The Hyksos, Kings of Egypt and the land of Edom

We come now to the question as to the religious identity of the Edomites and the Hyksos. The Hyksos Kings worshipped Sutekh or Baal. What, then, did the Edomites worship?

Esau himself was a nominal worshipper of Jehovah, the God of his fathers Abraham and Isaac. We have already gone over Esau's relatively light esteem of the demands of the worship of Jehovah (or "Yahweh" as some put it); how he sold his Abrahamic birthright for a mess of pottage, and then completely broke with the sacred traditions of the family by marrying two Canaanite women. Baal worship was dominant in Canaan. Esau sought material advantage and success, and largely gained what he sought. We miss in Esau's life those deep, inward climaxes resulting in conversion of character, redemption of soul, and re-birth of spirit, visible in the life-story of his twin brother Jacob. Nevertheless, the worship of Jehovah was not abandoned by Esau, nor by his earlier descendants.

Esau's eldest son was named Eliphaz, meaning, "God his strength." The name of his second son, Ruel, means, "Friend of God." The third son was Jeush, "To whom God hastens." His fourth son Jaalam, "Whom God hides." An early sheik of Edom is Magdiel, "The praise of God" (Gen. 36:5, 43, etc.)

In the Book of Job we discover that Eliphaz in his old age possessed a most profound knowledge of God and of righteousness. Like his father Esau, Eliphaz gave too great attention to outward, material prosperity; holding such to be the ultimate proof of Divine approval. Thus Job's calamities and material losses were, in his eyes, absolute and unanswerable demonstration of God's anger for some terrible personal sin or sins. Eliphaz had drunk deep of the cup of his father's philosophy. But it is clear that Eliphaz still followed the worship of Jehovah and of Him alone.

Job (or Jobab) also was a worshipper of Jehovah only. But it is to be noted as significant that Job speaks of idolatry as being secretly practiced by some (Job 31:21-28), though in general condemned by the populace of Edom at that time.

The Drift to Baal Worship
Thus up to the reign of Jobab, the second King of Edom, the worship of Jehovah was continued in general amongst the Edomites, either truly and sincerely or just nominally by the individuals. But by the time we reach the seventh king, Baal seems to step to the front. That king's name was Baal-hanan, meaning, "To whom Baal is merciful," or, "Whom Baal loves." The name "Jehovah" compounded into personal names appears less and less; "Baal" appears instead. This name "Baal-hanan" if compounded with "Jehovah" instead of "Baal" would mean, "Whom Jehovah loves." We know it as Johanan or John. One of the Hyksos kings actually bore this name. He is Jonias, otherwise known as "John" or "Khian." This shows that the name of God had not been forgotten, even so late as that, but with him the last vestige of Jehovah honoring seems to have disappeared. With King John the zenith of the Hyksos power passes also. Baal (Sutekh or Seth) became their god. Finally, we learn from Egyptian records that, "King Apophis made Sutekh (Seth) his Lord, serving no other god, who was in the whole land, save Sutekh." (27)

From all we know of the later Edomites it seems that Baal, in one form or another, was their principal god.

The whole picture seems to indicate a slow change over from the worship of Jehovah, derived originally from Abraham and Isaac; through a declining interest in Jehovah exhibited in Esau and Eliphaz; to an exaltation of Baal exhibited in the name of Baal-hanan; and the final exclusion of all other gods under King Apophis. Just the same drift would have taken place in Israel more than once except for the strenuous opposition of the prophets. The prophets brought about revivals in which the people returned to the worship of Jehovah. We know of no such revivals in the history of Edom.

Unger's Bible Dictionary, under "Hyksos," states: "The Hyksos erected large earthen enclosures for their horses. This type of construction can be seen at Jericho, Shechem, Lachish, and Tell el-Ajjul. They also erected many temples to Baal. There are also evidenced of worship of the mother goddess. Common in Hyksos levels are cultic objects such as nude figurines, serpents, and doves, showing their complete devotion to this type of degrading worship. Hyksos burial customs are distinctive as is their chariotry."

When we consider the high and noble origins of the Edomite/Hyksos peoples, the same origin which Israel had, our hearts are saddened to behold the depths to which they sank. Yet we thank God that He, through the prophets whom He raised up, preserved Israel for so many centuries before they too, in the days of Jeremiah, declined to the point that God ,had to remove them by captivity. He said to the "weeping prophet"

"Behold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape; and though they shall cry unto me, I will not hearken unto them For according to the number of thy cities were thy gods, O Judah, (local Baals); and according to the number of the streets of Jerusalem have ye set up altars to that shameful thing, even altars to burn incense unto Baal.... Therefore pray not thou for this people..." Jeremiah 11:11, 13, 14.

To sum up this interesting point, in spite of the paucity of specific detail, in the matter of religion there is no difficulty in linking the Edomites to the Hyksos. What we know of each seems to neatly dovetail into one picture, which should be the case if we are really dealing with one people.

The Comparison of Dates
Let us now take up the most difficult yet most important parallel, the question of the dates of the respective Edomite and Hyksos Empires. If we find both existed, as near as we can tell, at the same time, then the identity of the two could hardly be questioned. Two separate and unrelated empires cannot be occupying the same spheres and areas at one and the same time.

May we say immediately, that merely attaching a certain date BC to the one and the other from some popular (or other) chronological systems will in no way assist us in this important phase of our investigation? One man's set of dates for Biblical history may put the Edomite kings as about 1400 BC or later, another set may put them as 2200 BC or earlier. One Egyptologist will date the Hyksos kings as about 1800 B.C., and another at an altogether different date. To use a popular expression, "that gets us nowhere fast!" That will not help us, nor prove similarity of time.

What we need to do is so relate the time of the Edomite kings recorded in Scripture to some Biblical event which ties in to Egyptian history, that computing from that event; we discover the times of the Edomite kings and of the Hyksos Kings will link together. For instance, if we knew with absolute certainty which Pharaoh was reigning at the time of Joseph, the computation would be simple; but unfortunately we do not know that Pharaoh in spite of guesses and surmises we may say by the dozen! The next nearest event linking Egyptian and Biblical history is the Exodus of Israel from Egypt and Joshua's Conquest of Canaan.

The date of the Exodus is itself a very vexed question. But it seems to be now generally agreed that the Exodus was either during the XVIIIth Dynasty or the XIXth Dynasty. We strongly favor the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty, feeling that the date of the XIXth Dynasty does not tally with the chronological note given in I Kings 6:1, placing the Exodus nearly 500 years before Solomon's reign, nor with the lengthy period for the Judges in Israel as mentioned by Jephthah (Judg.ll:28). We will therefore consider the earlier dating, that is, that the Exodus was during the XVIIIth Dynasty.

The Fall of Jericho
The Bible record gives the destruction of Jericho under Joshua as being very soon after the death of Moses, at the end of the forty years of wandering in the wilderness. Prof. J. Garstang's excavations at Jericho not only demonstrated that the city's walls fell as with an earthquake shock, but make it fairly certain by the presence of Egyptian scarabs, etc., that Jericho was destroyed during the reign of the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenhotep III, dated by Breasted as 1411 - 1375 BC.

Using this as a link between Egyptian and Biblical histories, let us proceed to compare for confirmations of the link, and then compute back to the times of the Edomite kings and of the Hyksos Kings.

The Amara letters
A number of years ago a remarkable discovery was made at Tell el Amarna in Egypt of inscribed tablets giving official correspondence between government officials in Palestine and the reigning Pharaoh in Egypt. These tablets are a very valuable source of information, and are known as, "The Amarna, Letters."

Some of these letters tell of a people called "Khabirit" (that is, "Hebrews") who were invading Canaan from the east during the reign of Amenhotep III just as did the Israelites under Joshua in the Biblical record. (28)

This invasion continued on into the reign of the next Pharaoh, Akhenaton, or Amenhotep IV. If these Khabiri are the Children of Israel (Hebrews), under Joshua, and we believe they are, then the Amarna Letters confirm the archaeological data as to the fall of Jericho being during the reign of Amenhotep III. Thus we have two very good archaeological evidences linking Biblical and Egyptian histories at this point.

(Note. The excavations at Hazor in Northern Palestine are said to strongly favor the later date for the Hebrew invasion of Canaan, more in line with Merneptah as the Pharaoh of the ;Exodus. However, Razor does not seem to have been wiped out by Joshua as was Jericho, for early in the Book' of Judges Hazor is again the capital city of Jabin (II), king of the Canaanites (Judg.4:2). When Joshua burnt the city (Josh. 11:10-l3), and destroyed the people found in it, the damage must have been repaired, and either later or at the time re-occupied by Canaanites. For all we know, there may have been a greater destruction of Hazor after Deborah and Barak than under Joshua, the record does not say, and that later destruction would certainly fall in the time of the XIX Dynasty by our chronology. Further search at other points occupied by Israel at the Invasion is needed. The reference to a Canaanite Nazor in Judges 4:2 makes it impossible to say that the final destruction of Canaanite Hazor was carried out by Joshua. Joshua must belong to an earlier period, therefore, which would place him in the Amarna period.)

The Oppression and Exodus of Israel
Forty years before the death of Moses and the fall of Jericho, the Bible places the Exodus of Israel from Egypt. On the other hand, forty years before the invasion of Canaan by the Khabiri (Hebrews) and before the fall of Jericho from the archaeological evidence, brings us approximately to the time 'of the death of Amenhotep II, 1420 BC by Breasted's chronology. We therefore propose that this Pharaoh Amenhotep II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. We will use this as our working hypothesis.

At the Exodus, the Bible says, Moses was 80 years old and his brother Aaron 83 years (Exod.7:7). Using Breasted's Egyptian chronology, 80 years before the death of Amenhotep II would be 1500 BC for the birth of Moses, and 83 years before would be 1503 BC for the birth of Aaron. Now that date for the birth of Moses would be the second year of Thutmosis III, whom some have suggested as possibly the Pharaoh of the Oppression, and by the same reckoning the birth of Aaron comes two years before this Pharaoh began to reign. (His reign by Breasted's chronology began in 1501 B.C.) This arrangement of dates fits the Biblical account astonishingly well.

We know that the severe stage of oppression was on right at the time when Moses was born. The Pharaoh had just commanded that the Hebrew boy infants be thrown into the Nile, but Moses was hidden. On the other hand, there is no hint of any need for hiding Aaron who was born only thee years before Moses. Evidently, the cruel command to destroy the Hebrew baby boys was not yet made at the date of Aaron's birth (Exod.l:22) but it certainly was in effect at the date of Moses' birth. Clearly then, the command was issued in the interval. We suggest, therefore, that this new command came from the new Pharaoh, Thutmos1s III, shortly after he ascended to the throne, approximately two years after Aaron was born, and about one year before Moses' birth. The persecution was then at its maximum.

Nevertheless the Biblical account indicates it was a considerable time before the birth of Moses that persecution of the birth of Moses that persecution of the Hebrews and the enslavement of the nation first began. It began when the reigning Pharaoh feared lest these Hebrews ally themselves with Egypt's foes (Exod.l:8-l1). We are not told how long a time elapsed from the beginning of this enslavement to the more severe stage when the boy infants were to be destroyed, but the inference is that quite a few years passed by during which the Hebrews built store-cities for the king. The persecution of the Hebrews was evidently intensified from time to time, finally culminating in the new command to kill the baby boys, which as we have said, we think was issued by Thutmosis III shortly after he came to the throne. It takes not many years, only 79, to carry us back from the accession of Thutmosis III (1501 B.C.) to the founding of the XVIIth Dynasty under Ahmose I who is coupled directly with the expulsion of the Hyksos kings from Egypt (1580 BC). The founding of this Dynasty fits well with the wording of Exodus 1:8 "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt (29) Ahmose I was definitely a "new king" and the circumstances of that king's reign might well lead to the enslavement of the Israelites as we shall see in a moment.

From the foregoing study we give an accompanying Table of the Bible record and Egyptian History (the latter based upon Breasted's arrangement), in parallel columns. This parallel seems to be particularly happy at all points of contact throughout.

(Click here to view this table)

The Edom-Israel Quarrel
If the Hyksos people really the Edomites and associated nations or tribes as we have proposed, then Ahmose I, who expelled the Hyksos, would truly fear that the Hebrew chi1dren of Israel would join with the Hyksos, since the Edomites and Israelites were brother-nations. They were probably pledged to respect one another's territories. Such friendly peop1es would be expected to assist one another. So, whi1e Ahmose I warred with the Hyksos Kings (30) chasing them out of Egypt toward Southern Palestine, and was in the process of building his army and organizing Egypt into a military state, he apparently took counselw1th his advisers to subject Israel to slavery to nip in the bud any possible cooperation if Israel with Hyksos/Edom. It cannot be denied that the Pharaoh was expecting Israel to side with Egypt's enemies.

How would the Hyksos/Edom Kings view the situation? The Egyptians were revolting from under their rule. Israel was as "much foreign to Egypt" as were the Hyksos themselves; and Israel was their brother.

Hyksos/Edom was in terrific struggle, going down in defeat and humiliation. Did the Hyksos/Edomites feel that their brethren, the Israel-Hebrews, failed them in their hour of need? Did they perhaps appeal to Israel in their desperate situation? Would they not blame Israel for not rising up en masse against Ahmose I to contend on their behalf? We sense the reasonableness of all this from the view-point of Hyksos/Edom. This view would explain why Edom later so bluntly refused Israel passage through his land, why he so promptly came out against his brother with a sword (Num 20:14-21), and why so bitter an unending, age-long quarrel arose between Edom and Israel.

The Amalekites, too, an independent tribe which branched off from Edom (Gen. 36:l2,16}, probably branching off when the Hyksos/Edomite Empire collapsed, also exhibited a very bitter spite Israel, surprising them in the wilderness by a sneak-attack. This was followed by a perpetual quarrel for all time (Exod.11:8-l6).

Date of Hyksos Kings and Edomite Kings
Prof. Breasted believed that 100 years would be ample to cover the length of time the Hyksos ruled in Egypt, and it may have been less. (31) Now, our Parallel Table gives the expulsion of the Hyksos as 160 years before the Exodus, and 100 years more would place the Hyksos invasion of Egypt as 260 years before the Exodus.

The Children of Israel were in Egypt 430 years, from the day Jacob entered Egypt to the Exodus (Ex. l2:40-4l). On the basis of this data, the Hyksos invasion of Egypt would be about 170 years after Jacob and his family moved from Canaan into Egypt.

As we said before, it appears that Bela, Edom's first king may well have started his reign not very long after Jacob entered Egypt. This 170 years would therefore cover the formation of Edom into a kingdom, and also the reigns of the first five kings, Bela, Jobab, Husham, Hadad I, and Samlah. The average reign for these five would accordingly be approximately 30 years each. This seems reasonable enough, and seems to indicate we are on the right track.

Clearly, from the view-point of time or chronology, we find that the Edomite and Hyksos Empires coalesce into one full picture. The Biblical history and the Egyptian history supplement each the other. This brings our study of the time-element to a happy conclusion.

The parallels have much in agreement. That is what we set out to discover in this chapter, and the agreement of dates is not only encouraging to our theory, but makes it a well-nigh inescapable conclusion; because if there was an Edomite Empire as we have drawn from the Scripture references, then a separate Hyksos Empire could not exist at the same time in the same general area. Do empires overlap like this? No; and we therefore conclude that they are one and the same. Point No. 6 of Chapter I is thus found to be settled in our favor, we feel, conclusively.

End of Chapter Seven