What is no dates and no distinction between north and south?

Fix Avaris in the Delta (Hyksos) and Thebes in the south (Seventeenth Dynasty), and give the c. 1650 to 1525 BC framework.

§-Syllabus dot point

NSWAncient HistorySyllabus dot point

How did the Theban rulers expel the Hyksos and how did Ahmose I found the Eighteenth Dynasty and the New Kingdom?

The Second Intermediate Period and Hyksos rule in the north from Avaris; the Theban wars of liberation under Seqenenre Tao and Kamose; Ahmose I's expulsion of the Hyksos and the capture of Avaris and Sharuhen; the reunification and foundation of the Eighteenth Dynasty and New Kingdom; Ahmose's Nubian campaigns and early administration; and the tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana as a source

A study-guide answer to the HSC Ancient History dot point on the expulsion of the Hyksos and Ahmose I - Hyksos rule from Avaris in the Second Intermediate Period, the Theban wars of liberation under Seqenenre Tao and Kamose, Ahmose I's capture of Avaris and Sharuhen, the founding of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and the tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.813 min answerUpdated 2026-07-01

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Quick answer

At the end of the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1650 to 1550 BC) Egypt was split between the Hyksos Fifteenth Dynasty, ruling the north from Avaris (Tell el-Dab'a), and the native Seventeenth Dynasty at Thebes. A three-generation Theban war of liberation, opened by Seqenenre Tao (whose mummy shows fatal head wounds), continued by Kamose (who reached but did not take Avaris), was completed by Ahmose I (r. c. 1550 to 1525 BC), who captured Avaris, besieged Sharuhen for about three years, campaigned in Nubia, reunified Egypt and founded the Eighteenth Dynasty and the New Kingdom, beginning the imperial idea and the rise of Amun. The key source is the self-glorifying tomb biography of the naval officer Ahmose son of Ibana at el-Kab, read alongside the Kamose stelae, the Ahhotep material and the Tell el-Dab'a archaeology, with the invasion-versus-immigration debate (Manetho versus Bietak) framing how "expulsion" is understood.

Jump to a section

What this dot point is asking
The answer
How to read a source on this topic

What this dot point is asking

This is the opening slice of the Historical Period "New Kingdom Egypt to the death of Thutmose IV". It asks how Egypt moved from a divided, occupied land at the end of the Second Intermediate Period to a reunified, expanding kingdom under a single Theban dynasty. You need the political geography of the divide (Hyksos in the north from Avaris; Thebes in the south), the three-generation Theban war of liberation (Seqenenre Tao, Kamose, then Ahmose I), the decisive campaigns of Ahmose that captured Avaris and Sharuhen and expelled the Hyksos, his Nubian campaigns and early administration, and the key source, the tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana. Throughout, handle the propaganda and military-record bias of the evidence, and the modern debate over whether the Hyksos "invaded" or gradually settled.

In plain English

Picture a country split in two for about a century. Foreign-descended rulers hold the wealthy northern half from a fortress-capital, while the old royal family clings on in the south and slowly rebuilds its strength. Over three generations the southern family fights its way north - the grandfather dies in battle (we can literally see the axe wounds on his mummy), the father gets right up to the enemy capital but cannot crack it, and finally the youngest son storms the capital, chases the enemy out of the country and even follows them across the border, then reunites the whole nation under himself. That founder then keeps a proper standing army so no one can ever invade again. That is the story of Ahmose I expelling the Hyksos and starting the New Kingdom - and our best "war diary" comes from an ordinary naval officer who fought in it and had his memoirs carved on his tomb wall.

The answer

The Second Intermediate Period and Hyksos rule from Avaris

After the collapse of the Middle Kingdom, Egypt fragmented in the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1650 to 1550 BC). In the north, a line of Levantine (Canaanite) rulers formed the Fifteenth Dynasty and governed Lower Egypt from Avaris (modern Tell el-Dab'a) in the eastern Delta. Their name, "Hyksos", comes from the Egyptian heka khasut, "rulers of foreign lands"; the much later historian Manetho wrongly rendered it "shepherd kings". They were not simple occupiers: they adopted Egyptian royal titulary, hieroglyphic script and gods (favouring Seth), copied Egyptian texts such as the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus under king Apepi, and drew tribute from Middle Egypt while allied with the kingdom of Kush in Nubia to the south. Excavations by Manfred Bietak at Tell el-Dab'a reveal Middle Bronze Age Canaanite housing, temples and burials, evidence that reframes the Hyksos as a settled immigrant population rather than a purely hostile army of conquest.

Meanwhile a native Egyptian dynasty, the Seventeenth, held Upper Egypt from Thebes. For much of the period the two powers coexisted, but as Thebes recovered its strength it began to resent Hyksos overlordship and the squeeze of a hostile Kush to its south. Egypt was, in effect, caught between two rivals, and the Theban kings resolved to break out.

The Theban wars of liberation: Seqenenre Tao and Kamose

The liberation was the work of three generations. Seqenenre Tao (r. c. 1560 BC), sometimes called "the Brave", appears to have opened the war with the Hyksos king Apepi. His mummy is one of the most dramatic pieces of evidence for the period: it carries severe wounds to the head from an axe, dagger and perhaps a spear, consistent with a violent death in battle, an ambush, or possibly execution after capture. A later literary tale (the fragmentary "Quarrel of Apepi and Seqenenre") preserves a memory of the conflict beginning as a manufactured provocation, but as New Kingdom fiction it is unreliable for events.

His successor Kamose (r. c. 1555 to 1550 BC), the last king of the Seventeenth Dynasty, prosecuted the war vigorously. The Kamose stelae and the earlier Carnarvon Tablet I record him sailing north, ravaging Hyksos-held territory, and reaching the walls of Avaris itself, where he boasts of seizing ships laden with gold, silver, lapis lazuli and bronze. He also intercepted a messenger carrying a letter from Apepi to the king of Kush, proposing a pincer alliance against Thebes, a vivid glimpse of Theban Egypt's danger on two fronts. Crucially, though, Kamose did NOT capture Avaris; his stelae are royal propaganda that magnify a raid into a triumph. The war was unfinished at his death.

Ahmose I: the expulsion, reunification and the imperial idea

Ahmose I (r. c. 1550 to 1525 BC), brother of Kamose and son of Seqenenre Tao and Queen Ahhotep, finished the war and founded the Eighteenth Dynasty and the New Kingdom. Because our best account is the biography of Ahmose son of Ibana, we can trace the campaign: after a period of consolidation (Ahmose was young at his accession, and his mother Ahhotep seems to have acted as regent and rallied Upper Egypt), he assaulted and captured Avaris, then pursued the retreating Hyksos into southern Canaan and besieged the fortress of Sharuhen for about three years until it fell. This carried Egyptian arms beyond the traditional frontier for the first time in the campaign.

Ahmose then turned south, campaigning in Nubia beyond the Second Cataract to secure the frontier and the gold routes, and suppressed internal rebels (Aata and Tetian in the biography). The result was a reunified Egypt under one crown for the first time in roughly a century. Ahmose reopened the Tura limestone quarries, resumed monumental building, and began restoring the temples, above all that of Amun at Thebes, the god credited with the Theban victory, beginning the long rise of Amun's wealth and priesthood that would shape the whole New Kingdom.

Most significantly, Ahmose began what historians call the "imperial idea". The trauma of a century of foreign rule taught Egypt not to sit behind its borders but to hold buffer territory abroad. Backed by a permanent, professional army equipped with the horse-drawn chariot, the composite bow and improved bronze weapons (technology the Hyksos period had helped introduce), Egypt would now project power into Nubia and the Levant. The defensive kingdom became an expansionist empire.

The tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana

The single most important narrative source for this period is the autobiography of Ahmose son of Ibana, carved on the wall of his rock-cut tomb at el-Kab (ancient Nekheb) in Upper Egypt. Ahmose son of Ibana (named for his mother, Ibana, to distinguish him from the king and from another el-Kab soldier, Ahmose Pennekhbet) was a naval officer who served under Ahmose I, Amenhotep I and Thutmose I. His text narrates, in the first person, his part in the capture of Avaris, the siege of Sharuhen "for three years", and later Nubian campaigns, listing the "gold of valour", captives and grants of land he received for bravery.

As evidence it is invaluable and problematic at once. It is a near-contemporary, participant account, our fullest source for the sequence and geography of the wars, and a rare window onto how the crown rewarded loyal soldiers. But it is a self-glorifying funerary biography written to display the owner's valour to tomb visitors: it foregrounds his personal deeds, omits setbacks, gives almost no firm dates, and cannot be assumed complete. It must be cross-checked against royal monuments (the Kamose stelae, Ahmose's own building texts, the Ahhotep material) and against the archaeology of Tell el-Dab'a.

How to read a source on this topic

Section IV sources for this period are typically described reconstructions of a royal victory stele (Kamose), a tomb biography (Ahmose son of Ibana), a donation or building stele (Ahmose, Ahhotep), a physical object (the wounded mummy of Seqenenre), or a much later literary or historiographical text (Manetho via Josephus). Three habits.

First, classify the source. Is it archaeological (the mummy, the Tell el-Dab'a settlement layers, weapons) or written (a stele, a tomb biography, Manetho)? Each carries different limits: the mummy is direct physical evidence but silent on why or by whom the wounds were struck; a royal stele is articulate but partisan.

Second, fix WHO produced it, WHEN and WHY. A Kamose stele and the el-Kab biography are near-contemporary but self-promoting (royal propaganda; a soldier's boast). Manetho, preserved in Josephus's Against Apion, is over a thousand years later and transmits a hostile "invasion" tradition third-hand. The gap between a contemporary boast and a late hostile summary is decisive.

Third, always move from content to reliability to usefulness to perspective, and reach a judgement, rather than simply retelling what the source says.

Model exam responses

1. Source-analysis response (using the wounded mummy of Seqenenre Tao). "The mummy of Seqenenre Tao is valuable archaeological evidence for the violence of the early liberation because it physically preserves multiple head wounds from an axe, dagger and possibly a spear, showing the king died a violent death consistent with the conflict against the Hyksos. Its usefulness, however, is limited: the body cannot tell us WHO struck the blows or in what circumstances, whether pitched battle, ambush or execution after capture. Corroborated with the Kamose stelae, which show the war continuing into the next reign, it supports the view that Seqenenre opened an armed struggle, but the specific manner of his death remains an inference, not a fact the source states."

Marker's note: markers reward using physical evidence precisely while conceding what a body cannot reveal, and corroborating rather than speculating.

2. Essay paragraph (Ahmose as finisher, not sole author). "Ahmose I's personal achievement was decisive but should not be detached from its context. The biography of Ahmose son of Ibana shows him completing the capture of Avaris and the siege of Sharuhen that his predecessors had not achieved, and reunifying Egypt under one crown; yet Seqenenre's death in battle and Kamose's advance to the walls of Avaris, recorded on his own stelae, prove the war was already two generations old before Ahmose won it. As Bietak's excavations at Tell el-Dab'a suggest a settled Canaanite population rather than the sudden invaders of Manetho's tradition, the very word 'expulsion' is partly Theban propaganda. Ahmose was the indispensable finisher of the Seventeenth Dynasty's project, not its lone author."

Marker's note: this paragraph scores because it answers a "to what extent" question by weighing Ahmose against his predecessors and using the historiography to qualify the sources' own framing.

Command words and how to use a source

Outline/describe wants a small number of clearly separated points; explain wants a point, evidence and why it matters; assess/evaluate/to what extent wants a sustained argument reaching a supported judgement.

Using a source properly means four things every time: (1) content, what does it show or say; (2) reliability, who produced it, when and for what purpose; (3) usefulness, what specific question can it answer, and how far; (4) perspective, whose viewpoint is it, and what does it leave out. For this period, always flag whether a source is a near-contemporary royal boast (Kamose stelae, the el-Kab biography), physical evidence (the mummy, Tell el-Dab'a), or a late hostile tradition (Manetho in Josephus), because that placement usually decides reliability.

Weaving in historiography means using a named position to build your case: for example "as Bietak's Tell el-Dab'a excavations show, the Hyksos were a settled Canaanite population" used to qualify the propaganda language of "expulsion", not dropped in as decoration.

Practice questions

Original practice questions graded from foundation to exam level, each with a full worked solution. Try them before revealing the solution.

foundation4 marksOutline who the Hyksos were and the nature of their rule in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period.

Show worked solution →

A 4-mark "outline" wants several correct, clearly separated points.

Who they were: The Hyksos were a Levantine (Canaanite) people whose name comes from the Egyptian heka khasut, "rulers of foreign lands"; the later historian Manetho mistranslated it as "shepherd kings" (1 mark).
When and where they ruled: During the Second Intermediate Period (c. 1650 to 1550 BC), when Egypt fragmented, they formed the Fifteenth Dynasty and ruled Lower Egypt from their capital Avaris (modern Tell el-Dab'a) in the eastern Delta (1 mark).
How they ruled: They controlled the north and took tribute from Middle Egypt, coexisting with a rival native Egyptian dynasty (the Seventeenth) based at Thebes in the south, and were allied with the kingdom of Kush in Nubia (1 mark).
Their character: They adopted Egyptian titulary, script and gods (favouring Seth), so were partly Egyptianised rulers rather than simple occupiers; excavation at Tell el-Dab'a shows Middle Bronze Age Canaanite material culture (1 mark).

Marker's note: markers reward the correct meaning of the name and the divided, two-power situation, not a vague "foreign invaders" answer.

foundation5 marksOutline the Theban wars of liberation under Seqenenre Tao and Kamose.

Show worked solution →

A 5-mark "outline" wants a sequenced account with correct dated detail.

The starting point: By the mid-sixteenth century BC the Seventeenth Dynasty at Thebes had grown strong enough to challenge Hyksos overlordship in the north (1 mark).
Seqenenre Tao: Seqenenre Tao (r. c. 1560 BC) apparently opened the conflict with the Hyksos king Apepi (Apophis); his mummy carries severe head wounds from an axe and dagger, consistent with a violent death in battle or a raid (1 mark).
Kamose: His successor Kamose (r. c. 1555 to 1550 BC), last king of the Seventeenth Dynasty, pushed the campaign northwards, as recorded on the Kamose stelae and the Carnarvon Tablet (1 mark).
Kamose's campaign: Kamose raided the Hyksos-held territory and reached the walls of Avaris itself, and intercepted a letter from Apepi seeking an alliance with the king of Kush, but he did not capture Avaris (1 mark).
Outcome: The wars were left unfinished at Kamose's death; the final expulsion fell to his brother Ahmose I (1 mark).

Marker's note: markers reward the correct three-generation sequence (Seqenenre, Kamose, Ahmose) and the point that Kamose weakened but did not defeat the Hyksos.

core4 marksSource A (ExamExplained reconstruction, illustrative only, not a translated original): a tomb-biography inscription of the type carved at el-Kab, in which a naval officer records, 'I fought hand to hand at the taking of Avaris; I carried off captives and was given the gold of valour, and afterwards Sharuhen was besieged for years until it fell.' Using Source A and your own knowledge, describe the role of Ahmose son of Ibana as a source for the expulsion of the Hyksos.

Show worked solution →

A 4-mark "describe" using a source needs the source's content plus supporting own knowledge.

Use the source. Source A shows an eyewitness soldier recording, in the first person, his part in the two decisive actions of the war: the capture of Avaris and the siege of Sharuhen, together with the rewards ("gold of valour", captives) that such service earned (2 marks).

Own knowledge. Ahmose son of Ibana was a real naval officer from el-Kab (ancient Nekheb) whose autobiography, carved in his tomb, is our fullest narrative source for Ahmose I's campaigns; he served under Ahmose I, Amenhotep I and Thutmose I, and his text describes the fall of Avaris, the three-year siege of Sharuhen in southern Canaan, and later Nubian campaigns (2 marks).

Marker's note: markers reward candidates who treat the biography as a contemporary, participant account while noting (for higher bands) that it is a self-glorifying military record designed to display the owner's valour.

core6 marksExplain the significance of Ahmose I's capture of Avaris and Sharuhen for the foundation of the New Kingdom.

Show worked solution →

A 6-mark "explain" needs the events, why they mattered, and their consequences.

The events: Ahmose I (r. c. 1550 to 1525 BC) captured the Hyksos capital Avaris in the eastern Delta, then pursued the retreating Hyksos into southern Canaan and besieged the fortress of Sharuhen for about three years until it fell (2 marks).
Immediate significance: These victories broke Hyksos power on Egyptian soil and reunified the Two Lands under a single Theban king for the first time in roughly a century, ending the Second Intermediate Period (2 marks).
Longer significance: By carrying the war beyond Egypt's borders into Canaan, Ahmose began the "imperial idea": the New Kingdom policy of holding buffer territory abroad, backed by a permanent professional army built partly on the chariot warfare the Hyksos had helped introduce, so that Egypt would never again be invaded from the north-east. His reign founded the Eighteenth Dynasty and the New Kingdom itself (2 marks).

Marker's note: markers reward the causal chain from a military victory to reunification to the beginning of an expansionist empire, not just a narrative of the siege.

core6 marksSource B (ExamExplained reconstruction, illustrative only, not a translated original): a royal victory stele of the type Kamose set up at Karnak, in which the king declares, 'I sailed north in might to overthrow the Asiatics; the cowardly Apepi trembled in Avaris; I laid waste his towns and seized his ships laden with gold and lapis lazuli.' Assess the usefulness and reliability of Source B for a historian investigating the wars against the Hyksos.

Show worked solution →

A 6-mark source task needs balanced usefulness AND reliability anchored in origin, purpose and audience, plus own knowledge.

Content: Source B presents Kamose as a triumphant aggressor sailing north, terrifying Apepi at Avaris and plundering rich booty (1 mark).
Usefulness: It is useful as a near-contemporary royal record of the Theban campaign: it confirms that Kamose carried the war to the edge of Avaris, that the Hyksos king was Apepi, and that plunder and ships were prizes of the fighting, all corroborated by the real Kamose stelae and the Carnarvon Tablet (2 marks).
Reliability and limitation: As official royal propaganda carved for an Egyptian temple audience, it is one-sided: it glorifies the king, uses the hostile stock label "Asiatics", and exaggerates success, since we know from other evidence that Kamose did NOT actually take Avaris. Its purpose is to legitimise the Theban war, not to give a balanced account (2 marks).
Judgement: Source B is therefore reliable evidence for how the Theban kings PRESENTED the conflict and for the broad course of Kamose's raid, but not for its outcome; it must be checked against archaeology and the biography of Ahmose son of Ibana (1 mark).

Marker's note: markers reward separating what the stele claims from what can be trusted, and using the propaganda purpose as part of the judgement.

exam8 marksSource C (ExamExplained reconstruction, illustrative only): a donation stele of the type Ahmose I set up honouring his mother, praising Queen Ahhotep as 'one who cared for Egypt's soldiers, who gathered together its fugitives and pacified Upper Egypt, expelling its rebels.' Using Source C and your own knowledge, assess the usefulness and reliability of the tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana as evidence for the reign of Ahmose I.

Show worked solution →

An 8-mark task needs content, usefulness, reliability/limitation and a judgement that also uses Source C.

Content of the biography: The tomb biography of Ahmose son of Ibana at el-Kab is a first-person military autobiography that narrates the capture of Avaris, the three-year siege of Sharuhen, campaigns south into Nubia, and the rewards of "gold of valour", captives and land that the officer received (2 marks).
Usefulness: It is the single most detailed narrative source for Ahmose I's wars, written by a participant, and is our main evidence for the sequence and geography of the campaigns and for how the crown rewarded loyal service; it lets historians reconstruct events the royal monuments only summarise (2 marks).
Reliability and limitation: It is, however, a self-glorifying funerary text whose purpose is to display the owner's valour and status to visitors, so it foregrounds his personal deeds, is silent on setbacks, gives few firm dates, and cannot be assumed complete. Source C shows the same limitation from the other direction: it is royal praise of Ahhotep, useful for showing that others (including a queen who rallied Upper Egypt) contributed to the reunification, which the soldier's biography naturally omits (2 marks).
Judgement: Used critically and cross-checked against the Kamose stelae, the Ahhotep material and the Tell el-Dab'a archaeology, the biography of Ahmose son of Ibana is highly useful for the course of the wars but must be read as a partial, self-interested account, not a complete royal history (2 marks).

Marker's note: markers reward using BOTH sources to argue that no single account is complete, and weighing the biography's participant value against its self-promoting purpose.

exam25 marksTo what extent was Ahmose I, rather than the wider work of the Theban Seventeenth Dynasty, responsible for the expulsion of the Hyksos and the foundation of the New Kingdom? In your response, refer to relevant sources and historians' interpretations.

Show worked solution →

A Band-6 response needs a clear thesis, argument lines tied to dated evidence, engagement with historiography, a model paragraph, and a judgement answering "to what extent".

Thesis: Ahmose I delivered the decisive military and political achievement, the capture of Avaris, the pursuit to Sharuhen and reunification, but he completed a war his Theban predecessors had begun; the foundation of the New Kingdom is best understood as the culmination of three generations of Seventeenth-Dynasty effort that Ahmose crowned.
Argument line 1: the war was begun before Ahmose: Seqenenre Tao (r. c. 1560 BC) apparently opened the conflict, his battle-scarred mummy attesting a violent death, and Kamose (r. c. 1555 to 1550 BC) campaigned to the walls of Avaris, as the Kamose stelae record. Ahmose inherited an ongoing war and a strengthened Theban state, not a standing start.
Argument line 2: Ahmose achieved what they could not: The biography of Ahmose son of Ibana records that Ahmose finally took Avaris and besieged Sharuhen for about three years, expelling the Hyksos from Egypt and southern Canaan; he then campaigned in Nubia and reunified the Two Lands, founding the Eighteenth Dynasty (r. c. 1550 to 1525 BC). This decisive completion was his alone.
Argument line 3: others contributed to victory: Ahmose's donation stele praises his mother Ahhotep for rallying Egypt's soldiers and pacifying Upper Egypt, and the rise of a professional, chariot-equipped army drew on military technology the Hyksos period had introduced. The achievement was collective and institutional, not purely personal.
Argument line 4: the sources shape the emphasis: Royal monuments and the soldier's biography naturally magnify individual valour; the propaganda purpose of the Kamose stelae and the self-glorifying nature of the el-Kab biography mean the "great man" framing is partly a product of the evidence, a caution modern historians such as Redford and Bietak stress.
Historiography: Manfred Bietak's excavations at Tell el-Dab'a (Avaris) show the Hyksos as a settled Canaanite population, supporting a picture of gradual immigration rather than the sudden violent invasion of Manetho (preserved in Josephus), which reframes the "expulsion" as the end of a long coexistence. Donald Redford similarly rejects Manetho's invasion model. Both warn against reading the Theban propaganda literally.
Model paragraph: Ahmose's personal responsibility is real but should not be isolated from its context. The biography of Ahmose son of Ibana shows him completing the capture of Avaris and the siege of Sharuhen that his father and brother had not achieved, and reunifying Egypt under one crown. Yet Seqenenre's death in battle and Kamose's advance to Avaris, recorded on his own stelae, prove the war was already two generations old; Ahhotep's stele credits a queen with holding Upper Egypt together. Ahmose was the indispensable finisher of the Theban project, not its sole author.
Judgement: To a large but not exclusive extent: Ahmose was personally responsible for the decisive victory, reunification and the founding of the New Kingdom, but he completed and institutionalised a liberation the whole Seventeenth Dynasty had driven.

Marker's note: markers reward a sustained argument answering "to what extent" with dated evidence, named sources used critically, engagement with the invasion-versus-immigration historiography, and a judgement that weighs Ahmose against his predecessors rather than narrating his reign.