See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/332632002

The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age: A
Reassessment in Light of Recent Chronological Research

Article · January 2019

CITATIONS READS
6 1,608

1 author:

Felix Höflmayer
Austrian Academy of Sciences (OeAW)
71 PUBLICATIONS   460 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Tracing Transformations View project

Tel Kabri excavations View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Felix Höflmayer on 01 October 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections

T HE E XPULSION OF THE H YKSOS AND THE E ND OF THE M IDDLE B RONZE A GE :

A R EASSESSMENT IN L IGHT OF R ECENT C HRONOLOGICAL R ESEARCH

Felix Höflmayer
Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology, Austrian Academy of Sciences

ABSTRACT
The end of the Middle Bronze Age and its connection with the end of the Second Intermediate Period in Egypt and the
alleged expulsion of the Hyksos is of key-importance for understanding the development of the subsequent Late Bronze
Age and the rising Egyptian interest in the region. For a long time it was assumed that the destruction levels observed
at many Middle Bronze Age sites throughout the southern Levant could be linked to the Hyksos expulsion and the
immediate aftermath. The low chronology of Manfred Bietak and others dated the end of the Middle Bronze Age to the
early 18th Dynasty, up to the Thutmosid period and implicitly opened the possibility to connect these destructions
with the attested military campaigns of the Thutmosid kings. Recent radiocarbon data, however, challenged both the
low and the conventional chronology and placed the end of the Middle Bronze Age earlier, probably even before the
start of the New Kingdom. This paper reviews both the chronologies and the historical narratives involved and argues
for a new model for the transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze Age.

INTRODUCTION1 Following these groundbreaking results, recent

After a heated debate in the 1980s and early 1990s, years saw several additional publications on the
the discussion concerning the absolute chronology question of Middle Bronze Age chronology and its
of the Middle Bronze Age and its synchronization synchronization with Egypt. New radiocarbon
with Egypt became rather quiet.2 While general sequences were published or revisited for several
handbooks still followed the traditional chronology,3 sites in Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, and Jordan, such
several leading archaeologists in the field seemed to as Tell el-Burak, Tel Kabri, Megiddo, Tel Ifshar, Tell
have settled on the low chronology,4 which was most el-Hayyat, and Ashkelon, all pointing to a
prominently advertised by Manfred Bietak based on significantly higher Middle Bronze Age chronology
his excavation results at the site of Tell el-Dabʿa in supporting the high radiocarbon dates published for
the eastern Nile Delta (ancient Avaris, the capital of Tell el-Dabʿa by Walter Kutschera et al. in 2012.7 In
the Hyksos rulers in Egypt).5 However, the 2012 2017, a special volume of the Journal of Ancient
publication of a radiocarbon sequence of Tell el- Egyptian Interconnections was devoted to the renewed
Dabʿa by Walter Kutschera and colleagues not only discussion around the Middle Bronze Age
challenged Bietak’s dating of Tell el-Dabʿa and chronology and first ideas about the potential
undermined his arguments for a low chronology, historical impact have been offered.8 Needless to say,
but also sparked a new wave of debate around the not all scholars in the field were willing to adopt the
absolute date of the Middle Bronze Age and its new radiocarbon-backed high chronology with
synchronization with Egypt.6 Daphna Ben-Tor as the first one trying to challenge

Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections | http://jaei.library.arizona.edu |vol. 21 (March 2019) | 20–30

 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

the high chronology based on her interpretation of prevailing cities of the southern Levant, leading to
Egyptian scarabs found in the southern Levant.9 the catastrophic termination of what archaeologists
The present article aims to explore the potential call the Middle Bronze Age (c. 1550/1500 BCE).
implications of a high radiocarbon chronology for According to James Weinstein, “the complete
the transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze destruction of the hated Hyksos princes and their
Age in the southern Levant and its connection with cities was the primary goal of Ahmose’s one or more
the end of the Second Intermediate Period in Egypt. campaigns into Palestine,”13 and William Dever
We will first review the different chronologies and argued that “long series of campaigns repelled the
historical narratives currently in use and outline in intruders into Palestine and even into Syria as far as
brief the different methodologies and assumptions the upper Euphrates, as attested by violent
involved, then summarize the state of research of the destruction levels at nearly every known Syro-
high radiocarbon chronology, and finally trace the Palestinian site at the end of MB IIC or on the MB
historical impact of the high chronology particularly IIC/LB I horizon.”14
for the transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze Which sources did scholars use to reconstruct an
Age and the so-called expulsion of the Hyksos. historical event such as the expulsion of the Hyksos
and the military campaigns into the southern Levant
CHRONOLOGIES AND HISTORICAL NARRATIVES in addition to the obvious destruction horizons of
The reconstruction of a historical narrative of times many of the southern Levantine cities? Contem-
as remote as the Middle or Late Bronze Ages is no porary historical sources are in fact meagre. The
easy task. Sources are limited and often subjective Kamose Stelae I and II recount events that have been
interpretations prevail. Usually, much later sources interpreted as echoes of the Egyptian liberation wars
of, e.g., Greek historians were already accessible and against the occupying force of the Hyksos during the
known before any archaeological research took last king of the 17th Dynasty, and the fall of Avaris
place, so that the latter often had been interpreted is generally believed to be reflected in the colophon
through the lens of the former. Historical and of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus.15 The only
archaeological chronologies had to be linked and the contemporary text that could be linked not with the
interpretation of contemporary and later textual Reconquista of Lower Egypt but with the actual
sources had to be aligned with the archaeological expulsion (and subsequently with the destruction of
evidence in the ground. The transition from the Middle Bronze Age cities throughout the southern
Middle to the Late Bronze Age is an exceptional Levant) was the autobiography of Ahmose, son of
example of the intersection of contemporary and Ibana, an official of El Kab in Upper Egypt.16 In this
much younger texts, historical, archaeological and text, the author recounts the events that led to the
scientific approaches to chronology, and historical/ conquest of Avaris and describes a three-year-long
political events and archaeological transitions siege and the eventual fall of Sharuhen (most likely
detectable in the field. near modern Gaza).
Since the times of William Foxwell Albright, the This brief survey summarizes the contemporary
end of the Middle and the start of the Late Bronze textual sources that could be related with the
Age has been linked to the expulsion of the Hyksos expulsion of the Hyksos. It is quite obvious that
and the start of the Egyptian 18th Dynasty.10 For a based on these meagre sources nobody would have
long time, scholars have noted that the end of the reconstructed “long series of campaigns” (Dever)
Middle Bronze Age is characterized by widespread and “the complete destruction of the hated Hyksos
destruction horizons that primarily occur in the princes and their cities” (Weinstein). Instead, the
southern part of Palestine.11 The historical narrative historical narrative of the expulsion of the Hyksos
at that time saw the Egyptian armies under Ahmose was already part of the scholarly tradition, and new
conquering Avaris (Tell el-Dabʿa) and subsequently textual and archaeological evidence that came to
besieging and capturing Sharuhen (most likely light has been interpreted through this specific lens.
modern Gaza), as mentioned in one of the few William Dever (although himself very much a
contemporary sources, the autobiography of supporter of this historical narrative) was right to
Ahmose, son of Ibana.12 In the wake of this point out that in fact much of the historical narrative
campaign, the Egyptian pharaohs of the early 18th of the Hyksos period and the subsequent expulsion
Dynasty would have devastated much of the by the Egyptians goes back to Manetho’s

21
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

Aigyptiaka.17 The relevant part was quoted in Flavius Late Bronze Age and the beginning of the 18th
Josephus’ Contra Apionem: Dynasty might not be as clear-cut as it seemed to be.
In fact, he argued that one could also assume a start
Thereafter, he says, there came a revolt of for the Late Bronze Age still in the Second
the kings of the Thebaid and the rest of Intermediate Period or well after the start of the New
Egypt against the Shepherds, and a fierce Kingdom, maybe as late as the Thutmosid period.21
and prolonged war broke out between them. It is true that the historical narrative of the expulsion
(…) the Shepherds, he says, were defeated, of the Hyksos and the subsequent destruction of
driven out of all the rest of Egypt, and Levantine cities at the end of the Middle Bronze Age
confined in a region (…) by name Auaris. rests entirely on the chronological assumption that
Thummosis (…) attempted by siege to force the transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze
them to surrender, blockading the fortress Age could be equated with the end of the Second
with an army (…). Finally, giving up the Intermediate Period and the beginning of the New
siege in despair, he concluded a treaty by Kingdom. This equation, however, has never been
which they should all depart from Egypt conclusively established with clear-cut archaeo-
(…). On these terms the shepherds (…) left logical data; it was nothing more than an assumption
Egypt and journeyed over the desert into that entered, and established itself in, the scholarly
Syria.18 debate as a factoid that soon became a fact.
James Hoffmeier’s article immediately sparked
Despite the fact that this account was written more harsh rejoinders from many archaeologists, most
than one thousand years after the events presumably notably by William Dever and James Weinstein.22
had taken place, it predetermined heavily the While both had to agree that the Egyptian textual
scholarly image of the end of the Hyksos period and sources are indeed silent regarding potential
subsequent interpretation of the Egyptians being widespread destructions in the southern Levant in
involved in the violent end of the Middle Bronze the early 18th Dynasty, both basically argued that
Age in southern Palestine. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. They
However, in 1989 James Hoffmeier published a emphasized that the emerging Egyptian New
thought-provoking article in the journal Levant, in Kingdom with its increased interest in the state of
which he challenged the predominant narrative affairs in the Levant would be the only possible
from a philological point of view.19 Hoffmeier option for the Middle Bronze Age destructions, and
argued that the Egyptian sources are in fact silent they dismissed the possibility of internecine warfare
about any Egyptian military expeditions and or any other internal causes. Instead, both Dever and
widespread conquest and/or destruction of Weinstein maintained that the destruction had to be
Levantine cities prior to the time of Thutmose III. He linked to Egyptian warfare of the early 18th Dynasty
pointed out that there is actually no reason to as the only likely candidate. One has to emphasize
connect the destructions of the late Middle Bronze again that Dever and Weinstein’s narrative stands
Age attested at so many sites with Egyptian military and falls with the traditional chronological
activity, except for the siege and conquest of synchronization they both employ.
Sharuhen, according to the autobiography of Another model for the end of the Middle Bronze
Ahmose, son of Ibana, mentioned above. Age was the expansion of the Hurrians, most
Already earlier on, Donald Redford questioned recently advocated by Nadav Naʾaman.23 Naʾaman
whether the Egyptian army from the times of left the chronological question open but pointed out
Ahmose would have been capable to conduct large- that one could argue for an end of the Middle Bronze
scale military expeditions that would have resulted Age still during the late Second Intermediate Period.
in wide-spread destructions throughout the His core argument was that the advancement of the
southern Levant during a limited amount of time, Hurrians would have weakened the Middle Bronze
especially when one accepts a three-year siege for a Age city-states of the southern Levant, eventually
single stronghold like Sharuhen.20 Redford also leading to warfare and the destructions observed
pointed out another very important issue: the fact archaeologically. From his point of view, it was
that the chronological equation of the start of the possible that the Middle Bronze Age ended before

22
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

the Egyptian expansion of the New Kingdom, and and continued into the New Kingdom. Finds
that the Egyptians in fact took advantage of a included not only local Egyptian pottery but also
weakened political system in the southern Levant. Levantine Middle Bronze Age imports and later local
Not surprisingly, this explanatory model was production of Middle Bronze Age pottery shapes, as
outright rejected by William Dever, who maintained well as significant amounts of imported Middle and
that only the developing New Kingdom would have Late Cypriot material (such as White Painted Ware,
been capable of the destructions we see at the end of White Slip Ware, Base Ring Ware, etc.) important for
the Middle Bronze Age.24 interregional chronological synchronization. The
While also other scholars such as Shlomo Cypriot material proved to be crucial for
Bunimovitz were cautious to find the culprit in the synchronizing Middle and Late Bronze Age
Egyptian army and Ahmose, citing indications of a chronological phases in the Levant with the
long-term settlement crisis that culminated in the Egyptian historical chronology via the stratigraphy
destructions at the end of the Middle Bronze Age,25 of Tell el-Dabʿa; as Manfred Bietak pointed out:
in general, the view of Dever and Weinstein largely “Especially significant was the repetitive pattern of
prevailed. To date, the predominant scholarly the first appearances of Kamares ware and Middle
opinion adheres to the model that the pharaohs of and Late Cypriot wares in the stratigraphy of a series
the early 18th Dynasty, from Ahmose down to the of sites (…). This enabled the export of the Egyptian
Thutmosid kings, were culprits for the destruction chronology to the Levant and to Cyprus by
horizons.26 establishing timelines.”31
Significantly, this model stands and falls with the Based on the historical dates assigned to the Tell
assumption that the transition from the Middle to el-Dabʿa stratigraphy and the associated Near
the Late Bronze Age and the early New Kingdom are Eastern imports, Manfred Bietak argued for a low
indeed contemporary in time. However, little Middle and early Late Bronze Age chronology.32
evidence for this historical assumption exists. There According to his model, the transition from the
is no epigraphic Egyptian material found in late Middle to the Late Bronze Age would have occurred
Middle or early Late Bronze Age archaeological approximately during Stratum C/3, in the early-mid
contexts to bolster such an assumption. On the 15th century BCE, roughly equivalent to the
contrary, both the traditional Middle and the Late Thutmosid period in Egypt. This low date was based
Bronze Age chronological synchronizations with on the first appearance in Strata C/2 and C/3 of what
Egypt seem to be highly schematic. Dever himself are considered to be key-markers for the Late Bronze
pointed out that the shift from the 12th to the 13th Age in the Levant, such as Cypriot White Slip I and
Dynasty could be considered as “a convenient Base Ring I ware.
starting point” for Middle Bronze II,27 claiming that Employing the low chronology model, the violent
the Middle Bronze III was “exactly equivalent” to the destructions of the end of the Middle Bronze Age
15th Dynasty,28 and the beginning of the 18th would not be contemporary with the end of the
Dynasty again was regarded as “a convenient date” Second Intermediate Period, but instead with the
for the end of the Middle Bronze Age.29 Thus, it Thutmosid period in Egypt, therefore removing the
seems that the traditional synchronization with the chronological basis of Dever and Weinstein’s
Egyptian historical chronology has been based on argument for interpreting the destructions as an
very schematic historical assumptions instead on outcome of the expulsions of the Hyksos. Instead,
actual archaeological evidence. one could argue that the Middle Bronze Age
Archaeological evidence for the synchronization destructions, now falling into the Thutmosid period,
of Middle/Late Bronze Age chronology with Egypt could be explained by the many military campaigns
was for the first time produced by the Austrian of, e.g., Thutmose III, for which we also have an
excavations at Tell ell-Dabʿa in the eastern Nile Delta abundance of textual sources in Egypt itself.
(ancient Avaris, the capital of the Second In summary, by employing the traditional
Intermediate Period) under the direction of Manfred chronology of the Middle/Late Bronze Age, the
Bietak.30 Here, excavations uncovered a sequence of common historical narrative still viewed the
stratigraphic phases that started in the early 12th Egyptian pharaohs of the early 18th Dynasty as the
Dynasty, covered the Second Intermediate Period, culprits of the widespread destruction horizons at

23
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

the end of the Middle Bronze Age. A smaller, but eruption provides additional evidence,44 and new,
very outspoken, number of scholars argued for a soon-to-be-published radiocarbon determinations
significant lower chronology, synchronizing the end for the end of the Middle Bronze Age at Tel Lachish
of the Middle Bronze Age with the more advanced and the start of the Late Bronze Age at Gezer
18th Dynasty, maybe as late as the Thutmosid complement the picture.45
period. While adherents of the low chronology never The radiocarbon evidence proved to be both
traced the potential historical impact of their consistent but also challenging from the point of
suggestion, it might be speculated that, according to view of traditional relative pottery-based
their model, the destruction horizons of the end of chronology. At Tell el-Dabʿa, the beginning of the
the Middle Bronze Age period might have been Late Bronze Age is connected with Strata C/2–3 and
connected to the well-documented military the first appearance of key-Cypriot markers such as
campaigns of the Thutmosid kings at the dawn of White Slip I and Base Ring I.46 At the same time,
Egyptian involvement in the southern Levant. In pumice from the Minoan eruption of Santorini
both scenarios, the Egyptian army stands as the most appeared at the site.47 According to the radiocarbon
likely (or even only) candidate for causing the model published by Walter Kutschera and
destructions of the end of the Middle Bronze Age. colleagues, these strata should be dated around or
just before 1600 BCE.48
A NEW CHRONOLOGY EMERGES Tell el-Ajjul provided more ambiguous results.
As discussed above, the traditional historical Here, Horizons 7–6 were dated to the Middle Bronze
narratives stand and fall with the chronological III period, Horizon 5 to a transitional Middle/Late
synchronizations employed. For the Middle Bronze Bronze Age phase, and Horizons 4–3 to the early
Age southern Levant, recent years have seen the Late Bronze Age proper. Horizon 5 saw the first
development of a new radiocarbon-backed appearances of Cypriot White Slip I and Base Ring I
chronology that has challenged both the traditional, wares and, as Tell el-Dabʿa Strata C/3-2, pumice from
and especially the low, chronology, as it suggests the Minoan eruption of Santorini.49 Unfortunately,
significantly higher dates for the Middle Bronze Age only few radiocarbon dates are available for this site,
phases.33 This chronology is based on site-specific but according to the published dates, Horizon 5
Bayesian models of a large number of radiocarbon would date to sometime in the 16th century BCE.50
data from several sites in Egypt, the coastal Levant, A significant earlier date is suggested by a
and the Jordan Valley, including Tell el-Dabʿa,34 Tell radiocarbon sequence for Tell el-Hayyat in the
el-Ajjul,35 Ashkelon,36 Jericho,37 Tell el-Hayyat,38 Tel Jordan Valley. This Middle Bronze Age site ends
Ifshar,39 Megiddo,40 Tel Kabri,41 and Tell el-Burak.42 with stratigraphic Phase 1 dated to the Middle
These data suggest a Middle Bronze Age Bronze Age III, while Late Bronze Age is not
chronology that is about 120 years higher (older/less present.51 According to the radiocarbon data, the end
recent) than the low Middle Bronze Age chronology of Phase 1 falls in the 17th century BCE, maybe as
advocated by Manfred Bietak and up to 50 years early as the late 18th century BCE.52 This date,
higher (older/less recent) than the traditional however, should be treated with caution. The
chronology suggested by William Dever.43 While the younger phases of Tell el-Hayyat are not well
historical implications of higher dates for the Middle represented in the radiocarbon sequence and it
Bronze Age are a topic on its own, for the scope of remains unknown whether the actual end of the
this paper, we are interested specifically in the dates Middle Bronze Age III is present at the site.53
for the transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze More precise data is available for Jericho. Here,
Age. several short-lived (and also charcoal) dates were
When does the Late Bronze Age start from a published for the end of the Middle Bronze III,
radiocarbon point of view? Currently we have falling to around 1600 BCE.54 Additional
several datasets at our disposal. Radiocarbon data circumstantial evidence comes from Santorini. It has
for the end of the Middle Bronze Age, or more been shown that pumice from the Minoan Santorini
specifically for the transition from the Middle to the eruption appears in Tell el-Dabʿa Stratum C/2–3 and
Late Bronze Age, exist for Tell el-Dabʿa, Tell el-Ajjul, in Tell el-Ajjul Horizon 5, in both cases together with
Jericho, and Tell el-Hayyat. Data for the Santorini White Slip I and Base Ring I wares. White Slip I was

24
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

also present on Santorini before the eruption took For a long time, no suitable radiocarbon sequence
place in the late Late Minoan IA period.55 was available to check the Egyptian historical
Radiocarbon data for the eruption falls consistently chronology. Based mostly on textual sources, the
to the late 17th century BCE and is in agreement with start of the New Kingdom was dated to c. 1550/1540
data from Tell el-Dabʿa.56 Additional, not-yet- BCE.58 In 2010, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Michael
published radiocarbon evidence supports the overall Dee, and others published several Bayesian models
picture: the end of the Middle Bronze Age III palace for dynastic Egypt based on over 200 new high-
at Lachish dates to the 16th century BCE (cf. the data precision radiocarbon determinations and the
for Tell el-Ajjul), while early Late Bronze Age data known succession of the Egyptian pharaohs and
for Gezer and the appearance of White Slip I dates their individual reign-lengths.59 Based on their
to pre-1600 BCE.57 results, the start of the New Kingdom proved to be
Thus, although the radiocarbon data for the essentially in agreement with historical estimates,
transition from the Middle to the Late Bronze Age is but allowed for a slightly earlier start, somewhere
currently rather ambiguous, it suggests a date between 1566 and 1552 BCE (at 68% probability).
sometime in the first half of the 16th century BCE. At Later, Sturt Manning re-modeled these dates also
some sites, the start of the Late Bronze Age can according to new estimates of reign-lengths of
already be traced before or around 1600 BCE; other certain New Kingdom rulers as suggested by David
sites, such as Tell el-Ajjul or Lachish, seem to have Aston.60 According to these models, the earliest start
continued well into the 16th century BCE. Based on for the New Kingdom could fall between 1578 and
current evidence, the transition from the Middle to 1569 BCE, some 20–30 years earlier than previously
the Late Bronze Age might have lasted several assumed (and—interestingly enough—around the
decades, maybe even half a century (cf. Fig. 1). same time as suggested by Edward Wente and
While the start of the Late Bronze Age could be Charles van Siclen III in their chronology in the mid-
dated slightly earlier than the traditional chronology 1970s).61
(c. 1550/1500 BCE) and significantly earlier than the What does this mean for our alleged link between
low chronology (c. 1500/1450 BCE), a significant the start of the New Kingdom and the end of the
question is where to put the start of the Egyptian Middle Bronze Age in the southern Levant (Fig. 1)?
New Kingdom according to these radiocarbon data. According to our radiocarbon data, the end of the

FIGURE 1: : Comparison of different chronological models for

Egypt and the Levant.

25
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

Middle Bronze Age started around or before 1600 synchronization was adopted, the alleged Egyptian
BCE and seems to continue well into the 16th military campaigns were the only possible way to
century BC. At the same time, radiocarbon data puts explain the widespread destructions, which,
the start of the New Kingdom around 1575 BCE at according to this view, all happened around the time
the very earliest. Therefore, the transition from the of the emerging New Kingdom in Egypt.
Middle to the Late Bronze Age already commenced It was only in the late 1980s when James
during the Second Intermediate Period in Egypt and Hoffmeier rightfully denounced this historical
continued probably into the early New Kingdom. narrative as being based on very weak arguments.
From a chronological point of view, therefore, a Hoffmeier at that time implicitly followed the low
causal link between the destructions at the end of the chronology advocated by Manfred Bietak and for the
Middle Bronze Age and the expulsion of the Hyksos first time de-coupled the Middle Bronze Age
and/or any hypothetical military campaigns by early destructions from the end of the Second
New Kingdom rulers is simply not possible. Intermediate Period.
In the meantime, radiocarbon dating added yet
CONCLUSIONS another facet to the enigma surrounding the end of
Our brief survey of historical narratives and the Hyksos period and the end of the Middle Bronze
chronological reconstructions led to a somewhat Age. While the high radiocarbon chronology is far
dissatisfying result. Little can be told about this time from being widely accepted in the field, more and
period, which is often seen as a significant watershed more data emerges that challenges not only the low
in the development the ancient Near East. Manfred Middle Bronze Age chronology, but also the
Bietak was completely right when he pointed out traditional one, and, even more so, opens up
several years ago that “little is known about the end questions regarding the limitations of relative
of Hyksos rule in Egypt,”62 and, we might add, even pottery-based chronology overall. Markers for the
less so about a hypothetical link between what beginning of the Late Bronze Age, such as Cypriot
generations of Egyptologists and archaeologists White Slip I ware, consistently appear pre-1600 BCE
have called the “expulsion of the Hyksos” and the at Tell el-Dabʿa, Santorini, and now at Gezer, while
actual destruction horizons that have been dated to other sites, such as Lachish, that have been described
the end of the Middle Bronze Age in the southern as being terminal Middle Bronze III, seem to fall to
Levant. the 16th century BCE. While these dates substantiate
Our current historical narrative that the Egyptian the notion of previous researchers that the
Reconquista of northern Egypt first led to a forced destructions at the end of the Middle Bronze Age in
mass-exodus of Hyksos rulers and population to the fact may span over several generations, it also
southern Levant and then to wide-spread warfare in becomes clear that the destructions start before the
southern Palestine resulting in the destruction of beginning of the Egyptian New Kingdom. While
many sites by the invading Egyptian army is not absolute calendar dates for Ahmose and the
backed by contemporary evidence. This narrative, in beginning of the 18th Dynasty may be raised to c.
fact, is based on a unfortunate alliance between a 1580 BC, they still post-date the start of the Late
much later literary tradition (Flavius Josephus) and Bronze Age and the first appearance of White Slip I
a very simplistic approach by earlier archaeologists ware at several sites.
to equate each destruction horizon with an Egyptian An easy solution is not at hand. But as “it is better
military campaign, an effort that Susan Sherratt to be vaguely right than exactly wrong,”64 we should
several years ago very rightfully described as the accept the fact that our previous historical narrative
“Find the Pharaoh” game.63 This approach was lacks both contemporary textual evidence and
coupled by a chronological synchronization with chronological possibility. We might not be able to
Egypt that was in fact more myth than reality. The offer a new coherent historical reconstruction at the
equation of the end of the Middle Bronze Age with moment, but we can conclude that (a) the Middle
the end of the Second Intermediate Period was partly Bronze Age destructions start before the end of the
argued for by the many destructions in the southern Second Intermediate Period in Egypt, and therefore
Levant being viewed as the result of the expulsion (b) we have no reason to assume any widespread
of the Hyksos. Further, once the traditional Egyptian military interventions prior to the

26
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

Thutmosid period (except for the siege and conquest

“The Chronology of Syria-Palestine in the
of Sharuhen), in agreement with the textual sources,
Second Millennium B.C.E.: A Review of Current
and thus (c) based on our current knowledge (and
Issues,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
as also pointed out by Bietak) “we have no evidence
Research 288 (1992), 1–25; William G. Dever, “The
that the Western Asiatic population who carried the
Chronology of Syria-Palestine in the Second
Hyksos rule in Egypt was expelled to the Levant,
Millennium B.C.,” Ägypten & Levante 3 (1992),
except for the Manethonian/Josephus tradition.”65
39–51; Manfred Bietak, “Die Chronologie
These conclusions do not solve the issue of the
Ägyptens und der Beginn der Mittleren
Middle Bronze Age destructions in the southern
Bronzezeit-Kultur,” Ägypten & Levante 3 (1992),
Levant. But, as James Hoffmeier pointed out almost
29–37.
30 years ago, “It is easier to dismantle a hypothesis
than to construct a new one. (…) But having no
3
Amihai Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible:
solution is better than having one that lacks 10,000–586 B.C.E (New York: Doubleday, 1990);
historical evidence.”66 Thomas E. Levy, ed., The Archaeology of Society in
the Holy Land (London: Leicester University
Press, 1995).
NOTES
1
This paper presents research conducted by the
4
Lawrence E. Stager, J. David Schloen, Daniel M.
author while being a Glassman Holland Fellow Master, Michael D. Press, and Adam J. Aja, “Part
in residence at the W. F. Albright Institute of Four: Stratigraphic Overview,” in Lawrence E.
Archaeological Research and of the author’s Stager, J. David Schloen and Daniel M. Master
project “Tracing Transformations” funded by (eds.): Introduction and Overview (1985-2006),
the Austrian Science Fund START-grant Y-932 Ashkelon 1 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2008),
G25. 213–323; Amnon Ben-Tor, “Hazor and
Chronology,” Ägypten & Levante 14 (2004), 45–
2
Manfred Bietak, “Problems of Middle Bronze
67; Manfred Bietak, Karin Kopetzky, Lawrence
Age Chronology: New Evidence from Egypt,” E. Stager and Ross Voss, “Synchronisation of
American Journal of Archaeology 88 (1984), 471– Stratigraphies: Ashkelon and Tell el-Dabʿa,”
485; William G. Dever, “Relations between Ägypten & Levante 18 (2008), 49–60.
Syria-Palestine and Egypt in the ‘Hyksos’
Period,” in Jonathan N. Tubb (ed.): Papers in
5
Manfred Bietak, “Antagonisms in Historical and
Honour of Olga Tufnell, Palestine in the Bronze and Radiocarbon Chronology,” in Andrew J.
Iron Ages (London: The Institute of Archaeology, Shortland and Christopher Bronk Ramsey (eds.),
1985), 69–87; Manfred Bietak, “The Middle Radiocarbon and the Chronologies of Ancient Egypt
Bronze Age of the Levant: A New Approach to (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2013), 76–109.
Relative and Absolute Chronology,” in Paul 6
Walter Kutschera, Manfred Bietak, Eva M. Wild,
Åström (ed.), Acts of an International Colloquium Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Michael W. Dee,
on Absolute Chronology held at the University of Robin Golser, Karin Kopetzky, Peter Stadler,
Gothenburg 20th–22nd August 1987. Part 3, High, Peter Steier, Ursula Thanheiser, and Franz
Middle or Low? (Göteborg: Paul Åströms Förlag, Weninger, “The Chronology of Tell el-Daba: A
1989), 78–120; William G. Dever, “Tell el-Dabʿa Crucial Meeting Point of 14C Dating,
and Levantine Middle Bronze Age Chronology: Archaeology, and Egyptology in the 2nd
A Rejoinder to Manfred Bietak,” Bulletin of the Millennium BC,” Radiocarbon 54 (2012), 407–422.
American Schools of Oriental Research 281 (1991), 7
Felix Höflmayer, Jens Kamlah, Hélène Sader,
73–79; Manfred Bietak, “Egypt and Canaan
Michael W. Dee, Walter Kutschera, Eva M. Wild,
during the Middle Bronze Age,” Bulletin of the
and Simone Riehl, “New Evidence for Middle
American Schools of Oriental Research 281 (1991),
Bronze Age Chronology and Synchronisms in
27–72; James M. Weinstein, “The Chronology of
the Levant: Radiocarbon Dates from Tell el-
Palestine in the Early Second Millennium
Burak, Tell el-Dabʿa, and Tel Ifshar Compared,”
B.C.E.,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
Research 288 (1992), 27–46; William G. Dever,

27
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

375 (2016), 53–76; Felix Höflmayer, Assaf Yasur- (1960), 96.

Landau, Eric H. Cline, Michael W. Dee, Brita 11
James M. Weinstein, “The Egyptian Empire in
Lorentzen and Simone Riehl, “New Radiocarbon Palestine: A Reassessment,” Bulletin of the
Dates from Tel Kabri Support a High Middle American Schools of Oriental Research 241 (1981),
Bronze Age Chronology,” Radiocarbon 58 (2016), 1–28; Dever 1985.
599–613; Michael B. Toffolo, Eran Arie, Mario A.
S. Martin, Elisabetta Boaretto, and Israel
12
Donald B. Redford, “Textual Sources for the
Finkelstein, “Absolute Chronology of Megiddo, Hyksos Period,” in Eliezer D. Oren (ed.), The
Israel, in the Late Bronze and Iron Ages: High- Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological
Resolution Radiocarbon Dating,” Radiocarbon 56 Perspectives, The Hyksos (Philadelphia: The
(2014), 221–244; Ezra S. Marcus, “Correlating University Museum, 1997), 1–44.
and Combining Egyptian Historical and 13
Weinstein 1981, 10.
Southern Levantine Radiocarbon Chronologies 14
Dever 1985, 73.
at Middle Bronze Age IIa Tel Ifshar, Israel,” in
Andrew J. Shortland and Christopher Bronk
15
Redford 1997.
Ramsey (eds.), Radiocarbon and the Chronologies 16
W. Vivian Davies, “The Tomb of Ahmose Son-
of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2013), of-Ibana at Elkab: Documenting the Family and
182–208; Steven E. Falconer and Patricia L. Fall, Other Observations,” in Wouter Claes, Herman
“Radiocarbon Evidence from Tell Abu en-Niʿaj de Meulenaere and Stan Hendrickx (eds.), Elkab
and Tell el-Hayyat, Jordan, and Its Implications and Beyond: Studies in Honour of Luc Limme
for Bronze Age Levantine and Egyptian (Leuven, Paris, Walpole: Peeters, 2009), 139–175;
Chronologies,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Hans Goedicke, “Some Remarks Concerning the
Interconnections 13 (2017), 7–19; Hendrik J. Bruins Inscription of Ahmose, Son of Ebana,” Journal of
and Johannes van der Plicht, “The Minoan the American Research Center in Egypt 11 (1974),
Santorini Eruption and Its 14C Position in 31–41; Redford 1997, 15.
Archaeological Strata: Preliminary Comparison 17
Dever 1985.
between Ashkelon and Tell el-Dabʿa,”
Radiocarbon 59 (2017), 1295–1307.
18
W. G. Waddell, Manetho (Cambridge, London:
Harvard University Press, 1940).
8
Felix Höflmayer and Susan L. Cohen,
“Chronological Conundrums: Egypt and the
19
James K. Hoffmeier, “Reconsidering Egypt’s
Middle Bronze Age Southern Levant,” Journal of Part in the Termination of the Middle Bronze
Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 13 (2017), 1–6; Age in Palestine,” Levant 21 (1989), 181–193.
Felix Höflmayer, “A Radiocarbon Chronology 20
Donald B. Redford, “A Gate Inscription from
for the Middle Bronze Age Southern Levant,” Karnak and Egyptian Involvement in Western
Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 13 Asia During the Early 18th Dynasty,” Journal of
(2017), 20–33; Katharina Streit, “A Maximalist the American Oriental Society 99 (1979), 270–287;
Interpretation of the Execration Texts— Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in
Archaeological and Historical Implications of a Ancient Times (Princeton: Princeton University
High Chronology,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Press, 1992), 138–139.
Interconnections 13 (2017), 59–69. 21
Redford 1992, 139.
9
Daphna Ben-Tor, “Evidence for Middle Bronze 22
William G. Dever, “‘Hyksos’, Egyptian
Age Chronology and Synchronisms in the Destructions, and the End of the Palestinian
Levant: A Response to Höflmayer et al. 2016,” Middle Bronze Age,” Levant 22 (1990), 75–81;
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research James Weinstein, “Egypt and the Middle Bronze
379 (2018), 43–54. A detailed answer to Daphna IIC/Late Bronze IA Transition in Palestine,”
Ben-Tor is currently in preparation by the Levant 23 (1991), 105–115.
author. 23
Nadav Naʾaman, “The Hurrians and the End of
10
William F. Albright, The Archaeology of Palestine the Middle Bronze Age in Palestine,” Levant 26

28
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

(1994), 175–187. 34
Kutschera, Bietak, Wild, Bronk Ramsey, Dee,
24
William G. Dever, “Hurrian Incursions and the Golser, Kopetzky, Stadler, Steier, Thanheiser,
End of the Middle Bronze Age in Syria-Palestine: and Weninger 2012.
A Rejoinder to Nadav Naʾaman,” in Leonard H. 35
Peter M. Fischer, “The Chronology of Tell el-
Lesko (ed.), In Memory of William A. Ward, Ajjul, Gaza: Stratigraphy, Thera, Pumice and
Ancient Egyptian and Mediterranean Studies Radiocarbon Dating,” in David A. Warburton
(Providence: Department of Egyptology Brown (ed.), Time’s Up! Dating the Minoan Eruption of
University, 1998), 91–110. Santorini: Acts of the Minoan Eruption Chronology
25
Shlomo Bunimovitz, “On the Edge of Empires— Workshop, Sandbjerg November 2007 initiated by
Late Bronze Age (1500–1200 BCE),” in Thomas Jan Heinemeier & Walter L. Friedrich (Aarhus:
E. Levy (ed.), The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Aarhus University Press, 2009), 253–265.
Land (London: Leicester University Press, 1995), 36
Bruins and van der Plicht 2017.
320–331. 37
Hendrik J. Bruins and Johannes van der Plicht,
26
Ellen F. Morris, The Architecture of Imperialism: “Tell es-Sultan (Jericho): Radiocarbon Results of
Military Bases and the Evolution of Foreign Policy Short-Lived Cereal and Multiyear Charcoal
in Egypt’s New Kingdom (Leiden: Brill, 2005); Samples from the End of the Middle Bronze
Aaron A. Burke, “Canaan under Siege: The Age,” Radiocarbon 37 (1995), 213–220.
History and Archaeology of Egypt’s War in 38
Falconer and Fall 2017.
Canaan during the Early Eighteenth Dynasty,”
in Jordi Vidal (ed.), Studies on War in the Ancient
39
Marcus 2013; Höflmayer 2017.
Near East: Collected Essays on Military History 40
Toffolo, Arie, Martin, Boaretto, and Finkelstein
(Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2010), 43–66; Daphna 2014.
Ben-Tor, ed., Pharaoh in Canaan: The Untold Story 41
Höflmayer, Yasur-Landau, Cline, Dee,
(Jerusalem: The Israel Museum, 2016).
Lorentzen, and Riehl 2016.
27
Dever 1992, 10. 42
Höflmayer, Kamlah, Sader, Dee, Kutschera,
28
Dever 1992, 12. Wild, and Riehl 2016.
29
Kathleen M. Kenyon, Archaeology in the Holy 43
Höflmayer 2017; Felix Höflmayer, “Establishing
Land (London: Benn, 1979), 194. an Absolute Chronology of the Middle Bronze
30
Manfred Bietak, Tell el-Dabʿa II: Der Fundort im Age,” in Nadine Moeller, D. T. Potts and Karen
Rahmen einer archäologisch-geographischen Unter- Radner (eds.), The Middle Bronze Age, Oxford
suchung über das ägyptische Ostdelta (Vienna: History of the Ancient Near East Volume 2 (New
Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der York: Oxford University Press, in press).
Wissenschaften, 1975); Manfred Bietak, Avaris. 44
Sturt W. Manning, Felix Höflmayer, Nadine
The Capital of the Hyksos: Recent Excavations at Tell Moeller, Michael W. Dee, Christopher Bronk
el-Dabʿa (London: British Museum Press, 1996). Ramsey, Dominik Fleitmann, Thomas F. G.
31
Bietak 2013, 81. Higham, Walter Kutschera, and Eva M. Wild,
“Dating the Thera (Santorini) Eruption:
32
Bietak 2013, 81.
Coherent Archaeological and Scientific Evidence
33
Felix Höflmayer, “Carbone-14 Comparé: Middle Supporting a High Chronology,” Antiquity 88
Bronze Age I (IIA) Chronology, Tell el-Dabʿa and (2014), 1164–1179.
Radiocarbon Data,” in Jana Mynářová, Pavel 45
These data will be published by Lyndelle
Onderka and Peter Pavúk (eds.), There and Back
Webster.
Again—The Crossroads II: Proceedings of an
International Conference Held in Prague, September
46
Bietak 2013.
15-18, 2014 (Prag: Charles University in Prague, 47
Johannes H. Sterba, Karen Polinger Foster,
2015), 265–295; Höflmayer 2017. Georg Steinhauser, and Max Bichler, “New

29
 Höflmayer | The Expulsion of the Hyksos and the End of the Middle Bronze Age

Light on Old Pumice: The Origins of Vienna, 11th–12th of May 1998 (Vienna: Verlag
Mediterranean Volcanic Material from Ancient der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissen-
Egypt,” Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (2009), schaften, 2000), 39–52; Erik Hornung, Rolf K.
1738–1744. Krauss, and David A. Warburton, eds., Ancient
48
Kutschera, Bietak, Wild, Bronk Ramsey, Dee, Egyptian Chronology (Leiden: Brill, 2006).
Golser, Kopetzky, Stadler, Steier, Thanheiser, 59
Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Michael W. Dee,
and Weninger 2012. Joanne M. Rowland, Thomas F. G. Higham,
49
Peter M. Fischer, “Coast Contra Inland: Tell el- Stephen A. Harris, Fiona Brock, Anita Quiles,
ʿAjjul and Tell Abu al-Kharaz during the Late Eva M. Wild, Ezra S. Marcus, and Andrew J.
Middle and Late Bronze Ages,” Ägypten & Shortland, “Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for
Levante 14 (2004), 249–264. Dynastic Egypt,” Science 328 (2010), 1554–1557;
Andrew J. Shortland and Christopher Bronk
50
Fischer 2009; Höflmayer 2017. Ramsey (eds.), Radiocarbon and the Chronologies
51
Steven E. Falconer and Patricia L. Fall, Bronze of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxbow Books, 2013).
Age Rural Ecology and Village Life at Tell el-Hayyat, 60
David A. Aston, “Radiocarbon, Wine Jars and
Jordan (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2006). New Kingdom Chronology,” Ägypten & Levante
52
Falconer and Fall 2017; Höflmayer 2017. 22/23 (2012/2013), 289–315; Sturt W. Manning, A
53
Höflmayer 2017. Test of Time and A Test of Time Revisited: The
Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and History of
54
Bruins and van der Plicht 1995; Höflmayer 2017. the Aegean and East Mediterranean in the Mid-
55
Robert S. Merrillees, “Some Cypriote White Slip second Millennium BC (Oxford, Philadelphia:
Pottery from the Aegean,” in Vassos Oxbow Books, 2014).
Karageorghis (ed.), The White Slip Ware of Late 61
Edward F. Wente and Charles C. van Siclen, III,
Bronze Age Cyprus: Proceedings of an International “A Chronology of the New Kingdom,” in
Conference Organized by the Anastasios G. Leventis Edward F. Wente and J. H. Johnson (eds.),
Foundation, Nicosia in Honour of Malcolm Wiener, Studies in Honor of George R. Hughes (Chicago:
(Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie The Oriental Institute of the University of
der Wissenschaften, 2001), 89–100. Chicago, 1976), 217–261.
56
Manning, Höflmayer, Moeller, Dee, Bronk 62
Manfred Bietak, “From Where Came the Hyksos
Ramsey, Fleitmann, Higham, Kutschera, and and Where Did They Go?” in Marcel Marée
Wild 2014. (ed.), The Second Intermediate Period (Thirteenth–
57
Both datasets are currently prepared for Seventeenth Dynasties) (Leuven: Peeters, 2010),
publication by Lyndelle Webster. 139–181.
58
Jürgen von Beckerath, Chronologie des 63
E. Susan Sherratt, “Introduction to the Levant
pharaonischen Ägypten: Die Zeitbestimmung der during the Late Bronze Age,” in Margreet L.
ägyptischen Geschichte von der Vorzeit bis 332 v. Steiner and Ann E. Killebrew (eds.): The Oxford
Chr (Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1997); Kenneth Handbook of the Archaeology of the Levant, c. 8000–
A. Kitchen, “The Historical Chronology of 332 BCE, (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
Ancient Egypt, a Current Assessment,” in 2014), 497–508.
Manfred Bietak (ed.), The Synchronisation of 64
Carveth Read, Logic: Deductive and Inductive
Civilisations in the Eastern Mediterranean in the (London: Grant Richards, 1898), 272.
Second Millennium B.C.: Proceedings of an
International Symposium at Schloß Haindorf, 15th–
65
Bietak 2010, 171.
17th of November 1996 and at the Austrian Academy, 66
Hoffmeier 1989, 190.

30

View publication stats