posted
This is the title of a book I am reading right now. It's by Frederick J. Giles, and was published by the Australian Centre of Egyptology. It carefully documents some revolutionary ideas about the Amarna Age. It shows evidence--stele and other sources--of a co-regency between Akhenaton and his father, Amenhotep III. It proves that Nefertiti died in year 12, and it is a mistake to think she took a different name and ruled alone. Smenkhkara had 2 names, one of which ended with the feminine ending, the "t". He ruled with Akhenaton as a co-regent, and then by himself for about 1 year. He was married to Meritaton, who was his queen, never Akhenaton's. This, and many other statements, make this book a real shocker! I'm about 1/2 through, and there's new revelations with every page. I highly recommend it to everyone...
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
So much is known about the Amarna period yet there are so many unanswered questions. I think DNA testing could resolve the issue over Smenkare, Nefertiti and who Tut's mother was. I have heard some theory about Tut being the son of Akhenaten and Queen Tiye. Shocking if true...
Posts: 338 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's doubtful that Tiye was Tutankhamen's mother--her age at the time of his birth would have been too advanced for childbirth. A concubine or minor princess is the most likely. During Tut's reign, he never made any announcement of his mother's name. This is most likely a sign that she was deceased. The thing--ONE of the things that surprised me in the book was the announcement that Kiya couldn't have been his mother--that there are inscriptions that have been found that state she had only one child--a daughter.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Akhenaton has always fasinated me. The way he represented himself unlike any other egyptian leader and the attempts to change the age old society is unbelievable. please post more of what you read?
Posts: 23 | From: NY | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:A concubine or minor princess is the most likely. During Tut's reign, he never made any announcement of his mother's name. This is most likely a sign that she was deceased. The thing--ONE of the things that surprised me in the book was the announcement that Kiya couldn't have been his mother--that there are inscriptions that have been found that state she had only one child--a daughter.
Is there any mention in the book of the possibility of Maya being the mother of Tutankhamun. We know that she was probabaly more intiment than just his wet nurse. Any opinions on this matter?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ausar, interestingly enough, Giles does not talk that much of the burial of Tut nor his life, other than to mention that he believes that Amenhotep III is his father, and his mother is completely unknown--more than likely a concubine from A III's court. Tut's childhood, and any relationship he had with Maya, is not discussed. The focus of the book is more on the actual royal court, first in Thebes and then Aketaten. To give you an idea of the subjects discussed, here is a list of the chapters: The coregency of Amenhotep III and Akhenaton Smenkhkare The royal tombs and the Amarna period burials Tomb 55 Conclusions As you can see, it's a small book. What I like about it, though, is its extensive bibliography, using sources from all the well-known Egyptologists, and some I'm not familiar with, but you may know, such as Allen, Aldred, Carter, Brunton, Daressy, Davis, Dodson, Fakhry, GardinerMartin, Maspero--et al. You can see he uses many souces to substantiate his claims. As I've said, it really is an interesting read, and I hartily recommend it. Sestostris, some of the subjects are, especially showing the co-rengency between A III and his son, Akhenaton of at least 2 years, probably at least 9, and possibly 12. How Akhenaton did not "invent" Aton, that the idea goes back, in different forms, to the 4th Dynasty (at the earliest), that Nefertiti did not co-rule with her husband, or change her name and rule by herself--she died in Akhenaton's 12 year. That Smemkhkara co-ruled with Akhenaton for 2 years, and after A.'s death, ruled by himself for 3 more years. He feels "99% positive" that the burial in KV55 is Smenkhkara. That obliberation of the kings between A III and Aye did not occur as completely as it did until the 19th Dynasty kings, although Horemheb did some. By the way, he feels certain that there are still royal tombs to be discovered at Amarna, that Nefertiti, Smenkhkara, Tut and Meritaton had to have tombs excavated in Amarna.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sestostris, some of the subjects are, especially showing the co-rengency between A III and his son, Akhenaton of at least 2 years, probably at least 9, and possibly 12. How Akhenaton did not "invent" Aton, that the idea goes back, in different forms, to the 4th Dynasty (at the earliest), that Nefertiti did not co-rule with her husband, or change her name and rule by herself--she died in Akhenaton's 12 year.
Could you elaborate more on how the Aten idea goes back to the 4th dyansty? My personal belief from reserching the Kemetian religion is that the religion can conventionally be called monolatry meaning Kemetians reognized one supreme deity that had many manifestation. Even Akenaten reognized this concept that is not much different from the trinity concept or the 99 attributes of Allah in Islam.
Some Egyptologist have said that Akenaten recieved the Aten concept from his father Amenhotep III but later capitalizied off the idea.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
By saying that the Aton goes back to the 4th Dynasty, I think there was a mis-interpretation of what was said. The idea of worshipping the sun is a concept that gained ascendacy in the 4th Dynasty, using the Re, Kheptri, Atum and Re-Harakhty manifestations as solar Gods, they being well-established figures in the spectrum of Egyptian religion. It wasn't until the start of the 18th Dynasty that the word "Aton" has the god determinative, and is used in quite a few names. But again, until the rule of Amenhotep III, Aton was considered to be just a manifiestation of the solar god. During A III's rule, the Aton was used in several royal names, most notably A. III's barque, "Splendor of Aton". Giles even suggests that Akhetaton was built after his suggestion. A. III was quite a builder--his Hypostyle Hall in Karnak and the Luxor Temple, to mention but 2. He also started construction on several shrines and temple dedicated to the Aton. His death left most of the work unfinished. Akhenaton build a temple to Aton at Karnak, which Horemheb had pulled down and the rubble used as fill for his pylon--ironically, preserving the temple stones for us! It seems that, during the co-regency, A. III was able to keep Akhenaton--at that time A. IV--in check. A. IV used the 'old" art, and build the temple to Aton in Karnak, which was considered to be amen's property. It was only after A. III's death that A. IV changed his name to Akhenaton, started using the Amarna art, moved to Aketaten and started publically to pursue the old gods, especially Amen. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that Aton was worshipped in the 4th Dynasty--he was not, using that name.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
We also see a more emphasis in Re probabaly because of the connection that the V and VI dyansty had to the Annu[Heliopolian] theology as opposed to the first three dyansties which showed more ephasis in the more southern theology in southern Upper Egypt. During this period Kemetian per-aa began to go under the title of Sa-Re meaning sonf of Re. During this period there also is the solar temples which are probabaly the precussor for the obeliske that reflect the solar theology.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic