In the seventeenth century the Hyksos kingdom in the north, the national Egyptian Theban city state in the south, and the kingdom of Kerma as a third power all stood side by side (Davies 2003). The Thebans imitated the Hyksos both in the formation of names (Beckerath 1965: 129ff.) and in their architecture (e. g. the palace of Deir el-Ballas). The triumph of Thebes is known to us almost exclusively from epigraphic evidence that presents the Theban perspective. As a result, it is difficult to extract dates for the history of events from these sources. The literary history of P. Sallier I, with its history of the conflict between Apophis and Seqenenre is problematic. In the first decades after the events described in the text the oral historical memory may have been altered, but the fictionalization and literary format, using the motif of a riddle contest between the two rulers, are clear. The same is true of more historiographic texts, such as the Speos-Artemidos inscription of Hatshepsut. For contemporary sources some texts and images of Kings Kamose and Ahmose are available, (such as the Kamose Stela or the decorated axe of Ahmose) but also the self-presentations of the Theban elites who were near to the court. So Ahmose, son of Ebana reports in his tomb-inscription about his successful participation in the conquest of Avaris (Urk. IV 1,1-11,2, Popko 2006: 187-206) while Emhab’s memorial stone offers a remarkable text reflecting ‘‘the big picture’’ from the perspective of a participant (Morenz 2006). A perspective closer to that of the Hyksos can be found in the form of a secondary mytho-historical note written on the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus (Morenz 1996: 187-90).
In spite of their Egyptianizing tendencies the Hyksos were characterized as foreign kings by the Upper Egyptian royal houses of the Seventeenth Dynasty in Thebes and Deir el-Ballas. Kamose called the Hyksos king Apophis ‘‘Prince of Retjenu’’ and the first Kamose stela complains that he was obliged to share his power with a Nubian and an Asiatic. The war that had been started by his predecessor Seqenenre and continued by him contained elements of a war of liberation: ‘‘I desire to free Egypt, which is oppressed by the Asiatics’’ (Carnarvon Tablet, l. 4-5, Helck, 1983: 84). This picture became so ingrained that Hatshepsut presented the Hyksos as illegitimate and destructive rulers. The clockmaker Amenemhet rationalized the campaign of Thut-mose I against the Mitannian kingdom on the Euphrates as ‘‘retaliation for the evil’’ (columns 2-3, Helck 1983: 110). Even Thutmose III sometimes justified his campaigns as revenge against the attacks of hkiw-hiswt (cf. Urk. IV 1229,5; Redford 1970: 34). It is significant that the Egyptian-occupied Levant was primarily formed as a protective zone rather than as a province conquered for imperialistic reasons (Panagiotopoulos 2000).
Kamose, however, did not live to see the end of the war. He was able to besiege the Hyksos capital Avaris, but its conquest was only achieved by his successor Ahmose. The campaign led Ahmose as far as Sharuhen in southern Palestine where he finally defeated the Hyksos rulers in an interminable battle. With Ahmose the New Kingdom truly began. The perception that this marked a new epoch is not a modern construction but is genuinely Egyptian: Manetho begins the Eighteenth Dynasty with Ahmose. Furthermore the Min-festival relief in the Ramesseum already makes a clear break with Ahmose’s rule (Redford 1986: 34-6). Some sources, such as the stela of Ahhotep, suggest internal political unrest which had to be resolved so that Ahmose could turn his efforts to reform of the administration. In this way he left a kingdom to his successors that was secure both internally and externally.
The Hyksos war, regardless of what events actually took place, generated a change of mentalities in relation to historical memory. To a previously unknown extent the Amun-temple of Karnak was now used as a show-case for war booty and power, just as the Parthenon was following the Persian War. This was achieved through architecture and reliefs, but also through the use of prestige objects and estates.
The prominence of Thebes can also be seen on a purely ideological level in the Horus-names of the kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty - a tradition that can be traced back to Dedumose in the seventeenth century BC.
World History
