrians … would one day covet and attack his kingdom."

In the Saïte (Sethroïte) nome he found a city very favourably situated on the east of the Bubastite branch of the Nile, and called Avaris.… This place he rebuilt and fortified with massive walls, planting there a garrison.… Their race as a whole was called Hyksos, that is king-shepherds.

After a prolonged war with the Egyptians, the Hyksos were driven from Egypt and confined to the Delta city of Avaris. In an attempt

"by siege to force them to surrender, blockading … giving up the siege in despair, [the king] concluded a treaty by which they should all depart from Egypt.… On these terms the Shepherds, with all their possessions and households complete … left Egypt and journeyed over the desert into Syria."

Avaris was a big fortified place in the Delta, east of the Bubastic branch of the Nile, in keeping with the archaeological remains of Tell ed-Dabʿa. Manetho's account of the destruction of temples and other atrocities has been doubted by scholars and was most probably an exaggeration. The many royal Middle Kingdom statues found in Tanis, but most probably transported originally to Avaris, can be seen as a sign of the destruction of Egyptian monuments in the Hyksos period. It is also thought that the many private and royal Middle Kingdom statues abroad may have been traded by the Hyksos dynasty.


Hyksos. Political map of the Hyksos period.

Hyksos Rule in Egypt.

The rise of Hyksos rule can be traced to the major influx from the Levant into Egypt's temple economy and the royal and private households of the twelfth and the thirteenth dynasties, especially those near the royal residence (at Itjtawy, el-Lisht) or at Illahun. Their large settlement in the northeastern Nile Delta (Tell ed-Dabʿa, later Avaris) was inhabited by soldiers, shipbuilders, craftsmen, and trading agents from Syria-Palestine. It became a specialized settlement at the northeastern entrance of Egypt for organizing and controlling Egyptian mining expeditions and trade with the Levant, Cyprus, and to some extent the Aegean. The Egyptian officials responsible for this activity (“Overseers of Foreign Countries” or “Overseers of Retenu”) were peoples of West Semitic language. Their tombs were adjacent to their palatial residences, and some had monumental limestone statues portraying them in their native dress and coiffure. The later destruction of such statues indicates political turmoil in that region. Their nearly exclusive control over foreign commodities, soldiers, ships, and connected installations in the eastern Delta gave them powerful positioning for making policy.

The thirteenth dynasty was not stable; it consisted, more or less, of a continuum of usurpers with very short reigns that averaged three years. The power brokers of that period were administrators and generals, some of them of foreign origin. Toward the end of the eighteenth century BCE, parts of the Delta broke with thirteenth dynasty rule. By a few monuments, the kingdom of Nehesy “the Nubian” is known. His monuments are only in the northeastern Delta, between Bubastis and Tell el-Hebwa. He seems to have resided in Avaris, where he created an Egyptian interpretation of a local cult of the Syrian storm god Hadad (Baal-Zaphon), syncretizing him with the Egyptian storm god Seth, who became from that time the dynastic god “Seth, lord of Avaris” or “Seth, lord of Rʒ-ʒḫt” (“door of the fertile land”). The name Nehesy is known from several monuments as “oldest king's son” before he came to reign. He was possibly part Egyptian, based on his mother's purely Egyptian civil name. His power rested, however, on the large population of Near Easterners, who had continuously settled in the northeastern Delta before his reign. Many kings' names of the fourteenth dynasty may not be Egyptian, and several are West Semitic. The large number of non-Egyptian names suggests that several small kingdoms existed in the northeastern Delta during that time, but only one, with Avaris as capital, has been documented. It probably became the core of the later kingdom of the Hyksos. This would explain why the kings of the fourteenth dynasty were originally called ḥḳʒw-ḫʒswt (“rulers of the foreign countries”). This title led to the mistake that this dynasty originated from the town of Xois (according to the Manethonian tradition). [See MANETHO.] There is, however, no indication that Xois was an important city during the Second Intermediate Period.

The transition from the late Middle Kingdom to the fifteenth dynasty (and the Second Intermediate Period) remains unclear. It may have begun with the union of several petty kingdoms in the northeastern Delta or with the takeover by Salitis of Memphis, the traditional capital, as well as the Middle Kingdom royal residence, Itj-tawy—so that he would be crowned as pharaoh. Whatever the cause, the late thirteenth dynasty rulers either withdrew to Upper Egypt or abdicated to a new local dynasty, a phenomenon that was parallel to the dissolution of the fourteenth dynasty in the Delta. At that time, Lower Nubia was left to the Sudanese kingdom of Kush. A stela of the local Theban king Neferhotpe III shows that hordes of Near Easterners destabilized the Theban area. It may have been only a matter of time until Upper Egypt came under the control of the North.

The Fifteenth Dynasty.

The six Hyksos in Manetho's epitomes have their equivalent in the six Hyksos on a fragment of the Turin Canon. Only the name of the last king, ḫamudi, was preserved. To equate the six Hyksos names from Manetho's excerpts with those from monuments is very difficult because of corrupted versions in the epitomes. For the beginning of the fifteenth dynasty, Manetho attributes nineteen regnal years to Salitis. From a genealogy of priests, the name Shalek (Šʒrk) has been proposed as the first Hyksos king, who lived one generation before Apophis. The names Mʒʿ-ib-Rʿ and šši on numerous scarabs with a wide distribution have never been found on monuments. Inclusion into the main Hyksos dynasty may therefore be doubtful; the same applies to the name Mr-wsr-Rʿ Iʿḳb-hr (Yaʿakob-har), whose scarabs were found from Kerma in the Sudan to Shiqmona in northern Palestine.

Seuserenre Khayan (Apachnan from Manetho's list) must have been an important ruler, since monumental architecture is known from his reign, such as an inscribed block from Gebelein. Stone vessels have been found in Knossos and in Boghazköy that were probably diplomatic gifts from Khayan, sent abroad. He also usurped statues of the Middle Kingdom. On a stela from Tell ed-Dabʿa, containing the royal names of Khayan, there is evidence of the king's oldest son Yanassy (Yansas-aden); probably he can be identified with Iannas from Manetho's list (who according to Josephus, reigned after Apophis; according to the third century CE historian Africanus, Khayan ruled under the name Staan, two reigns before Iannis).

The most important Hyksos was Apophis (Apopy), who had a long reign (c.1605–1565 BCE). He probably held successively the pronomina ʿʒ-ḳnn-Rʿ, Nb-ḫpš-Rʿ, and ʿʒ-wsr-Rʿ. An architrave from Gebelein also shows his name. The Rhind mathematical papyrus is dated to his thirty-third regnal year. Manetho's epitomes attribute either sixty-one or fourteen years to his rule. As the opponent of the kings Sekenenre and Kamose of Thebes, Apophis should be placed near the end of the Hyksos period. Most likely, he was the immediate predecessor of ḫamudi (Khamudy), the only Hyksos name preserved in the Turin Canon. The length of his reign can be approximated from the reverse of the Rhind mathematical papyrus, dated to Year 11 of an unmentioned king—who can only be ḫamudi.

The succession of Khayan, Yansas-aden, Apophis, and ḫamudi is probably correct. The dynastic placement of Seker-her (Sikru-Haddu, “memory of the god Hadad”) is problematic. He must have been (according to a monumental doorway with his full titles) one of the six Hyksos of the fifteenth dynasty.

Nearly all the Hyksos names have been convincingly decoded as West Semitic (Redford, 1970, Ryholt, 1997, and Schneider, 1998), with some differences in interpreting the etymology. The suggestion that some of the names may be Hurrian or even Aryan is not convincing. Besides the above-mentioned names of the fifteenth dynasty, many more scarabs are known with West Semitic names, such as ʿAmu, Yakʿammu, Yakbeʿam, and Yakubaʿal; some of them also carried the title of Hyksos, like ʿAnat-her, User-ʿAnat, and Semqen. Probably the above-mentioned scarabs with the names Maa-ibre Sheshy and Mer-userre Yaʿa kub-har should be placed within this group, rather than among the kings of the fifteenth dynasty. Some Egyptologists place most of the obscure kings under the sixteenth dynasty. Their frequency in Palestine (Iʿaqeb-her and Yakbeʿam occurred even in northern coastal Palestine) leads to the suspicion that there were a number of rulers in southern Palestine around Sharuhen or even as far north as Tel Kabri, who were vassals to the fifteenth dynasty kings, or even partly independent. It is unclear whether the sixteenth dynasty designation “Shepherd Kings,” according to the Africanus version, is correct, or if the sixteenth dynasty kings reigned in Thebes (Eusebius) as Ryholt (1997) maintains. Without doubt, there were, under the umbrella of the fifteenth dynasty rulers, a series of vassals in southern and coastal Palestine, in Middle Egypt, and in Thebes. (In Thebes, they also can be identified within the seventeenth dynasty.) Such was the political system of the Hyksos, and typical of the Amorite kingdoms in Syria and the city-states in Palestine. We know little about the conditions in the central and western Delta at that time; probably vassals were installed there, too.

The Hyksos soon took pharaonic status and titles and probably used Egyptian scribes and officials for administration. It seems, however, that they adapted the administration to their own tradition. No vizier is known, but the office of the chancellor (ʾimy-r-ḫtm.t), with the West Semitic name Ḥʒr, seems to have had prime importance; scarabs with his name have a wide distribution, from southern Palestine to Kerma in Sudan. The sciences and literature were continued, and several important papyri were kept in Avaris: the mathematical Rhind Papyrus, the literary Westcar Papyrus, and some medical papyri.

The chancellor's scarabs and a similar wide distribution of certain types of pottery (of Tell el-Yahudiyya ware) show the extent of Hyksos commercial and political influence. The presence of such seals and pottery in Lower Nubia and Sudan and the paucity of such objects in Upper Egypt indicate that the Hyksos kingdom in northern Egypt and the southern kingdom of Kush established direct relations, without Upper Egypt participating in this trade. Such commerce would make strongholds necessary, controlled by the Hyksos. Such a station was set up on the commanding rocks of Gebelein, 28 kilometers (17 miles) south of Luxor, where two blocks of monumental architecture with the names of Khayan and Apophis were found (it is unlikely that those blocks were transported from Lower Egypt just to be incorporated as fill there). Another such stronghold was Nefrusi in Middle Egypt.

In southern Palestine, the widespread Hyksos scarabs and Tell el-Yahudiyya ware indicate a Hyksos realm of influence. Central inland Palestine shows a distinctly different pottery scatter, a sign of cultural and political distinction, independent of the Hyksos. Nonetheless, the enormous fortifications in the south of Canaan that are dated to the late Middle Bronze Age could be taken as some evidence of protection against the Hyksos.

According to the Speos Artemidos inscription of Hatshepsut, the Hyksos ruled without Re and, according to the Sallier Papyrus, King Apophis did not serve any god but Seth. This may be an exaggeration since the Hyksos kings used the prenomens constructed with Re and the zʒ-Rʿ-title (“son of Re”), at least from Khayan onward. They seem to have followed some Canaanite cults that incorporated Egyptian traits and showed acculturation (according to archaeological evidence from a temple precinct in Avaris). The Hyksos also tolerated the continuation of local traditional cults in Egypt but probably failed to maintain them.

The End of Hyksos Rule.

Under Khayan and the early reign of Apophis, the rule of the Hyksos reached its peak. Resistance against those kings started from their remotest vassal, Thebes, which then controlled the region between Elephantine and Cusae, to the south of Hermopolis. The beginning of the seventeenth dynasty there seems to coincide with the beginning of Hyksos rule—and this suggests that the seventeenth dynasty may have been installed by the Hyksos. Yet the names of its kings, such as Intef and Montuhotep, suggest Theban nationalism. In the Ramessid-era Papyrus Sallier I, in the tale of Apophis and Sekenenre, a problem arose between the Hyksos ruler and his Upper Egyptian vassal; the end of the story is not preserved, but the mummy of King Sekenenre Taʿo shows several deadly wounds caused by a Syrian-Palestinian battle axe. An encounter on the battlefield between this king and the forces of his overload Apophis was possible. At Deir el-Ballas in Upper Egypt, near Naqada, a castle was constructed by Sekenenre Taʿo that served, according to the excavator Peter Lacovara, for this king and his successors Kamose and Ahmose, as a campaign residence against the Hyksos. Inscriptions on Tablet Carnarvon I and the two stelae of Kamose, found at Karnak, tell that at the beginning of Kamose's reign, conditions were peaceful; in his third year, he began a rebellion against the Hyksos ruler Apophis. The devoted vassal of the Hyksos Teti, son of Pepy, was defeated at Nefrusi. A surprise attack to the north then opened a route to Avaris. Apophis attempted to resume a former strategic relationship with the king of Kush (Kerma), inviting him to attack in the south of Egypt while Kamose was still busy in the north; but the messenger, who had avoided the Nile Valley, was intercepted along the oasis route.

Avaris was not taken by Kamose, but his stela reported that plentiful booty was taken from hundreds of ships filled with gold, lapis lapis lazuli, silver, turquoise, innumerable bronze battle axes, bʒk-oil, incense, fat, honey, precious woods, and other products from “Retenu” (Lebanon/Palestine). Kamose claimed to have taken everything from Avaris, although this seems highly exaggerated. It is also unlikely that the ships were not turned back before the Thebans could advance to Avaris. The listing of the products of Retenu is valuable for its information about goods from Canaan. Kamose seems to have died that year, since no records survive for him beyond Year 3 of his reign. Ahmose, probably his brother, succeeded to the throne as a child under the tutelage of his mother Ahhotep, so it took some time before warfare with the Hyksos was resumed. That could not have happened before the eleventh year of the reign of King ḫamudi, who must have succeeded Apophis, after the Year 3 of Kamose, although the exact date is undetermined. Most likely, he started his reign later than Ahmose. According to paleographic evidence, the final assault on Avaris happened only from Ahmose's eighteenth regnal year onward, but not much later.

The entry on the reverse of Rhind Papyrus states that Memphis (Heliopolis) was the first city to be taken in Ahmose's offense against the Hyksos. Two days later, the Thebans took the frontier fortress Sile (probably Tell el-Hebwa). For this operation they must have bypassed Avaris along the river and severed connections between Avaris and Palestine. The length of the siege of Avaris is unknown, owing to limited information. The naval officer Ahmose, son of Abn, mentions in his autobiographical inscription in his tomb in Elkab, some battles in which he was personally involved, and “then one took Avaris.” (More information can be expected from the study of numerous relief fragments, with representations of the warfare around Avaris, found recently by Stephen Harvey at the Ahmose pyramid-temple at Abydos.)

Manetho's work, as related to us by Flavius Josephus, reported the ancient Egyptians in despair because of the long siege, so they agreed to a free retreat by the Hyksos to Palestine. The archaeological record at Tell ed-Dabʿa revealed that the majority of the town escaped destruction by fire and seems to have been abandoned; within the citadel, however, we have evidence of destruction and violence.

After the conquest of Avaris, Ahmose constructed within the Hyksos citadel his own headquarters, containing two palaces on high platforms—a big one and a small one. Those installations probably replaced his former campaign residence in Deir el-Ballas and served as a new residence for the campaigns he continued against the Hyksos in southern Palestine. Surprisingly, parts of his new palace compound in Avaris imitated Aegean ashlar façades with wooden elements. A side entrance had painted decorations and a portico. Rooms of the small palace had Minoan-style wall paintings: bull-leaping, bull-grappling, hunting, acrobatics, and emblematic griffins. The use of scenes typical to Minoan palaces suggests a throne room, similar to that known from the palace at Knossos. The similarity of emblems shared with Knossos includes a half-rosette frieze. The Minoan paintings probably reflected a new political agreement between Egypt—which could provide the luxury goods of Africa, especially gold—and the most formidable sea power of that time, the Minoan Thalassocracy, which could provide Egypt some security at sea. Lacking a seagoing fleet at that time, Egypt probably needed the help of a sea power.

After the reconquest of Avaris and the eastern Delta region, the Egyptians of the early New Kingdom were still vulnerable. The Hyksos had not been thoroughly defeated, especially since several sites show that they must have had an intact domain to the northeast of the Delta in southern Palestine. There, a subdynasty of the main Hyksos existed (probably the sixteenth dynasty). Southern Palestine was the main olive oil and wine source for the Hyksos, as known from the many amphoras in Avarais from that region. Great were the resources and economic strength of this remaining Hyksos kingdom, to which the Avaris Hyksos withdrew; thus the potential of a reconquest of Egypt from this nearby base still existed in the early New Kingdom. The attack by Ahmose on Sharuhen in southern Palestine was then a logical move for the stabilization of his reign. According to the biography of his namesake Ahmose, son of Abu, it took three years to take Sharuhen. The assaults on the other towns in southern Palestine were, perhaps, not less difficult. The Middle Bronze Age city-states in inland Palestine were not attacked until the time of Thutmose III. After the destruction of the Hyksos kingdom in southern Palestine, the successors of Ahmose focused their attention immediately to the north, to Syria, where another new and formidable power, the kingdom of Mitanni, had begun to infiltrate the important city-states there. Egypt, after a long period of isolation, was fully entangled in the mainstream of Near Eastern politics during the eighteenth dynasty.

Archaeological Sources.

In archaeological terms, the presence of the Hyksos rule in Egypt can be assessed through the data from sites that were a specific variant of the Syrian-Palestinian Middle Bronze Age culture. These sites were found east of the Pelusiac branch of the Nile River, along the eastern edge of the Delta. They represent something similar to a cultural province that outlined the core, or the homeland, of the Hyksos rule in Egypt. The most important, and northernmost site was Tell ed-Dabʿa, (Avaris) which had the longest history of continuous settlement. The Syrian-Palestinian Middle Bronze Age culture there dates to the late twelfth dynasty (c.1800 BCE), when a massive influx came to the region. Before that, only a few sherds of Levantine origin were found in the stratigraphy of an otherwise purely Egyptian culture. Perhaps the size and singularity of the early settlement at Tell ed-Dabʿa can be explained best as an open trading zone for the Levant—comparable to Naucratis for the Greeks in the Late period. Besides Tell ed-Dabʿa, the Middle Bronze Age IIA (Middle Bronze Age I) is only represented by some few camp sites without architectural features in the Wadi Tumilat, perhaps originating from migrating nomads. Some tombs that date to the end of this period are known at Farasha.

All other known sites are dated to the time of the Hyksos rule, especially to the second half of this period. One of the most important strategic sites was Tell el-Yahudiyya, with a rampart fortification covered by a stucco slope. North of that site were the cemeteries of Inshâs and another settlement at Ghita. In the Wadi Tumilat were cemeteries at Kua, a bigger settlement with tombs at Pithom, and more tombs at Tell es-Sahaba. (Remains of Middle Bronze Age culture from Bubastis are unverified.)

The position of the Hyksos sites shows that during their rule the route along the Pelusiac branch of the Nile was important for sea connections to the Levant. The land route along the Wadi Tumilat—a traditional track to the central and southern Sinai—was also important. Interestingly, no evidence exists for the use of the via maris or the turquoise mines at Serabit el-Khadim during this period. A connection to the Red Sea has been suggested but not verified. Some contacts to the galena mines at Gebel Zeit can be postulated according to hawk-shaped Tell el-Yahudiyya ware that has been found in the eastern Delta. Since Middle Bronze Age sites are not known from other parts of Egypt, this suggests that the land was otherwise controlled by vassals and by occupied strongholds.

The sites, in particular Tell ed-Dabʿa, show that long before the Hyksos, Near Easterners lived in the Nile Delta. The camp sites at Wadi Tumilat show that they were nomads pasturing their flocks. The stable settlement at Tell ed-Dabʿa, with its. Syrian middle-room houses (dated to the Middle Bronze Age IIA period), as well as house burials and temple constructions, demonstrate that an urban population of a different background was in residence there. Some of the ceramic and architectural features point toward northern Syria as their origin. This source is also indicated by a locally made cylinder seal, with a representation of the northern Syrian storm god. Another part of the population may have originated from southern Palestine, from where the majority of trade originated. A high percentage of graves having weapons and copper molds suggests that many settlers were soldiers and metalworkers. The martial features in the burial customs continued until the Hyksos period. Pairs of donkey burials were found in front of tombs, indicating the use of caravans.

An Egyptian administrative palace of the early thirteenth dynasty shows that the officials who resided there were Near Eastern. The cemetery attached to the palace has syncretic features of Syrian-Palestinian Middle Bronze Age and Egyptian burial traditions. Even high officials who controlled the administration of trade and other enterprises with the Levant were of Near Eastern origin. A few held the title of “Overseer of Foreign Countries” and had colossal limestone statues set up in the chapels of their tombs, depicting them as Near Eastern dignitaries, with red mushroom-shaped coiffures, yellow skin, and the traditional throw stick. A blending of ideology was also present in Canaanite temples and cult installations within Egyptian mortuary chapels, showing that syncretism between the two cultures developed both before and during the Hyksos period. The position of tombs within houses and the location of graveyards in the midst of settlements is, however, an ancient Near Eastern feature.

The location of Avaris in a northerly position at a navigable Nile branch and the listing of numerous ships at Avaris in the Second Kamose Stela makes it clear that maritime activity was an important part of this community living in Egypt. With the beginning of the Hyksos period, the settlement area of Avaris doubled or tripled in size, and in the eastern Delta most of the sites date only to this period. There were also changes in some classes of pottery, especially in the Tell el-Yahudiyya ware. All the evidence suggests that a massive influx of people came to Avaris.

Archaeological evidence in Egypt reveals that intense trade occurred with southern Palestine throughout the Second Intermediate Period—with the main imports olive oil and wine. New animals were introduced, including the horse and, shortly before the Hyksos period, wool-bearing sheep. Contacts with the northern Levant were, however, poor during the Hyksos period, owing to the destabilized condition of the coastal Syrian towns. Yet trade with Cyprus flourished, and the ceramic records of mutual imports from Egypt in Cyprus were, perhaps, only a side effect of an increased demand for copper by the Hyksos. Trade with Cyprus reached a peak toward the end of the Hyksos period, especially at Tell ed-Dabʿa and, to a lesser extent, farther inland. Fragments of huge storage jars show that commodities, such as fruits, nuts, or other organic matter, were imported in large quantities. The archaeological record also shows that trade between the Hyksos-dominated North and Upper Egypt was very poor and that during the later phase of the Hyksos period imports from the Memphite area came to an end. This lack of trade prompted an increased isolation of the eastern Delta from the rest of Egypt, and resulted in economic disadvantages for the North, which explains its eventual downfall.

The impact of the Hyksos on ancient Egypt should not be underestimated. They were perceived as a foreign dynasty, so their political relations and acts of power must have caused great internal irritation. Their rule therefore stimulated a political nationalism by the time of the rulers of the late seventeenth dynasty. Egypt benefited from the Hyksos trading network that included the southern Levant and Cyprus, as well as some technical innovations in the ceramic and metal industries. The long contact with a Near Eastern culture also had its impact on Egypt in the fields of literature, music, and perhaps indirectly in language innovations. From those influences, Egypt became, in the New Kingdom, more involved with the eastern Mediterranean than ever before.



  • Alt, A. Die Herkunft der Hyksos in neuer Sicht. Sitzungsberichte d. Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 101.6. Leipzig, 1954.
  • Bietak, M. “Hyksos.” In Lexikon der Ägyptologie, 3:62 ff. Wiesbaden, 1978.
  • Bietak, M. Avaris and Piramesse, Archaeological Exploration in the Eastern Nile Delta. Ninth Mortimer Wheeler Archaeological Lecture, The British Academy. Oxford, 1981. Included in Proceedings of the British Academy, London, 65, pp. 225–290. 2d enl. ed. Oxford, 1986.
  • Bietak, M. “Egypt and Canaan during the Middle Bronze Age.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 282 (1991), 28–72.
  • Bietak, M. Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos—Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dabʿa. The first Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation Distinguished Lecture in Egyptology, British Museum Publications. London, 1996.
  • Gardiner, A. H., “The Defeat of the Hyksos by Kamose: The Carnarvon Tablet No. 1.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 3 (1916), 95–110.
  • Giveon, R. “The Hyksos in the South.” In Fontes atque pontes: Eine Festgabe für Hellmut Brunner, edited by M. Görg. Wiesbaden, 1986.
  • Habachi, L. The Second Stela of Kamose and His Struggle against the Hyksos Ruler and His Capital. Glückstadt, 1972.
  • Oren, E. D. ed. The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. University Museum Symposium Series. Philadelphia, 1997.
  • Van Seters, J. The Hyksos: A New Investigation. New Haven, 1966.
  • Redford, Donald B. “The Hyksos Invasion in History and Tradition.” Orientalia n. s. 39 (1970), 1–51.
  • Redford, Donald B. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel. Princeton, N.J., 1992.
  • Ryholt, K. S. B. The Political Situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period c. 1800–1550 B.C. CNI Publications, 20. Copenhagen, 1997.
  • Säve-Söderbergh, T. “The Hyksos Rule in Egypt.” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 37 (1951), 53–71.
  • Schneider, T. Ausländer in Ägypten. während des Mittleren Reiches und der Hyksozeit. Ägypten und Altes Testament, 42. Wiesbaden, 1998. Follows O. Rössler's transcription system.
  • Wadell, W. G. Manetho. Loeb Classical Library. London, 1956.
  • Weinstein, J. “Hyksos.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, edited by E. M. Myers et al., vol. 3, pp. 133–136. New York, 1997.

Manfred Bietak