Akhenaten (Box, Carter Archive 001K)

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,792
Crows nest
Well it is interesting, and I read it all the way through. I'll not do a spoiler as it's interesting to read through all the arguments for and against before we get the answer.
 
Mar 2019
229
Peterborough, Ontario Canada
Well it is interesting, and I read it all the way through. I'll not do a spoiler as it's interesting to read through all the arguments for and against before we get the answer.
I agree and also wanted to apologize if you felt I was attacking you previously. It certainly was not my intention—I simply would love to discuss all of this free of comments towards one camp or the other that could be construed as dismissive (and I wasn’t referring to just you but to everybody). And if you felt that I did exactly that to you, I’m both mortified and apologetic.

I sincerely want to get to the truth of the matter, and am interested in what you’ve read to persuade you of there being no co-regency. You mentioned that you once felt there could be one of duration around 8 years, which is where I’m at currently and why I’m especially interested in what convinced you otherwise.

In your opinion—or anyone else’s, who’d like to join in—mounted more towards no co-regency? You mentioned Bailey’s article which I’m familiar with, and I posted some other articles, including this one by Allen, that have given me pause for thought.

But so far, unless more evidence comes to light or I’m pointed towards papers with evidence that I’m not yet familiar with, I believe that Murnane, Allen, Aldred, Johnson and Luban provide convincing counter-arguments to the evidence presented by those in favour of no co-regency.

But I’m open to persuasion and anything you can point me towards would be gratefully appreciated.
 
Nov 2016
773
Germany
I believe that Murnane, Allen, Aldred, Johnson and Luban provide convincing counter-arguments to the evidence presented by those in favour of no co-regency.
In order to create a balance, I take the liberty to list a couple of opponents of the long-co-regency theory who either don't accept any co-regency or only accept a very short one, namely Redford, Gardiner, Reeves, Gabolde, Hornung (“A co-regency between the two kings is untenable”), Krauss, Dodson, Dorman, Berman, Cline, Helck, and Campbell.

To augment your list: Some more experts who favor a longer co-regency are Petrie, Hayes, and Habicht.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Kyla

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,147
Bendigo
In order to create a balance, I take the liberty to list a couple of opponents of the long-co-regency theory who either don't accept any co-regency or only accept a very short one, namely Redford, Gardiner, Reeves, Gabolde, Hornung (“A co-regency between the two kings is untenable”), Krauss, Dodson, Dorman, Berman, Cline, Helck, and Campbell.

To augment your list: Some more experts who favor a longer co-regency are Petrie, Hayes, and Habicht.
I am totally undecided about the Coregency question, but I wonder, if no Coregency, should we then abdandon the Akhenaten-Neferneferuaten coregency as well? Would it be useful to discuss the pros and cons for that? Is a Coregency tenable for those two, I wonder? Maybe it would be worthwhile for us here to discuss that issue?
 
Mar 2019
229
Peterborough, Ontario Canada
I am totally undecided about the Coregency question, but I wonder, if no Coregency, should we then abdandon the Akhenaten-Neferneferuaten coregency as well? Would it be useful to discuss the pros and cons for that? Is a Coregency tenable for those two, I wonder? Maybe it would be worthwhile for us here to discuss that issue?
Murnane is considered one of the leading authorities on Egyptian Co-Regencies, as he held an extreme interest in them and this is the link to his magnum opus on them:

https://oi.uchicago.edu/sites/oi.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/shared/docs/saoc40.pdf

But do check out the other authors mentioned in previous posts as well. Tammuz mentioned a couple that I’m not yet familiar with and look forward to reading as well.
 
Likes: Ayrton

Ayrton

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,147
Bendigo
Here is an interesting link to an article by James Allen on another graffito from Dahshur, that would seem to imply a coregency between AIII and AIV/Akhenaten of a minimum of 7 years:
http://www.jacobusvandijk.nl/docs/GraffDahshur.pdf
A start of a Coregency before year 28 is intriguing. That would make Akhenaten’s Year 12 plausibly line up with Amenophis III’s year 39. I still think of Aldred’s suggestion that the Year 12 Durbar was a celebration of Akhenaten’s step up to being sole Pharaoh.
 
Nov 2016
773
Germany
I am totally undecided about the Coregency question
Well, to be honest, I think that the initial decision whether pro or contra co-regency of father and son is made intuitively by the vast majority. Of course, this is not meant to be derogatory, since intuition is an important method in science (and also in criminalistics). On the other hand, it can hardly be distinguished from a purely emotional decision based rather on prejudice. I have much experience with similar pro-contra debates in other areas (question of gender of the first deities, question of the historical existence of Jesus), which are a much more heated battlefield than the comparatively harmless question of the co-regency of A III and A IV, so it does not surprise me that in Egyptology there is an analogous variant of such controversies.

I see the reason for this in the father-son issue, which is one of the fundamental problems in human societies. Freud has created the concept of the Oedipus complex in this regard. As I have already indicated weeks ago, the father problem is also an important aspect of the religious fanaticism of Akhenaten, and it is precisely for this reason that the question of co-regency is of particular importance, because the way in which the father problem which is manifested in Akhenaten's Atenism is to be approached and explained depends on the answers. My personal decision contra co-regency is therefore based on the intuition (which can be rationally justified afterwards) that the peculiarities of Akhenaten's Atenism are much easier to explain if he has conducted his reign entirely or very largely without fatherly companionship. From a psychological point of view, I consider it impossible that during and after a co-regency of 4 or 8 or more years, the development of Atenism could have occurred as it did (although I reject the assessment that Akhenaten was a monotheist, rather he was an overzealous henotheist). That's why I think that a regency independent of the father should be assumed, as long as the circumstantial evidence doesn't refute it (and some speak clearly for it anyway, as I think, e.g. EA 27).

I'll come back to the other question of a co-regency between Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten.
 
Last edited:

AlpinLuke

Ad Honoris
Oct 2011
26,217
Italy, Lago Maggiore
My impression about a "coregency" between Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV is that it was probably similar to the one between Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten: one Monarch in a palace to deify himself, the other one aorund the country to run the administration, the Army, the temples ... I still consider the evidences of the activity of Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten in a border fortress [Tell El Borg] useful to understand.

So, this is my opinion, I suspect that it wasn't exactly about a coregency, but about a kind of division of rules. One was the deified Monarch, the other was the ruling Sovereign.

Now, we haven't got preserved monuments, but the talatats and the sections of constructions don't show couples of Monarchs, like in the case of the buildings wanted by Hatshepsut. I would say that Hatshepsut and Thutmose III knew a proper coregency, while I beging to think that the two Amenhotep and then Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten knew something slightly different. If something happened for real between the two Monarchs.
 
Likes: Kyla

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,792
Crows nest
Now, we haven't got preserved monuments, but the talatats and the sections of constructions don't show couples of Monarchs, like in the case of the buildings wanted by Hatshepsut. I would say that Hatshepsut and Thutmose III knew a proper coregency, while I beging to think that the two Amenhotep and then Akhenaten and Neferneferuaten knew something slightly different. If something happened for real between the two Monarchs.
Lack of any mention of Amunhotep III as a living king at Akehnaten's Karnak constructions seriously mitigates against them reigning at the same time. Building, still as Amunhotep IV, such an edifice as the Gempaaten without the presence of a joint, and senior king, is not feasible, and that goes also for the Hwt-bnbn. Excuses can be made for the temples at Akhetaten constructed when he had become Akhenaten, but not at Karnak.
 

Similar History Discussions