1

Rebecca Welton
5/5/13
History 648
Historiography Paper-Final Draft
Societies and individuals have been erased from history for various reasons. Perhaps
they kept no written records, or their culture was destroyed in a natural disaster. In some cases,
the erasure occurs intentionally, with successors or rivals attempting to destroy all evidence of
the individual or societys accomplishments, culture, and ideas. In the case of individuals, this
was often done after one did something particularly heinous or controversial. One of the most
notable individuals who was nearly lost to history due to erasure was the Pharaoh Akhenaten.
Akhenaten had revolutionary ideas about religion and society, and instated monotheism under
his rule. He also created his own capital city of el Amarna and, as his predecessors, had many
buildings, statues, and sculptures inscribed with his image. His son, Tutankhamen began the
official purging of Akhenaten from history by ordering the destruction of el Amarna and the
defacement of all of his images and texts as part of a return to the traditional polytheistic society.
Despite Tutankhamens efforts, many artifacts, although many of them heavily damaged,
survived from the Amarna period. It is up to historians to piece these scraps together in an
attempt to reconstruct the erased history of Akhenaten and his unusual reign.
Historiography dealing with the reign of Akhenaten follows no specific sort of trend over
time, and there are no regular patterns of change that can be readily observed. Each historian has
his or her own opinions about the pharaoh, the nature of his reign and religion, his possible
disabilities and disorders, and his ability to deal with outside conflict. In any given year, books
2

and articles providing both positive and negative views of Akhenaten will both emerge and clash
with one another, but there is no clear prevailing or correct viewpoint. Still, historians have
many things that they enjoy focusing on as a whole. Many debate about Akhenatens appearance
in the artwork that surrounded his palace, with some believing it to have represented his actual
appearance and then moving on to speculate on possible diseases that the pharaoh may have had,
and others dismissing it as a stylistic choice. Other elements commonly addressed include any
possible familial or otherwise influence on the pharaoh when he was young that may have
steered his religious beliefs in the direction that they eventually took, along with the pharaohs
progression to monotheism. Did he simply rise to power with his head already full of ideas, or
did he slowly develop these over time? Was monotheism inevitable? The religion of the Aten
itself is also discussed and debated, historians seemingly undecided on whether it was a true
religion or a means of imposing Akhenatens will. The issue which divides the most scholars
though is the nature of the pharaoh, or, essentially, if he was an irredeemable heretic or a man
with a vision that was grossly misunderstood.
Over the years, historians have struggled with how to deal with the issue of Akhenatens
attempted erasure. Not only are ancient histories hard to piece together to begin with, as limited
complete primary sources exist, but in the case of an individual whose legacy was destroyed, the
sources are even fewer in amount and are not intact due to defacement. There is also the
complication of the pharaohs sullied image as a heretic, a madman, and a false prophet.
Historians must figure out how to construct a fairly objective-sounding truth when discussing
this man and his regime without completely vilifying him or making him seem like a heroic
martyr. To this day, historians do not know Akhenatens true motives behind the religious
change, and one must ignore the urge to invent reasoning for his actions.
3

Histories of the Amarna Period and Akhenaten date back fairly early, and one of the first
that was fairly easy to find dates back to 1948. Leslie A. Whites work, entitled Ikhnaton: The
Great Man vs. The Culture Process was published in the Journal of the American Oriental
Society and uses a social science approach to study Akhenatens changes to ancient Egypt. White
was an anthropologist by training, receiving his degree at the Columbia University, and having a
hand in creating the anthropology department of the University of Michigan. His work is
primarily centered on the study of ancient Egyptian cultures, although aspects of his work show
that he was highly influenced by the studies of psychology and sociology as well. He began by
attempting to analyze Akhenatens psychology and possible motives as described by historians
before him, addressing their various opinions. According to Whites work, even as early as this
article historians were divided on the matter of Akhenatens behavior. One author that White
mentions claims that Akhenaten was the first individual, meaning the first man in history to
truly stand out from the crowd, and that his willpower and strong mind allowed him to make
changes to society, while another states that he was a religious fanatic and lists many negative
behavioral traits along with two positive ones of honesty and sincerity.
1
Others believe that
Akhenaten was merely searching for a form of truth and had a dangerously clear mind, which
disputes the madman theory presented by some historians.
2
Immediately afterward, White
discusses one of the most talked about issues pertaining to Akhenaten; his unusual appearance in
art and possible deformity. Some authors claim that it might have signaled some form of mental
deficiency as well, but as White states, it may have simply been the art style of the age that
resulted in the unusual depiction.
3
Oddly enough, White then discussed many off-topic ideas

1
Leslie A. White. Ikhanaton: The Great Man vs. The Culture Process Journal of the American Oriental Society, (Vol
68, No. 2, 1948)., pg. 93.
2
Ibid., pg. 94.
3
Ibid., 94.
4

such as the development of the human speech and advanced mind. Perhaps this goes along with
his idea that Akhenaten was a truly remarkable individual, but it seems unnecessary to his thesis.
In the next section, he gives a brief history of the periods before the Amarna Period and comes to
the conclusion that the high status of the Amun priests may have either proved a challenge to
Akhenatens power, or an inspiration for his religion.
4
White describes the Amarna period as a
troublesome time where conflict existed both in the kingdom and outside of it, though, oddly
enough, he places some of the blame for its troubles on Akhenatens wife, Nefertiti as well as his
successor and son Tutankhamen.
5
Instead of the destruction of Akhenatens reign beginning as
early as Tutankhamen, however, White largely places the responsibility for much of the defacing
in the hands of Horemheb, a later ruler.
6
After a brief description of later history, White returns
to Akhenaten and concludes that the pharaoh did not even originate the idea of monotheism in
Egypt and that the kingdom was heading toward it inevitably, pointing toward the overwhelming
power of cults that worship singular deities.
7
Finally, Whites article loses much of its strength as
he returns to a study of the kings appearance in art and possible physical deformity as if it had
some form of bearing on his ideology. It loses further strength as White attempts to make cross-
cultural comparisons between Akhenaten and the czars of Russia and kings of England. They
grew up in very different time periods, and to compare the two is a very far-fetched idea. Still,
White sets up a fairly positive image of Akhenaten as a great man and thinker who tried to
revolutionize Egypt.
Later, a book published in 1970 attempted another examination of the pharaoh. Titled
Ikhnaton: Legend and History it was written by F.J. Giles and covers different aspects of

4
Ibid., 96.
5
Ibid., 97.
6
Ibid., 100.
7
Ibid., 102.
5

Akhenaten and his reign. Giles is an Egyptologist, having received official training in the highly
multidiscipline field at the University of London. He began by discussing the romanticized myth
that many previous historians held of the pharaoh as a strongly spiritual and truth-seeking
prophet who was strong in these matters due to his weak form, but he attempts to form a more
realistic picture of the man.
8
He stated that it was Akhenatens mother, Queen Tiy who elevated
the priesthood of the sun while the heir was still young and made many of the rash decisions that
Akhenaten was credited for, likely because the sickly child was not expected to live long.
9

Oddly, Giles stuck to a previously existing theory based on the art of the age that Akhenatens
possible madness due to his physical condition may have had a hand in his ideology and
visions, despite claiming to want to create a true depiction of the ruler.
10
Like White, Giles fell
into the trap of sensationalist theory, this time with not only Akhenatens appearance but also
with his relationship with his partner, Smenkhkare, which he claims to be of a homosexual
nature.
11
Still, his study of the regents death was interesting, claiming that a fairly healthy man
suddenly dying shortly before the pharaoh may have hinted at a failed assassination attempt of
Akhenaten, or, perhaps may have plunged Akhenaten into a state of panic and depression that
eventually resulted in his own death. Another strength of the book is his discussion of the Aten
cult after Akhenatens death, noting that although they lost their fanatical mannerisms, they
continued to exist alongside other priests and cults.
12
Perhaps the most unusual thing about
Giles book is that it contains a piece of evidence that contradicts the authors argument about
Akhenatens deformity having a role in his promotion of the monotheistic religion and its
instatement. The very first image of his image section is a mask of Akhenaten which, although

8
F.J. Giles. Ikhnaton: Legend and History, (London: Hutchinson of London, 1970), pg. 15.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid., 17.
11
Ibid., 95.
12
Ibid., 138.
6

highly feminine looking, does not appear to have much deformity to it, not at all like the alien-
like sculptures.
13
The fact that an author who would argue in favor of a possible mental and
physical issue in the pharaoh would include such an image is baffling as it unseats that aspect of
his argument. Still, Giles book takes a step toward a less fantastic history of the pharaoh,
depicting him as a mere man, rather than a revolutionary prophet.
Donald B. Redfords work Akhenaten: The Heretic King is more blatant with its bias as
reflected in the title. Being an Egyptologist and archaeologist, and, current Professor of Classics
at Penn State, Redford has a rich training in various disciplines of historical study. The book
began with an introduction to the pharaohs and history before Akhenaten, and placed the origins
of the religion of the Aten sun disk in the hands of his father, Amenophis III.
14
Redford
described him as a lazy king that allowed the Aten priesthood to take control while he was
celebrating his riches and enjoying his happy marriage to his wife. When it comes to
Akhenatens rule, he was the first author in this list to note Nefertitis importance in prayers and
ceremonies to the Aten as well as her very high status, being on nearly equal footing with her
husband.
15
However, unlike other authors, Redford mentioned other people at the court of
Akhenaten other than Nefertiti, his children, and Shenkhkare being the first in this selection of
books and articles to mention Kiya, Tutankhamens mother as well as other members of the court
including the kings butler, advisers, and ambassadors. Many other works usually have
Akhenaten standing alone, or with his wife Nefertiti only, but Redford realized that in order to
operate the throne, there must be many people assisting the pharaoh to form an effective system.
As Redford pointed out toward the end of his book, it is folly to describe Akhenaten as an

13
Ibid., 205.
14
Donald B. Redford. Akhenaten the Heretic King, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), pg. 34.
15
Ibid., 79.
7

intellectual prophet as scholars like White had.
16
If anything, Redford claimed that he was not
all-knowing and was likely reacting in the face of an all-encompassing powerful religion,
comparing him more to Martin Luther in the sense that he grew tired of the old regime.
17
Above
all, Redford claimed that he was lazy and self-gratifying, with artwork often depicting him lazing
about with his wife and children, or consuming massive amounts of food at a banquet.
18
He used
this to state that he was an ineffectual ruler, tiresome, and obnoxious. This is a very strong turn
from the previous two works, which mostly present a somewhat negative, but still largely
sympathetic image of the Pharaoh.
Another book that has a fairly negative outlook on Akhenaten is entitled Akhenaten:King
of Egypt, written by Cyril Aldred, an Egyptologist and Art Historian who received degrees from
various universities of England and put his training to use in the Royal Scottish Museum of
Edinburgh, in 1988. The first section of the book dealt with tombs and their discovery and
artifacts along with some notes about rulers before Akhenaten, but nothing truly insightful. The
true content that focused on the Pharaoh himself bega with a chapter entitled The Pathology, a
chapter that dealt exclusively with Akhenatens supposed deformities. As Giles book had done
before, Aldred had a depiction of a mask actually sculpted from the pharaohs face early on in
the book, and yet still must have a discussion of the bizarre towering colossi with their elongated
faces.
19
He however chalked part of the odd representation up to being a representation of the
Aten as a force both masculine and feminine in nature that was applied to the form of the
pharaoh, an interesting insight, but the immediately turned to theories about the pharaoh himself

16
Ibid., 232.
17
Ibid., 233.
18
Ibid., 234.
19
Cyril Aldred, Akhenaten, King of Egypt, (London: Thames and Hudson, 1988), pg. 231.
8

shortly after.
20
He described the idea that the king suffered from Frolichs Syndrome, a disease
that to some extent fits his appearance.
21
There is a problem with this assessment however,
because sufferers of the disease, as Aldred states himself, were largely infertile, and Akhenaten
had as many as seven to eight children with both Nefertiti and other wives. Aldred stated that
perhaps the children were another mans, or that some of them were the result of Akhenaten
coupling with one of his daughters, a sensationalist theory with no proof whatsoever.
22
To rub
salt in the metaphorical wound, Aldred then described Akhenaten as a full-fledged mad heretic,
claiming that he burst upon the stage with his head full of ideas.
23
He then claimed that the
entire religion of the Aten that was forced upon the people was a largely political move to
control them.
24
As distasteful as aspects of Redfords article were, Aldreds seemed highly
spiteful toward Akhenaten, having described him as deformed and mad, but in some sense a
political genius, hardly a flattering picture.
Following this, an article put out by the History Today journal entitled Akhenaten:
Egypts Prodigal Son? and written by John Ray, an Egyptologist of the University of
Cambridge, challenged Redfords ideas and the ideas of many authors before him. Ray referred
to Akhenaten as remarkable in the same manner as White did back in the 1940s, and
challenges many assumptions made of him by other writers, including his possible madness,
abusive nature, and other rumors in favor of a more realistic picture.
25
He advocated that the
remaining scraps of knowledge about the pharaoh and his city need to be analyzed more closely
and the hunt for new evidence needs to continue rather than making harsh judgments from the

20
Ibid.
21
Ibid., 232.
22
Ibid., 234.
23
Ibid., 260.
24
Ibid., 262.
25
John Ray Akhenaten: Ancient Egypts Prodigal Son?, History Today, (Vol. 40, 1990).
9

fragments that exist. The first things that Ray tackled are the unusual-looking statues of
Akhenaten at his city, which he refers to by its old original name of Akhetaten rather than el-
Amarna. He believed that the statues, rather than depicting the true face of the pharaoh were
meant to instill fear and awe into visitors and inhabitants alike.
26
He also noted that, since they
were so huge and meant to be viewed from below, the faces would have to be distorted to some
extent in order to stand out more obviously.
27
Secondly, he described Akhenatens artistic
genius, stating that some of his later prayers to the Aten seem like an artist trying to write
poetry, and believing that some of the pieces of art from the period were actually made by the
pharaoh himself, or by those who learned from him as evidenced by the recurring imagery and
the feeling of familial and religious love that runs through each and every piece.
28
It is evident
that Ray saw Akhenaten as a true genius, but one that is oft criticized by both those alive during
his time and later historians. However, Ray stated that many of these letters that exist from his
critics as well as notes condemning Atenism written by Tutankhamen are an example of
political banter and may not necessarily depict the truth even in an exaggerated form.
29
His
article ended with a highly thought provoking question: Was the criminal of Amarna a
prophet misunderstood by his contemporaries, or was he a visionary that was understood far too
well?
30
Overall, Rays article seemed very strong, not once falling into sensationalist theories
and, although it observes Akhenaten in a mostly positive light, relies only on fairly concrete facts
and evidence.

26
Ibid.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
10

Conversely, Nicholas Reeves book Akhenaten: Egypts False Prophet, published in
2001 once again returned to a negative image and uses far-fetched theories and ideas with no
bearing. Reeves is an Egyptologist who currently works at the Metropolitan Museum of Arts
Egyptian wing. For one thing, he placed the blame of the Akhenatens actions squarely on the
shoulders of a much earlier pharaoh, Hatshepsut, claiming that it was her giving the sun priests a
higher position that spurred on the religion of the Aten.
31
The entire argument seems very sexist
and irrational as if it is claiming that if the woman had stayed in her place, the entire events of
the Amarna Period might not have happened. Moving on to Akhenaten himself, Reeves, like
Aldred, felt the need to bring up many sensationalist theories about him, ranging from new ideas
about any possible disease that he might have had and of course, incest and abuse theories. He
claimed that Aldreds theory on Frolichs Syndrome was flawed, and proposed that the king
suffered instead from Marfans Syndrome, which more fits his appearance in art and does not
label him as impotent or mentally ill.
32
Still, all of these disease theories are just theories until an
actual examination of his mummy can be conducted. Reeves theories might be interesting if he
had historians to back him up, yet he provides no back up and no contradicting evidence in a
very unprofessional practice. Still, Reeves did have some positive things to say about
Akhenatens rule. Kitchen gods and ones of the hearth were allowed to be worshipped, and there
were many festivals held where people were encouraged to be merry and celebrate life.
33
Still,
this does little to counteract the authors endless bashing of the pharaoh with theory after theory.
That very same year, an interesting article on Akhenaten was published in the National
Geographic magazine. Titled Pharaohs of the Sun and written by Rick Gore, it takes a more

31
C.N. Reeves. Akhenaten: Egypts False Prophet, (New York: Thames and Hudson, 2001), pg. 33.
32
Ibid., 151.
33
Ibid., 140.
11

analytical approach to the pharaoh as Rays work had previously done. Gore, a man of many
disciplines including theater arts and archaeology, claimed that if anything, Akhenatens
personality more fitted the type of a cult leader than a madman, since he was charismatic,
powerful, and very convincing.
34
He also stated that the bizarre statues seem to be more of a
depiction of the Aten as a dualistic deity rather than of Akhenaten himself, although he and
others admitted that the king likely was not very fit given his decadent lifestyle and aversion to
most forms of exercise, evidenced by reliefs.
35
Gore placed the idea of the Aten in the hands of
Amenhotep III as other authors had, but, instead of citing his laziness as being the cause of his
sons actions, he stated that Amenhotep had been the first to describe a link between the sun and
himself, and Akhenaten, seeking to outdo his father, created the religion.
36
Gore acknowledged
that it is impossible to tell how the people of Egypt actually viewed Akhenaten, or even how
outsiders view him, but brought up a piece of writing where the king repeatedly talks about an
unnamed it and how it is frustrating to him.
37
We may never know what this it was, but it
seems to have created trouble for the pharaoh at the start, which eventually resulted in much
political unrest. Gore used others findings on the subject as well as his own to present a well-
rounded viewpoint in the article. These include Rita Fried, an Egyptologist working with the
Boston Museum of Fine Arts, who set forth the idea of Akhenaten as a cult leader, and Nicholas
Reeves, an Egyptologist whose work and views were previously explored. Overall, Gores article
was once again very balanced and discusses many findings about Akhenaten without falling into
the trap of sensationalist theory.

34
Rick Gore, Pharaohs of the Sun, National Geographic, (April 2001).
35
Ibid.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid.
12

In 2006, a triad of authors, David P. Silverman, Josef W. Wegner and Jennifer Houser
Wegner wrote a book entitled Akhenaten and Tutankhamun: Revolution and Restoration, which
not only describes Akhenatens reign, but also how it linked to that of his son Tutankhamen. The
three authors have strong credentials, being not only professors of Egyptology, archaeology, and
museology, but also working as curators at the Penn Museum. The authors stated that Horemheb,
in a desperate effort to erase all trace of Akhenatens religion, also targeted the tombs of
Tutankhamen, even though the latter distanced himself from his father greatly, an idea that was
not brought up in previous texts.
38
Although Tutankhamen was not Akhenatens direct successor,
the two had some form of dynamic, as at first, Tutankhamen continued to have pieces of art
made of himself with the sun rays, but also used his original name at first Tutankhaten.
39
It is
unknown why he made the change back to tradition, but the fact that he operated under his
fathers tradition for some time is an interesting fact to point out. As for the authors descriptions
of Akhenaten himself, they noted that they understand many criticisms of him, stating that
historians are apt to make critiques due to his inaction toward outside threats and his preference
to lounge and party with his family.
40
Still, they presented a balanced image of Akhenaten,
noting that he had his flaws, but not attacking him with the vigor of other authors. They seemed
overall baffled by the appearance of the strange statues and appearance of Akhenaten in art,
discrediting the idea of him being presented with a dual gender, along with discrediting the idea
that the king was deformed.
41
Perhaps this is a step toward some actual answers about the bizarre
works of art. They highlighted Akhenatens status as an artist of the word as well as a patron of

38
David Silverman et. Al. Akhenaten and Tutankhamen: Revolution and Restoration, (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2006), pg 3.
39
Ibid., 165.
40
Ibid., 157.
41
Ibid., 17.
13

the arts, which he used to further his ideology.
42
Interestingly, they included descriptions of daily
life in Amarna, with some discussion of the artists, builders and citizens, agreeing with Reeves
on some aspects of their lives such as the continued worship of hearth gods and their increasing
malcontent with the pharaoh over time.
43
The book seemed fair and balanced in its depiction of
the two kings.
The final publication of this analysis is an article published in Smithsonian in 2007,
simply titled Rebellious Son, written by Andrew Lawler, who drew from the research and
theories of many Egyptologists, including Betsy Bryan of Johns Hopkins University, who
provided a very insightful quote. When referring to the historical content that has been written
about Akhenaten, she states, people tend to allow their fantasies to run wild, a statement that
applies to much of the research in the field that seems to be based on guesswork.
44
Meanwhile
Ray Johnson of the University of Chicago stated that although historians seem to like to place
moralistic values upon Akhenaten and why he acted as he did, there is still not enough historical
proof to either condemn him or uplift him.
45
The article began with a description of Akhenaten
defacing his fathers memorials, ordering the removal of Amun, and forcing the move to
Amarna, a rather negative note to start on.
46
He stated, however, that Akhenaten and his reign
has captured the imagination of historians, for better or for worse, as many of them seem to
invent facts and ideas as they go along. He brought up many ideas from other authors, such as
the aforementioned Johnson and Bryan that coincide with the ideas of previously mentioned
authors in this analysis, including the idea that Akhenatens father, Amenhotep III, influenced his

42
Ibid., 31.
43
Ibid., 122.
44
Andrew Lawler, Rebellious Son, Smithsonian, (Vol. 38, Issue 8, 2007).
45
Ibid.
46
Ibid.
14

religion and that some household gods were accepted during Akhenatens reign.
47
The article
was very short and brings up more questions than answers as to Akhenatens motivation, his
rationale, and his ideology. Lawler described Akhenaten as a true extremist, and, given his
negative introduction, seems to have resurrected the distaste for the pharaoh that some earlier
historians had.
The historiography of Akhenaten has no trends and hardly any consistencies and goes
from a negative portrayal of the ruler to a positive one even in the span of a year. Overall, the
main problems with the historiography, although there are many smaller ones, can be condensed
to three. Firstly, there is a preoccupation among historians with the pharaohs appearance in art,
and many authors spend chapters trying to figure out what his possible disease was, despite there
being no evidence of a disease at all, and, given the recent explorations of Akhenatens mummy,
disease theories have been largely disproven, finally putting the theories to rest. Secondly, there
is a problem with fragmented evidence. Due to the destruction of many artifacts pertaining to the
pharaoh and his rule, many historians see it fit to invent history as they go along. This can be a
very positive or negative practice as it creates a more coherent story, but also creates false,
troublesome truths. Finally, there is the issue of moral judgments being placed upon
Akhenaten. Many authors outright vilify him, while others describe negative aspects of his reign
and brush over positive ones as if they never happened. Moral judgments can create false truths
and negative images of people that may influence later historians to error.
Even though the mystic veil surrounding Akhenaten has been slowly lifted over the years
and people have begun depicting him as a simple human being and not some madman, prophet,
or even an alien figure, there are still some mysteries that need to be explored. Hopefully, with

47
Ibid.
15

time, more artifacts will be discovered detailing hidden aspects of his reign that will answer
some long-standing questions. Until this day comes, historians must make their best effort to
piece together the pieces of the shattered puzzle of Akhenatens life and reign without falling
into the traps of bias and scandal.