Thebes in Egyptian and Biblical History

Thebes, located in Upper Egypt (modern-day Luxor), was one of the most influential cities in ancient Egyptian history. It served as a religious and political capital, particularly during the Middle and New Kingdoms, and was associated with the worship of Amun, a leading deity of Egypt. Known to the Egyptians as “Waset” and referenced in classical literature as “Diospolis,” Thebes was a city of monumental architecture, powerful priesthoods, and dynastic influence. However, by the 7th century B.C.E., Thebes experienced a dramatic downfall at the hands of the Neo-Assyrian Empire under Ashurbanipal.

This event is not only historically verified by Assyrian inscriptions and archaeological evidence but is also mentioned explicitly in the Bible—most notably in the prophetic book of Nahum. The prophet Nahum references the fall of Thebes to illustrate the inevitable judgment upon Nineveh, the capital of Assyria itself. The convergence of biblical testimony and extrabiblical historical records in this case offers an exceptional example of the Bible’s reliability in describing ancient geopolitical events.

---

Historical Context: Assyria’s Domination of Egypt

By the early 7th century B.C.E., the Neo-Assyrian Empire, having already subdued the kingdoms of Israel and Syria, turned its attention to Egypt. The Assyrians under Esarhaddon (reigned 681–669 B.C.E.) successfully invaded Egypt around 674 B.C.E., eventually capturing Memphis in 671 B.C.E. and forcing Pharaoh Taharqa of the 25th (Kushite) Dynasty to retreat south to Upper Egypt. Taharqa briefly regained some territory, but Assyrian pressure remained unrelenting.

Esarhaddon died in 669 B.C.E., and his son Ashurbanipal (reigned 669–c. 631 B.C.E.) took the throne. Ashurbanipal launched another campaign into Egypt in 667–666 B.C.E., again defeating Taharqa and reasserting Assyrian control. After Taharqa’s death in 664 B.C.E., his successor Tanutamani sought to reclaim Egyptian independence, marching north and briefly retaking Memphis. This provoked a final and decisive response from Ashurbanipal, resulting in the brutal conquest of Thebes around 663 B.C.E.

---

The Fall of Thebes: Assyrian Records

The Assyrian campaign against Thebes is recorded in Ashurbanipal’s annals, which vividly describe the conquest and devastation of the city:

“Thebes, the whole city, I captured with the help of Assur and Ishtar. Silver, gold, precious stones, the treasures of his palace, all that was found, garments, costly linen, great horses, men and women, two tall obelisks of shining electrum, the weight of which was 2,500 talents, I removed from their place and took to Assyria. From Thebes I brought back countless spoils.” (Prism of Ashurbanipal)

The Assyrians razed much of the city, plundered its wealth, and deported a significant portion of its population, including artisans and administrators. Although Thebes was not permanently destroyed (it was later rebuilt to some extent), this marked the end of its role as a central power in Egypt. The city never recovered its former dominance, and Assyrian power in Egypt soon began to wane as well.

---

The Biblical Testimony: Nahum’s Oracle Against Nineveh

The book of Nahum, dated to between 663 and 650 B.C.E., provides a rare biblical reference to a major event in Egyptian history. Speaking against Nineveh—the Assyrian capital—Nahum 3:8–10 says:

8 Are you better than No-amon*
which sat by the Nile canals,
waters surrounded her,
whose rampart was the sea,
whose wall was of the sea?
9 Ethiopia** was her strength;
Egypt too, and that without limit;
Put and the Libyans were her*** helpers.
10 Yet she became an exile;
she went into captivity;
her children were dashed in pieces
at the head of every street;
for her honored men lots were cast,
and all her great men were bound in chains.
(Nahum 3:8–10, UASV)

* That is, Thebes
** LXX VG “Ethiopia” MT SYR “Cush”
***  MT AT VG “your” LXX “her”

This passage reveals multiple layers of historical accuracy. It correctly describes Thebes’ geographical features (surrounded by water and fortified by the Nile), her foreign alliances (Cush—i.e., Nubia; Put—likely a Libyan tribe), and the subsequent devastation. The prophetic comparison is sharp: if proud Thebes could fall despite her apparent invincibility, then so too would Nineveh, whose judgment was likewise inevitable. This indicates that the prophet Nahum was writing in a period shortly after Thebes’ destruction in 663 B.C.E., but before Nineveh’s fall in 612 B.C.E.

---

Archaeological Evidence Supporting the Sack of Thebes

Excavations at Thebes have revealed signs of destruction and cultural disruption consistent with the Assyrian sack. While there is no single burn layer or mass devastation stratum that archaeologists point to as definitive proof of the 663 B.C.E. conquest (largely due to later rebuilding and reuse of the city), Assyrian reliefs and inscriptions corroborate the attack in rich detail.

Assyrian palace reliefs, especially those found in Nineveh, portray scenes of conquest, plundering, and forced deportations that align with the description of the fall of Thebes. These were intended as propaganda but also serve as vital historical sources. Egyptian records from the later Saite Dynasty (beginning with Psamtik I) are notably silent about the devastation—understandably, given the national humiliation it represented. However, the political vacuum left by the sack of Thebes allowed Psamtik I, with Assyrian and later Greek assistance, to establish the 26th Dynasty and reunify Egypt under a native dynasty.

---

The Identity of “No-Amon” and the Significance of the Name

In Nahum 3:8, the city is called “No-Amon,” which is the Hebrew form of the Egyptian name for Thebes (Egyptian “Niwt-Imn,” meaning “City of Amun”). This is linguistically accurate and consistent with how the city would have been known to the Hebrews during that era. “No” represents the city (Thebes), and “Amon” refers to the deity Amun, whose cult center was located there.

The mention of Thebes by name in the Hebrew text reflects a remarkable level of geographical and political awareness by Nahum. It also confirms that his prophecy was grounded in observable, recent history, not vague allegory or myth. Furthermore, the identification of foreign powers such as Cush and Put as Egypt’s allies fits with what is known of Egypt’s regional alliances during the 25th Dynasty.

---

The Chronological Framework and Its Implications

As noted earlier, Thebes was captured around 663 B.C.E., during the reign of Ashurbanipal. This date is consistent across Assyrian and biblical records. The prophet Nahum, therefore, must have written his oracle after this date, and before the fall of Nineveh in 612 B.C.E. This tight timeframe (c. 663–630 B.C.E.) for Nahum’s composition aligns with the tone of his message—Nineveh is still standing but warned of imminent destruction.

The chronological precision in Nahum’s reference to Thebes provides a powerful apologetic for the historical reliability of the prophetic books. Liberal scholars often accuse biblical prophecy of being “post-eventum”—written after the fact and disguised as prophecy. However, Nahum refers to Thebes’ fall as a past event and uses it as evidence to predict Nineveh’s future fall. This ordering of historical events, supported by external Assyrian records, invalidates the common critical assumption of late prophetic authorship. It also underscores that the biblical prophets were not mythmakers or nationalistic storytellers—they were men raised up by Jehovah to deliver accurate warnings rooted in historical realities.

---

Implications for Biblical Reliability and Archaeological Correlation

The convergence between Assyrian inscriptions, biblical texts, and archaeological findings in this case is especially notable. The sacking of Thebes was a major event in ancient history, and the fact that a minor Hebrew prophet could reference it accurately—both in timing and detail—speaks volumes about the credibility of the biblical record.

Secular archaeology, though often biased toward critical or skeptical perspectives, nonetheless confirms the fall of Thebes and its impact on Egypt’s political structure. It was a turning point that facilitated the rise of a new dynasty (the 26th) and marked the waning influence of the Kushite rulers. The Assyrian records are graphic and boastful, typical of Mesopotamian royal inscriptions, but they affirm that such a conquest occurred and that it was severe.

The biblical text not only affirms the same event but does so with remarkable sobriety and theological insight. The reference to Thebes is not incidental—it is integral to the prophet’s argument. Just as Thebes, seemingly secure and fortified, fell, so too would Nineveh. This illustrates the theological principle that no nation, however powerful, is exempt from divine judgment.

---

Conclusion: Thebes as a Historical and Theological Marker

The fall of Thebes in 663 B.C.E. is one of the clearest examples of a historical event that bridges biblical and extra-biblical records. Its inclusion in Nahum’s prophecy reflects the prophet’s awareness of international events and lends weight to the authenticity and dating of his book. The Assyrian records, biblical text, and archaeological indicators all converge to confirm that Thebes fell, its people were taken into captivity, and it ceased to be the dominant force it once was.

For biblical archaeology and historical apologetics, this event serves as a case study in how the Bible’s historical claims can be tested and confirmed using reliable external data. It affirms that the Scriptures, even in their prophetic portions, reflect real history, not myth, and that the biblical authors were accurate witnesses of the geopolitical realities of their day.

You May Also Enjoy

Carchemish 605 B.C.E.: How the Babylonian Victory Over Egypt Confirms Jeremiah’s Prophecy and Anchors Biblical Chronology

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS