Egyptian Myth and Legend Chapter 20, The Hyksos and their Strange God

EGYPTIAN MYTH AND LEGEND

With Historical Narrative, Notes on Race Problems, Comparative Beliefs, etc.

by

Donald Mackenzie

Gresham Publishing Co., London

[1907]

CHAPTER XX

The Hyksos and their Strange God

The Sebek-Ra Rulers–A Great Pharaoh–The Shadow of Anarchy–Coming
of the “Shepherd Kings”–Carnival of Destruction–A Military Occupation –Causes
of World–wide Unrest–Dry Cycles–Invasions of Pastoral Peoples–History in Mythology–Tribal
Father and Mother Deities–Sutekh, Thor, Hercules–Mountain Deities and Cave Demons–Hyksos
Civilization–Trade with Europe and Asia–The Horse–Hittite Influence in Palestine–Raid
on Babylon–Kassites and Aryans–Aryan Gods in Syria–Mitanni Kingdom.

AFTER the close of the Golden Age the materials for Egyptian history become
somewhat scanty. The Thirteenth Dynasty opened peacefully, and the Sebek-Ra names
of its kings indicate that the cults of the crocodile and the sun held the balance
of power. The influence exercised by the Pharaohs, however, appears to have been
strictly circumscribed. Some of them may have reigned in Crocodilopolis or its
vicinity, but Thebes ultimately became the capital, which indicates that the Delta
region, with its growing foreign element, was considered insecure for the royal
house. The great kings of the Twelfth Dynasty had established their power in the
north, where they found it necessary to keep watchful eyes on the Libyan and Syrian
frontiers.

Succession to the throne appears to have been regulated by descent in the female
line. Evidently the Legitimists were resolved that alien influence should not
predominate at Court, and in this regard they must have received the support of
the great mass of the Egyptian people, of whom Herodotus said: “They contentedly
adhere to the customs of their ancestors, and are averse from foreign manners”.
It is significant to find that the father of one of the Sebekhotep kings was a
priest who achieved greatness because he married a princess. This Sebekhotep was
followed by his son, who had a Hathor name, but he was dethroned after a brief
reign. The next Pharaoh was the paternal uncle of the fallen monarch. His royal
name was Neferkhara-Sebekhotep, and he proved to be the greatest ruler of this
obscure period. He controlled the entire kingdom, from the shores of the Mediterranean
to the second cataract, where records were made of the rise of the Nile. On the
island of Argo, near the third cataract, he erected two granite statues over 20
feet in height, which stood in front of a large temple. Nubian aggression must
have been held firmly in check by a considerable garrison. But not for long. After
two weak kings had reigned, the throne was seized by Neshi, “the negro”, a worshipper
of Ra and Set. His colossal statue of black granite testifies to the supremacy
achieved by the Nubian raiders. In the north another usurper of whom we have trace
is Mermenfatiu, “Commander of the Soldiers”.

The shadow of anarchy had again fallen upon Egypt. Once more, too, the feudal
lords asserted themselves, and the kingdom was broken up into a number of petty
states. A long list of monarchs is given by Manetho, and these may include many
of the hereditary nome governors who became Pharaohs in their own domains and
waged war against their neighbours. Thebes remained the centre of the largest
area of control, which may have enjoyed a meed of prosperity, but the rest of
Egypt must have suffered greatly on account of the lack of supervision over the
needful distribution of water. Peasants may well have neglected to till the soil
in districts ever open to the raids of plunderers, exclaiming, in the words of
the Twelfth-Dynasty prophet: “What is the good of it? We know what is coming.”

Egypt was thoroughly disorganized and unable to resist its enemies. These were
ever watchful for an opportunity to strike. The Nubians had already achieved some
success, although they were ultimately expelled by the Thebans; the Libyans must
have been active in the north, while the Asiatics were pouring over the Delta
frontier and possessing themselves of great tracts of territory. Then came the
Hyksos invaders, regarding whose identity much controversy has been waged. They
were evidently no disorganized rabble, and there are indications that under their
sway Egypt became, for an uncertain period, a part of a great empire of which
we, as yet, know very little.

Josephus, the patriotic Jewish historian, who believed that the Hyksos were
“the children of Israel”, quoted Manetho as saying that “they were a people of
ignoble race who had confidence to invade our country, which they subdued easily
without having to fight a battle. They set our towns on fire; they destroyed the
temples of the gods, and caused the people to suffer every kind of barbarity.
During the entire period of their dynasty they waged war against the people of
Egypt, desiring to exterminate the whole race. . . . The foreigners were called
Hyksos, which signifies ‘Shepherd Kings’.”

Manetho’s reference to a carnival of destruction is confirmed by the inscription
of Queen Hatshepsut of the Eighteenth Dynasty, who declared with characteristic
piety:

I have restored what was cast down,
I have built up what was uncompleted,

Since the Asiatics were in Avaris of the north land,
And the barbarians were among them, destroying buildings,
While they governed, not knowing Ra.

But if the hated Hyksos were wreckers of buildings, so were the Egyptians,
who were ever prone to obliterate all records of unpopular rulers. Khufu’s enduring
pyramid defied them, but they destroyed his mummy and perpetuated his memory in
a spirit of undeniable bitterness, although he was one of their greatest men.
He was an enemy of their gods, which means that he laid too firm a hand upon the
ambitious and acquisitive priests. Thutmose III and Akenaton also undertook in
their day the vengeful work of erasing inscriptions, while Rameses II and others
freely appropriated the monuments of their predecessors. It is not surprising,
therefore, to find that few traces of the Hyksos rulers survive, and that, in
a folktale, they are referred to as “the impure”. They ruled “not knowing Ra”,
and were therefore delivered to oblivion. Manetho, who compiled his history about
a thousand years after they were driven from the country, was unable to ascertain
much about them. Only a few of the kings to whom he makes reference can be identified,
and these belong to the Fifteenth Dynasty. Of the Sixteenth Dynasty he knew little
or nothing, but in dealing with the Seventeenth he was on surer ground, because
Upper Egypt had then regained its freedom, and was gradually reconquering lost
territory in the north.

The Hyksos overwhelmed the land at the close of the Fourteenth Dynasty. Then
they chose for a king “one of their own people”. According to Manetho his name
was Salatis, and with him begins the Fifteenth Dynasty. He selected Memphis as
his capital, and there “he made Upper and Lower Egypt pay tribute”, while he left
garrisons at places which were “considered to be proper for them”. Did the Hyksos,
therefore, effect merely a military occupation of Egypt and compel the payment
of tribute to a controlling power in Asia? On this point we obtain no clear idea
from Manetho, who proceeds to state that the foreigners erected a strongly fortified
town called Avaris–afterwards destroyed by the Egyptians–and there they kept
a garrison of 240,000 men, so as to secure the frontier from the attacks of the
Assyrians, “who, they foresaw, would invade Egypt”. Salatis held military reviews
to overawe all foreigners.

Whatever enemy the Hyksos feared, or prepared to meet, it was certainly not
the Assyrians, who were at the time fully occupied with their own affairs; they
had not yet attained to that military strength which subsequently caused the name
of their god Ashur to be dreaded even in the Nile valley.

The reference, however, may be to Babylonia, where, as we shall see, an aggressive
people had made their appearance.

In absence of reliable records regarding the Hyksos people, or perhaps we should
say peoples, for it is possible that there was more than one invasion, we must
cross the frontier of Egypt to obtain some idea of the conditions prevailing in
Asia during this obscure but fascinating period.

Great changes were passing over the civilized world. Old kingdoms were being
broken up, and new kingdoms were in process of formation. The immediate cause
was the outpourings of pastoral peoples from steppes and plateaus in quest of
“fresh woods and pastures new”, because herbage had grown scanty during a prolonged
“dry cycle” in countries like Arabia, Turkestan, and the Iranian plateau. Once
these migrations by propulsion began, they were followed by migrations caused
by expulsion. The movements were in some districts accompanied by constant fighting,
and a people who displayed the best warlike qualities ultimately became conquerors
on a gradually increasing scale. Another cause of migration was the growth of
population. When an ancestral district became crowded, the surplus stock broke
away in “waves”. But movements of this kind invariably followed the line of least
resistance, and did not necessarily involve marked changes in habits of life,
for pastoral peoples moved from upland to upland, as did agriculturists from river
valley to river valley and seafarers from coast to coast. When, however, peaceful
settlements were effected by nomads in highly civilized areas an increased impetus
must have been given to migration from their native country, where their kindred,
hearing of their prosperity, began to dream dreams of the land of plenty. Nomads
who entered Babylon or Egypt became “the outposts” of those sudden and violent
migrations of wholesale character which occurred during prolonged periods of drought.
The Hyksos conquest of Egypt is associated with one of these “dry cycles”.

In an earlier chapter 1 we have referred to the gradual
expansion from North Africa of the early Mediterranean “long heads”, who spread
themselves over the unoccupied or sparsely populated valleys and shores of Palestine,
Asia Minor, and Europe. Simultaneously, or not much later, Asiatic “broad heads”
moved in successive “waves” along the mountain ranges; these are the Alpine people
of the ethnologists, and they are traced from the Himalayas to Brittany and the
British Isles. The beliefs and tribal customs of the Mediterraneans appear to
have been mainly of Matriarchal character, while those of the Alpine folk were
mainly Patriarchal.

The mixture of these peoples caused the development of a great civilization
in Asia Minor, and so, it is believed, had origin the Hittite kingdom. Other races
were embraced, however, in the Hittite confederacy. Mongols from Turkestan moved
southward during a dry period apparently, and became a strong element in the Hittite
area of control, while Semites from Arabia, who appeared at very early times in
Syria, became allies of the rising people, with whom they fused in some districts.
The eagle-nosed, bearded Alpine Hittites are believed to be represented by the
present-day Armenians and the Mongolian Hittites by the Kurds. Some ethnologists
are of opinion that the characteristic Jewish nose indicates an early fusion of
Hittites and Syrians. There was also an Alpine blend in Assyria, where the Semites
had facial characteristics which distinguished them from the ancestral stock in
Arabia.

Hittite theology is of special interest to us because its influence can be
traced in Egypt immediately before and especially during the Hyksos period. Some
of the tribes of Asia Minor worshipped the Great Mother deity Ma or Ammas, who,
like the Libyan Neith and other virgin goddesses of the Delta, was self-created
and had a fatherless son. She was essentially an earth goddess, and of similar
character to Astarte, Aphrodite, the Cretan serpent goddess, “Our Lady of Doves”
in Cyprus, the Celtic Anu or Danu in Ireland, and the Scottish Cailleach Bheur
who shaped the hills, let loose the rivers, and waved her hammer over the growing
grass.

In Cilicia the male deities predominated, and in southern Cappadocia, where
primitive tribal beliefs appear to have fused early, we find a great rock sculpture,
depicting, it is believed, the marriage of the Great Father and Great Mother deities
of the Alpine and Mediterranean peoples.

The Great Father god of the Hittites is Pappas or Attis (“father”), who was
best known to the Egyptians as Sutekh. He is identified with Baal, “the lord,”
a deity no longer regarded as Semitic in origin. It was the moon god Sin, for
instance, who gave his name to Sinai, and the Arabian sun deity was female.

Sutekh is depicted on a cliff near Smyrna as a bearded god with curly hair
and a high, curving nose. He looks a typical mountaineer, clad in a tunic which
is tightened round the waist by the “hunger belt” so familiar in Scottish hill
lore, and wearing boots with turned-up toes, specially suited for high snow-covered
altitudes.

Sutekh was a sky and atmosphere deity who caused the storms and sent thunder.
He was a god of war, and wore goat’s horns to symbolize fertility and the male
principle. As Tark or Tarku he is depicted carrying in one hand a hammer and in
the other three wriggling flashes of lightning, suggesting the Teutonic Thor.
He is also shown grasping a mace and trident or a double battleaxe. As Ramman
2 with double horns, and bearing his axe and three thunderbolts,
he received adoption in Babylonia after the Hittite conquest.

When the Great Mother was wedded to the Great Father, her son may have been
regarded as the son of Tarku also. It was probably the younger deity who was identified
by the Greeks with Hercules, son of Zeus. But we need not expect a continuity
of well-defined ideas regarding deities of common origin who have developed separately.
These two gods, the Great Father and the son of the Great Mother, are sometimes
indistinguishable. They not only varied in different districts, but also at different
periods. In the latest phase of Hittite religion the Great Father, the conquering
war god of the Alpine people, predominated, and he absorbed the attributes of
other deities in localities where Hittite influence became supreme.

The Hittite deities were associated with mountains and mysterious caves, which
indicates that in their earliest stages they were giants and hags of the type
familiar among the Tyrol mountains, in the Scottish highlands, and in Scandinavia.
They had also their animal affinities and were depicted standing on the backs
of lions and lionesses. The double-headed eagle and the three-legged symbol had
also religious significance.

In addition to the deities there were fearsome demons. The Hittite Typhoon,
like the Egyptian Set and Apep serpent, warred against the gods. He was half-human
and half-reptile–the upper part of his body was that of a man and the lower that
of a serpent. He lived in a cave which was connected by an underground passage
with the cave of the gods. Tempests issued from his jaws and lightning flashed
from his terrible flaming eyes. He was slain by Tarku, as the Hydra was slain
by Hercules, and the various dragons of European story were slain by heroes of
popular romance.

Egypt also had its somewhat colourless dragon legend, which was probably imported.
In one of the Horus stories, Set became a “roaring serpent”, and in this form
he concealed himself in a hole (a cave) which, by command of the ubiquitous Ra,
he was not permitted to leave. He thus became identified with the Apep serpent.
Sutekh, the later Set, who was regarded in the Delta as the true sun god, displaced
Ra and Horus and figured as the “dragon slayer”. The earlier Set was not originally
a demon. He was, it would appear, the god of a foreign people who entered Egypt
in pre-Dynastic times and were ultimately associated with all that was evil and
impure, like the later Hyksos who worshipped Sutekh.

In Syria and Mitanni, prior to the Hyksos period, the Great Father deity of
the Hittites became the supreme god. The most reasonable inference is that he
was the divine representative of the conquering people in Asia Minor. He bore
several territorial names: he was Hadad or Dad in Syria and Teshub (or Teshup)
in Mitanni; he was Tarku farther north. But that he was identical with Sutekh
there can be little doubt, for when Rameses II entered into a treaty with the
Hittites, Sutekh and Amon Ra were referred to as the chief representative gods
of the two great empires.

Now it is a significant fact that the Hittite war god was the chief deity of
the Hyksos. Like Ra-Tum of Heliopolis and Horus of Edfu his appearance in Egypt
points to a definite foreign influence. He was the deity of a people who exercised
control over subject states–a strange god who was adopted by compulsion because
he represented the ruling Power. The Hyksos kings endeavoured to compel the Egyptians
to recognize Sutekh, their official non-Arabian god–an indication that their
organization had a religious basis.

From Manetho’s references to this obscure period we gather that the invaders
of Egypt were well organized indeed. Their raid was not followed by those intertribal
feuds which usually accompanied forcible settlement in a country by Semitic hordes
from Arabia. They did not break up into warring factions, like the early invaders
of Palestine. Before reaching Egypt they must have come under the influence of
a well-organized State. They had attained, at any rate, that stage of civilization
when a people recognize the necessity for establishing a strong central government.

The Hyksos must be credited with military and administrative experience, seeing
that they garrisoned strategic points, and maintained a standing army like the
greatest of the Pharaohs. The collection of tribute is also significant In like
manner did the later Egyptian emperors extract revenue from the petty kings of
subject states in Syria. What Power received the tribute gathered by the Hyksos?
All the indications point to the Hittites. If the Hyksos people were not wholly
from Asia Minor, it is highly probable that the army of occupation was under Hittite
control.

It may be that the invading forces included Semites from Arabia, plundering
Bedouins, Amorites, and even Phoenicians who had migrated from the north of the
Persian Gulf to the Palestine coast, –and that assistance was given by the Libyans,
reinforced by mercenaries from Crete or the ean Peninsula. But it is inconceivable
that a hungry horde of desert dwellers, or an uncontrolled and homogeneous rabble
from Arabia, could have maintained firm control of Egypt for a prolonged period.
The nomads, however, who accompanied the Hyksos forces, may have been “the barbarians
in the midst of them” who are referred to in the inscription of Queen Hatshepsut.
No doubt the invaders were welcomed and assisted by those troublesome alien peoples,
who, during the Twelfth Dynasty, had settled in Egypt and absorbed its civilization.
But the army of occupation was ever regarded as a foreign element, and in all
probability it was reinforced mainly from without. The country must have been
well governed. Queen Hatshepsut admits as much, for she condemns the Hyksos chiefly
on religious grounds; they destroyed the temples–perhaps some were simply allowed
to fall into disrepair–and they ruled “not knowing Ra”. Had the foreign kings
followed the example of some of the most popular Pharaohs, they might have purchased
the allegiance of the priests of the various cults; but their desire was to establish
the worship of the Hittite Sutekh as a result, it may be inferred, of political
influence exercised by the foreign power which received the tribute. One or two
of the Hyksos kings affected a preference for Egyptian gods.

We must take at a discount the prejudiced Egyptian reference to the hated alien
rulers. During the greater part of the Hyksos period peaceful conditions prevailed
not only in Egypt but over a considerable area in Asia. The great trade routes
were reopened, and commerce appears to have been in a flourishing condition. Agriculture,
therefore, must have been fostered; a surplus yield of corn was required not only
to pay tribute but also to offer in exchange for the commodities of other countries.
We meet, in Manetho’s King Ianias, a ruler who was evidently progressive and enterprising.
He is identified with Ian, or Khian, whose name appears on Hyksos relics which
have been found at Knossos, Crete, and Bagdad in Persia. His non-Egyptian title
“ank adebu”, which signifies “Embracer of Countries”, suggests that he was a representative
of a great power which controlled more than one conquered kingdom. Breasted, the
American Egyptologist, translates Hyksos as “rulers of countries”, which means
practically the same thing, although other authorities show a preference for Manetho’s
rendering, “Shepherd Kings”, or its equivalent “Princes of Desert Dwellers”. It
may be, of course, that “Hyksos” was a term of contempt for a people whom the
proud Egyptians made scornful reference to as “the polluted” or “the impure”.
To this day Europeans are regarded in China as “foreign devils”.

We regard the Hyksos period as “a dark age” mainly because of the absence of
those records which the Egyptians were at pains to destroy. Perhaps we are also
prone to be influenced by their denunciations of the foreigners. We have no justification
for assuming, however, that progress was arrested for a prolonged period extending
over about two centuries. The arts did not suffer decline, nor did the builders
lose their skill. So thoroughly was the kingdom reorganized that the power of
the feudal lords was completely shattered. Even the Twelfth-Dynasty kings were
unable to accomplish as much. The Hyksos also introduced the domesticated horse
into Egypt, but at what period we are unable to ascertain. Manetho makes no reference
to it in his brief account of the invasion. If, however, there were charioteers
in the foreign army when it swept over the land, they could not have come from
Arabia, and Bedouins were not likely to be able to manufacture or repair chariots.
Only a rich country could have obtained horses at this early period. They had
newly arrived in western Asia and must have been scarce and difficult to obtain.

Whence, then, came the horse which shattered and built up the great empires?
It was first tamed by the Aryans, and its place of origin is signified by its
Assyrian name “the ass of the East”. How it reached Western Asia and subsequently
made its appearance in the Nile valley, is a matter of special interest to us
in dealing with the Hyksos problems.

We must first glance, however at the conditions which prevailed in the immediate
neighbourhood of Egypt prior to the invasion. During the “Golden Age” the Pharaohs
were much concerned about maintaining a strongly defended north-eastern frontier.
No Egyptian records survive to throw light on the relations between Egypt and
Syria, but the large number of Twelfth-Dynasty ornaments, scarabs, and amulets,
bearing hieroglyphic inscriptions, which have been excavated at Gezer and elsewhere,
indicate that trade was brisk and continuous. A great change had meantime passed
over Palestine. “Sometime about 2000 to 1800 B.C.”, says Professor Macalister,
the well-known Palestinian explorer, “we find a rather sudden advance in civilization
to have taken place. This, like all the other forward steps of which recent excavation
in the country has revealed traces, was due to foreign interference. The Semitic
nations, Amorite, Hebrew, or Arab, never invented anything; they assimilated all
the elements of their civilization from without.”

During the Twelfth Dynasty, therefore, Palestine came under the sway of a people
who had attained a high degree of culture. But they could not have been either
Assyrian or Babylonian, and Egypt exercised no control beyond its frontier. The
great extending Power at the time was the Hittite in the north. Little is known
regarding the early movements of its conquering peoples, who formed small subject
states which were controlled by the central government in Asia Minor. That they
penetrated into southern Palestine as traders, and effected, at least, a social
conquest, is certain, because they were known to Amenemhet I, although he never
crossed the Delta frontier. The northern war god was established at an early period
in Syria and in Mitanni, and Biblical references indicate that the Hittites were
prominent land owners. They were probably the people who traded with Egypt at
Gezer, and with whom the Twelfth-Dynasty Pharaohs arrived at some understanding.
It is unlikely that the influential foreign princesses who were worthy to be introduced
into the royal harem were the daughters of rough desert dwellers. The Dashur jewellery
suggests that the ladies were of refined tastes and accustomed to luxurious living.

We have no means of ascertaining why Senusert III, the son of one of the alien
wives, invaded Syria and fought a battle at Gezer. It may be that the Hittites
had grown restless and aggressive and it is also possible that he co-operated
with them to expel a common enemy–perhaps Semites from Arabia.

Some time prior to the Hyksos invasion the Hittites raided Babylon and overthrew
the Hammurabi Dynasty. But they were unable to enjoy for long the fruits of conquest.
An army of Kassites pressed down from the mountains of Elam and occupied northern
Babylonia, apparently driving the Hittites before them. The Kassites are a people
of uncertain origin, but associated with them were bands of Aryans on horseback
and in chariots. This is the first appearance in history of the Indo-European
people.

A westward pressure of tribes followed. The Kassites and Aryans probably waged
war against the Hittites for a period, and the Hyksos invasion of Egypt may have
been an indirect result of the migrations from the Iranian plateau and the conquest
of Babylonia. At any rate it is certain that the Aryans continued to advance,
for, prior to the close of the Hyksos period, they had penetrated Asia Minor and
reached the Syrian coastland. Whether or not they entered Egypt we have no means
of knowing. All foreigners were Hyksos to the Egyptians at this time, as all northern
barbarians were Celts to the Greeks at a later period. Some change occurred, however,
for there was a second Hyksos Dynasty. What we know for certain is that a military
aristocracy appeared in Mitanni, where Tushratta, who had an Aryan name, subsequently
paid tribute to Egypt in the time of Amenhotep III and his son Akhenaton. He is
believed to have been educated in the land of the Pharaohs, and his ancestors
must have been the expellers from Mesopotamia of the Hittite rulers; the Mitanni
rulers were for a period overlords of Assyria. In addition to the Hittite Sutekh-Teshub,
the Mitanni Pantheon then included Indra, Mithra, and Varuna, the well-known Iranian
gods. These had been introduced into the Punjab by an earlier Aryan “wave” which
swept towards India about the beginning of the Twelfth Egyptian Dynasty.

It may also be noted here that when the Egyptians expelled the weakened Hyksos
army of occupation they possessed horses and chariots. They afterwards pressed
into Syria, but the danger of subsequent invasion was not secured until Thutmose
III overcame the Mitanni Power, which apparently was not unconnected with the
later “Hyksos” overlordship of Egypt.

During the Hyksos period the children of Israel appear to have settled in Egypt.

Footnotes

1 Chapter III.
2 “When I bow down myself in the house of Riminon, the
Lord pardon thy servant in this thing.”–2 Kings, V, 18.