Many years ago (1987 to be exact), I wrote a couple of papers on Egypt's Second Intermediate Period. In one of them, I made a half-hearted attempt to identify the six
Hyksos "Great Kings". I include the relevant section of the paper below. I my next post, I will retract part of what I wrote many years ago in light of new evidence that has become available.
The Six “Great Kings” of the Hyksos:It is difficult to determine exactly who the six
Hyksos “Great Kings” were.
Manetho claims that the Sixteenth Dynasty was comprised of
Hyksos Pharaohs, but this is impossible as the
Kamose Stela proves that
Kamose (of Dynasty Seventeen) and
Apopis (of Dynasty Fifteen) were contemporaries
[1]. Furthermore, the Turin Canon clearly states that there were six
Hyksos Kings
[2]. The usual explanation for
Manetho’s Sixteenth Dynasty is that
Manetho somehow got a list of
Hyksos “
Princelings” and came to the conclusion that they were Pharaohs in a separate dynasty
[3]. In view of the almost total lack of evidence for this period it must be admitted that no better idea is available.
Going on the assumption that there were only six
Hyksos Pharaohs and that they comprised the Fifteenth Dynasty we next turn to the question of exactly who those six Kings were.
Manetho’s version of the names of these King’s is too garbled to be of any real use, and will be ignored for the most part in the following discussion.
The Inscribed monuments show that
Apopis must have been one of the six Kings in question and that he must have been either the last of the six or next to the last (this is proven by the
Kamose Stela, which clearly shows that
Apopis is a contemporary of
Kamose).
Khian is certainly one of the six as well, but it cannot be stated for certain who the other four were.
Attempts to clear this matter up have been made by several scholars in the past. Olga
Tufnell, in her analysis of the scarabs of the period
[4], is one of the persons who have tried to shed light on this topic. A detailed analysis of her work is impossible here, but a summary of her results is in order.
First of all, she concludes that the only “Kings” who must be included in Dynasty Fifteen for sure are
Khian,
Apopis and
Khamudy, There are no scarabs or other monuments of
Khamudy;
Manetho provides the only evidence for his existence when he claims that
Khamudy was the (short-lived) successor of
Apopis[5].
Secondly, she separates a list of “Kings” who are represented by a greater amount of “evidence” than the others. She includes on this list:
Khian,
Meruserre Yakubher,
Mayebre Sheshi,
Kauserre Amu,
Sekhaenre Ykbmw,
Nebuserre Y’
mw,
Ahetepre,
Apopis and
Khamudy. The remaining three Pharaohs could be any three persons on this list, or even from a list of lesser know individuals.
Thirdly, and most importantly, she has created a relative chronology of the Kings in question, which is not contradicted by any other historical source. This chronology indicates that
Khian must be one of the earliest Kings of the period, while
Apopis must be at the end. Most scholars accept
Mayebre Sheshi as one of the
Hyksos Kings
[6] and, if her chronology is accurate, he must rule after
Khian and before
Apopis[7]. There is no way to prove who the remaining two
Hyksos rulers were, but the present author is inclined to follow
von Beckerath and, very tentatively, suggest
Yakubher and
Sekhaenre[8], as these two have left behind a larger number of scarabs than other candidates. Taking all of this in to consideration, I would suggest that the six “Great Kings” of the
Hyksos, in the order that they ruled, were
Meruserre Yakubher,
Khian,
Mayebre Sheshi, Sekhaenre,
Apopis and
Khamudy.
[1] Hibachi, p. 31 and passim.
[2] Gardiner, pp. 149-50.
[3] Trigger, p. 158.
[4] Tufnell, O. Studies on Scarab Seals, vol II, (
Warminster:
Aris & Phillips,
lt., 1984).
[5] Tufnell, p. 172.
[6] Tufnell, p. 162.
[7] Tufnell, p. 168, fig. 29.
[8] Von
Beckerath, p. 32 and
Tufnell, p. 162 and sources quoted therein.