Читать книгу The Golden Mask of King Tut The Code - Jesús Ariel Aguirre - Страница 13

The origin of the Hebrew people, their ties with Egypt and their settlement in Palestine are subjects of debate even today, no less so is the origin of monotheism, closely linked to the figure of Moses, Hebrew leader and legislator, without whose presence history of Israel would be incomprehensible. Precisely, the trajectory followed by monotheism in the Ancient World has originated various hypotheses with which researchers try to explain its emergence, in the Near East, Egypt or Palestine without having managed to overturn the balance for any of them specifically.

The Finding in 1887 of the letters (379) clay tablets of the pharaohs Amenhitep III and his son, Akhenaten (Amenophis IV), at Tell El Amarna, as well as the hymn of Aton in the tomb of the vizier Ay, and the Statues discovered by Henri Chevrier in 1925 at Karnak, they made evident the existence of what was, for some, a heroic reforming pharaoh, leader of a religious revolution in Egypt.

From then on, his historical figure would be linked to Hebrew monotheism and Moses. In fact, it has been speculated that Aton’s followers were religious émigrés who, led by an Egyptian prince (Moses?) Settled in Canaan and spread the belief of a single god from there. One of the proofs of this would be, in the opinion of some historians, in the similarity and similarities that Psalm 104 presents, attributed to Davis and the hymn to Aton of the pharaoh Akhenaten.

What is true in all this? Were Moses and Akhenaten the origins of monotheism? Are there historical indicators that link Akhenaten to Moses? Was this last disciple of the first? Were they perhaps the same person? Finally, was there a true monotheism in Egypt?

Let’s start by saying that the patriarch Moses developed and gave written form to the Jewish worship of Jehovah as the only God. Monotheistic cult that practiced the Semitic culture for years.

What happens is that according to the record of Moses himself when he faced the Egyptian pharaoh, it has always been believed that this was Ramses II (1304-1214). According to (Gen 47:11 “Joseph made his father and brothers dwell and gave them possession in the land of Egypt in the best of the land of Rameses”, Exodus 12:37 “they proceeded from Rameses”, Num. 33: 3, 5) and this was the son of Seti I, this son of Ramses I, the trusted general of Pharaoh Horemheb, the last of the 18th dynasty, Ramses I (ruled 1295 to 1294 BC) would begin the 19th dynasty and would be the founder of the Lineage of the Ramenidas. (Horemheb married Nefertiti’s sister, Mutnedymet, he had nothing to do with the ancestral 18th dynasty, thus he entered the royal family and ruled the country with an iron hand, erasing from him all traces of his immediate predecessors, protagonists of the “Amarna Schism.” His alliance with the oligarchy and the army and with the priests of Amun, made possible his ascent to the throne, restored his privileges, and began to plan the destruction of the city Ajetaton, which Akhenaten had built. At his death, after 28 reigning, he was succeeded by Ramses I. Let us remember that Ay was an authentic political animal that had been able to survive four different reigns and managed to be crowned pharaoh in his old age. Apparently Ay was the father of Nefertiti, but despite being related to the “heretics of Amarna” he was successful in any conspiracy and before being crowned he was the vizier of the child-king Tutankhamun, a puppet of his. eb, that on his death he would succeed him, for which reason he had to marry Mutnedymet.

Let’s go back to Ramses I, whose history is safeguarded in the Temple of Luxor. The pharaohs prior to Ramses I, had died without leaving heirs, the last royal pharaoh was Tutankhamun and he had no children since he died very young. This was succeeded by Ay and Horemheb, the latter being the one who appointed Ramses I as co-regent of Egypt or then called Paramessu.

As we said he was not of royal blood, he was born in the small town of Avaris, located in the delta of the Nile. His father was commander of the Troops and head of the royal archers. When Horemheb died in 1305 BC Paramessu was crowned King of Upper and Lower Egypt.

With the name of Menpehtire Ramses, or better known as Ramses I who was the first of 11 pharaohs known as the Ramesida dynasty. Sitra his Great Royal wife was the founder of the Valley of the Queens, and from that reign onward, all the royal wives and princes were buried in that Valley. His reign lasted only two years, so his gifts as king are not known, which was succeeded by his son Sethy I, the father of Ramses II.

But let’s go back to other dates about Moses that the biblical record gives us again. When was Moses born? Let’s do the math.

The fourth year of Solomon’s reign is estimated to be about 1007 BC.

The Exodus was 480 years before the fourth of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 6: 1) 1487 BC.

After the exodus, Israel was in the wilderness for 40 years (Num. 32:13) until 1447 BC.

Moses was 120 years old at the time (Deut. 34: 7), so he was born 1567 BC.

Therefore Akhenaten was not of the same time, since two centuries separate him at least. Akhenaton ruled between 1353-1336 BC.

Moses was then born in 1567 BC and Ramses II in 1304 BC. So they are separated by 263 years, it is not Ramses II who contended with Moses either.

Let’s explain it in another way, for some; Israel arose in Canaanite territory around the 12th century BC from the gradual union of several tribes, indigenous and foreign, with a common past, which formed leagues of defense and mutual aid. For foreign attacks, but their real nation dates back to the fifteenth century, in the geographical historical setting configured by Egypt and Palestine, at this point we will cite documents from the New Egyptian Empire and the Hittite Empire (fifteenth and fourteenth centuries BC) in those who speak of nomads called hapiru, one of whose branches has wanted to identify with the Hebrews. Whether or not there is any relationship, if it could be proven that there were Semitic captives (hapiru) in the reign of Amenophis II (1450-1425), and in the reign of Sethi I (1312-1298), who were educated in the Egyptian court, thus the Hebrew tradition of the captivity of Egypt and the higher education of Moses are not as antehistoric, as has been claimed. Likewise, the exodus could be accepted as the emigration of a people (an unusual fact in antiquity), although there are no direct anti-biblical references. It is also to remember that the stela of Pharaoh Merneptah (XIII century) cites Israel among the peoples established in Canaan, that their people uses the determinative for people, it was not for place. Therefore, the emigration to the Promised Land and the events that mark it, had to have occurred prior to the 13th century, which does not place it in the immediate previous centuries.

According to the Bible, Moses was born in Lower Egypt (in Gosen) and his name is very common in the country, it means “Drawn, or saved from the water.” Despite the favored position that Egypt offered him, Moses felt linked to his Hebrew people and it was only at the age of forty when he could no longer bear the martyrdom of his people in Egypt that he rebelled and was exiled 40 years in Madiam. That was when he had divine contact with an angel of Jehovah and returned to save his captive people.

He would be the key figure in the “battle of the gods” that broke out between the gods of Egypt and the god of Moses (Exodus 7 to 12 where he mentions the 10 plagues).

So far the biblical story. Is there any archaeological, pictorial or written support for it? First of all, the first question to be investigated is whether the existence of Moses can be proven (beyond what seems probable or not) and determine the time in which he lived. It is not news that the historicity of Moses has been repeatedly questioned to this day, and since no direct records are available, his life is often viewed as a legend.

This leads us to analyze the same Musaic traditions and their source, the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, attributed to the patriarch Moses himself.

From the internal point of view, Freud in 1937, who proposed an Egyptian origin for Moses, argued that the analysis of the legend that frames his birth, upbringing and return to the town of origin, does not agree with the typical patterns of a legend, in which the hero is born into a powerful family, grows up in a poor family, and after many hardships he regains his original place. And actually the story of Moses does not fit the structure of this type of novel. On the other hand, consider the internal content of the Pentateuch, we see that both in terms of name, customs and religion as well as places, geography and killers, the accumulation of external archaeological evidence confirms that its records were made by someone who did know the culture. Egyptian on the inside, which coincides with the biblical fact that Moses, was brought up in “all the wisdom of Egypt.”

Flavius Josephus, Jewish historian in his Jewish Antiquities, book II, ch. XII, sec. 4 refers to the fact that archeology shows that the Egyptians used to admit the dwelling of foreigners in their country, but they kept separate from them, as the Pentateuch indicates. The waters of the Nile were used for bathing, which reminds us that Pharaoh’s daughter bathed there. Bricks made of straw and without it have been found. Additionally, magicians were prominent during the height of the Egyptian New Kingdom. The monuments show the pharaohs of the days of Moses followed these customs.

Also what about the historical Hebrew traditions? Did the memory of Moses survive for millennia? Was it a real or a fictional character? Let’s see some:

1 Silver scrolls found in a Hebrew tomb from the 7th century BC, prior to the time of the captivity, which contained passages from the Pentateuch.

2 More than a hundred papyri from the 5th century BC found in Elephantine, Egypt produced by the Jewish community there.

3 The Arsham scrolls, containing letters to Persian governors sent to Egypt.

4 THE Samaritan Pentateuch dating from the 4th century BC

5 The Egyptian historian Maneton (3rd century BC)

6 The Greek Septuagint or version of the seventies written in Greek in Alexandria, Egypt, in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-246 BC)

7 And the writings of the Hellenistic king Antiochus (164-167 BC)

8 To these they add other Greco-Roman sources such as Diosoro, Hecateo de Andera, Lisimaco de Alejandría, Eupolemo, Tacito and Numenio, who attribute to Moses the institution of the code of laws of the Hebrew people.

But it is also possible that no remains of the Israelites are found because they are looking at the wrong time. The departure in times of Ramses II is not derived from the bible or the internal chronology. Considering the biblical reference that “Israel worked in the construction of the cities of Pitom and Raamses (Exodus 1:11), some historians place it in the XIX Dynasty whose pharaohs (Sethi I and Ramses II) carried out a great construction activity in the delta of the Nile. And in that sense they point to an inscription from the time of Ramses II in which they speak of “Pr”, that is to say, Semites, as “those who drag the stone blocks for the great fortress of the city Pi -Ramses-Meri-Amon ”.

However, considering that the place of these sites, Piton (House of Atum) and Raamses, has not been categorically identified; and that actually the biblical text says that the Hebrews made bricks, not that they dragged stones. Another aspect they overlook is that the name Ramses was already in use in the 18th century BC, so there is no reason to suppose that the use of that name in the Bible has to do with Ramses II (1290-1230). During his reign there were already several cities bearing that name.

In this regard, the historian BD Redforf says: “It does not seem that the biblical Ramses and the capital PR R-ms-sw ´Per-Ramses´ have more in common than the name.” Due to the total absence of corroborating evidence, extreme caution must be exercised before equating locations. Note that Josephus in his Jewish Antiquities says that the Hebrews departed from Letopolis, near Memphis, and not Per Ramses. The name Ramses himself is inscribed on a painting of the tomb of Pharaoh Amenhotep III, who ruled almost 100 years before Ramses II. The date that seems probable to us must be placed two centuries earlier, in the environment of the expulsion of the Asians. Which is why unearthing the archaeological evidence for the life of Moses and the Israelites in Egypt depends in part on searching in the right place and at the right time, which I estimate is not being done.

So when did Moses live? If we are guided by the internal chronology of the Bible, Moses must have lived between the 16th or 15th centuries BC. C., which would coincide with the time when the hapiru were taken captive in Egypt, around the reign of Amenophis II (16th century), or a century later, in the 13th century BC But, not a few wonder, how can I The figure of Moses being united with that of Akhenaten, the memory of this pharaoh had been erased from Egyptian history long before the birth of Moses. If Moses lived a century after Akhenaten, there was no longer any memory of his feat. Only his was contemporary could there be a relationship.

Lein asks a bit confused:

Was Ramses II the Pharaoh of the Jewish Exodus?

Well inevitably we must talk about him, as we saw he ruled in the City of Pi-Ramsés. He married Nefertari Meryetmut, the great royal wife, and had several children over a hundred according to some historians, but with her only seven, the first-born would be the one who died during the last plague sent by the god of Moses, if this were Pharaoh of the narration.

But Ramses II could not be the pharaoh of the Jewish exodus, since the data and years do not coincide. The Bible says that the Israelites built Rameses and since Rameses II ruled during the years 1290-1224 BC, he built a royal city called Pi-Rameses, many assume that this was the mentioned pharaoh, however some recent excavations at this site indicate that this city was occupied much earlier by the Egyptians.

Exactly 150 years apart. Now although the Bible does not specifically identify the pharaoh mentioned in Exodus by name, it does say the exact date of the exodus.

1 Kings states that Solomon began building the Temple during the fourth to his reign, 480 years after the exodus. Most Bible scholars agree that the fourth year of Solomon’s reign was 967 BC. C.

So the date of the exodus can be calculated to be 1447 BC And according to history, Pharaoh Ramses did not begin his reign until around 1290 BC. C., so that it could not be the pharaoh mentioned in the Exodus.

The theory promoted by Prime Minister of Israel Meanachem Begin in 1977 that the Israelites were the slaves used to build the pyramids is also not true. It is an argument that neither accepts nor criticizes, since historians and archaeologists assure that the pyramids were built between the 27th and 24th centuries BC. C. Hundreds of years before the arrival of the Jews in Egypt. Indeed, the Moses on which the story is based once existed and is estimated to have been between the 14th and 13th centuries BC. C.

The Old Testament does not specify which pharaoh reigned over Egypt at the time of Moses. Depending on which history book we read, there are two possible candidates. The first is Amenhotep II (1450-1425 BC), son of Tuthmosis III (1490-1450 or 1436 BC) as the other possible candidate.

If Tuthmosis II was the pharaoh from whom Moses fled, it is possible that Tuthmosis III was the pharaoh of the Exodus. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote the following: “It happened that the pharaoh, from whom Moses had fled, died and a new ruler took his place.”

After the death of Tuthmosis II, his son, not the one he had with Hatshepsut, became the pharaoh. If Tuthmosis III ruled jointly with Queen Hatshepsut until her death in 1482 BC. He then ruled alone until about 1480 BC.

It is also known that Tuthmosis III was so jealous of the acts performed by Queen Hatshepsut that one of his first acts, after she died, was to purge her name from almost all the monuments of Egypt.

Although the Bible does not mention these events, Josephus states, “There was a state of war between Egyptians and Ethiopians. By that time Moses had grown up and became a man.

The two sides participated in a terrible battle in which the Ethiopians were victorious and went on trying to conquer Egypt. The Egyptians seeking help, questioned their priests and they revealed that they should appoint Moses their general. Thus it was that Moses became a general or commander of the great Egyptian army. In a surprise attack on the Ethiopians, Moses led his troops to victory.

It may be that Tuthmosis III, jealous of Moses’ victory over the Ethiopians, credited him. Josephus also writes: “Then the Pharaoh from whom Moses had fled died and another ruler took power. Moses traveled to his palace and reminded him of the victories he had won for Egypt in the war against the Ethiopians. He also spoke to Pharaoh about what had happened to him on Mount Sinai and when Pharaoh laughed, Moses showed him signs. “

According to the Bible, after the ten plagues that God had sent against Egypt, Israel was able to leave there, but Pharaoh was at the head of his army to pursue them to the Red Sea.

According to Psalm 136: 13-15: “To him who divided the Red Sea into parts and made Israel pass through it, and drove Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea.” This passage shows that the pharaoh died in the incident. So in that case the date of the Exodus in 1447 BC, which is recorded in the Bible, is synonymous with the death of Pharaoh Tuthmosis III, which most historians estimate to have taken place in 1450 BC.

The other theory is Moses fled from Tuthmosis III, and that the pharaoh of the exodus his son Amenhotep II, although there is a gap of 66 years here, let’s sees.

A surprising fact related to Amenhotep II was that his successor was neither his first-born nor his heir.

This is confirmed by Exodus 4: 22-23 “And you shall say to Pharaoh: The Lord has thus said Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have already told you to let my son (town) go to serve me, but you have not wanted to serve me, but you have not wanted to let him go; here I am going to kill your son, your firstborn”.

The chronology makes the Exodus coincide with the reign of Amenhotep II, namely the year 1513 BC (66 years back).

The truth is that both pharaohs had a great army and that they led Egypt to great conquests. Something that did not happen after them, their successors Tutmosis IV, Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV (Akheanton) in which Egypt drastically ceases its war campaigns and opts for much more peaceful relations with its neighbors.

From the reign of Tutmosis IV, changes began to be made that led to the Amarna religious crisis as Amarna was the new place of worship established by Akhenaten.

Biblical researchers in the late 19th century viewed Amenhotep II as the pharaoh of the exodus, but criticism from secular historians who preferred to locate Ramses II left Amenhotep II aside, even though Ramses II does not fit the bill. Biblical chronology, nor has any foundation since his mummy was found and rested in the Valley of the Kings and the Pharaoh of the exodus ended up under the waters of the Red Sea.

Another relevant fact is that Tutmosis IV ascended the throne unexpectedly, when his father Amenhotep II died, not being the first-born. There is no secular explanation that can explain it or say that it happened.

The mummy of Amenhotep II seems not to have been found, the mummy that they say would be of him, is not well identified and there are doubts regarding Amenhotep II. On the other hand, other mummies like those of Tutmosis III are well confirmed.

During Akhenaten’s reign (approximately 50 years after the death of Amenhotep II), the Egyptian ambassadors informed him that they were no longer respected by the nations (probably due to the humiliations received against monkeys from the god of the Hebrews and the losses suffered).

The biblical account also harmonizes with secular history in many details, for example: The pharaoh who got up in time and did not know Joseph would be Tuthmosis I. This would be the one who ordered to kill the babies and Moses was saved in the river and the princess who rescued him and adopted Moses, would be Hats h epsut herself. The pharaoh who tried to kill Moses when he found out that he had killed an Egyptians would be Tuthmosis III. His reign was one of the longest (more than 50 years), coinciding with the following statement from Exodus 2:23 “And during those many days it happened that the king of Egypt finally died, but the children of Israel continued to sigh because of of slavery”. And the pharaoh who succeeded him was precisely Amenhotep II, who was known for following the same policy as his father.

The campaign of Tuthmosis III to erase the memory of Hatshepsut and Senenmut occurred several decades after her death, about 40 years after the death of Amenhotep II, when they had enough reasons to hate them (to him for being the guilty of her misfortunes and her for having cared for and protected Moses during the first 40 years).

As we see there are many points in common that would indicate Amenhotep II as the pharaoh of the exodus (for example the story of the Hyksos, which harmonizes perfectly with this chronology and with these events).

Thus it is clear that in the time of Moses Pharaoh Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) had not yet been born. As many agree, they are at least 100 years apart.

Now, the case of Akhenaten (1350-1334 BC) is different in this sense, because the direct proofs about his existence (monuments, inscriptions, reliefs, statues, etc.) are quite abundant, but what is unnecessary to go deeper into this aspect . However, on the contrary, the personality of the Egyptian reformer is very controversial. The pendulum has swung from considering him an idealistic, ultra-pacifist dreamer, disinterested in worldly affairs, to seeing him as a power-hungry tyrant seeking to impose his absolute authority in Egypt. Recently Nicolas Reeve (2002), director of the royal tombs project of Tell El-Amarna (ancient capital of the god Aton - Ajetaton) shows very documented a pharaoh who was not exactly Moses (as if Freud assumed) but rather a sectarian, victim of his own fantasies who failed to want to impose his religion. Since we could continue with the hypotheses, the figure of Akhenaten is very ambiguous.

Many let their imagination and thoughts fly when dealing with the origin of monotheism, and the links between Moses and Akhenaten. They are often built on false assumptions and hypotheses, without any historical basis. And in their eagerness to point out similarities between the religion of Akhenaten and that of Moses, they elude the fundamental question, was Akhenaten really Monothelite?

A “unique God” also sometimes refers to other Egyptian gods in different respects. It was a fairly common attribution among the gods. One of those cases is clear that of Amun, Aton’s rival. In one of the hymns dedicated to Amun it is said that this god is: “(...) the one who is unique and whose arms are numerous” and then in another place he says that he is: “The One and Only, creator of what exists “And” the Only King, Unique among the gods, with multiple names, whose number is unknown. “

Also in a stela at Gizeh this concept about Amun is reiterated. From what we see Akhenaten attributes to Aton qualities that Amun also has.

A hymn from the time of Amenhotep III begins by talking about the: “Adoration of Amun, when he rises in Harakhti, by the directors of workers Amun, Seth and Horis: health to you, beautiful of Ra of every day (...)”.

In this sense, it is also worth remembering the Hymn to Osiris, from the time of Amenophis III, in which the praises of Ra were sung and Aton was invoked:

“Cheers to you, Aton of the day, which also recalls the oldest solar hymn of Merikara. Only the protocol granted to Harakhti is new. Ra, Harakhti and Shu made up a kind of trinity of heaven. At one point early in his reign he shows Aton of the day with the head of a hawk on a man’s body, with a red sun disk. It is the traditional image of the Harakhti under the name of Shu who is Aton”.

As we see both Amon and Aton are attributed a link with Ra and Horajthu, that is, Horus, adding in the case of Aton a relationship with the god Shu.

Osiris, popular god, also participated in the fusion movement. There was no rejection of the Osirian cult by Akhenaten, as has sometimes been suggested.

Then Akheanton was not monotheistic, although he worshiped the solar disk and its rays.

Others have compared the similarities of the Hymn of Aton and Psalm 104.

“The sun knows well where it sets. You (God) keep the darkness so that it becomes night” (v19-20)

The truth is that the psalms were finished writing in 460 BC, about a thousand years after Akheanton, when the monarch had been completely forgotten.

Therefore, any claim that the monotheism of the writings of Moses stemmed from Egyptian influence is without foundation.

Akhenaten’s Atonism was not entirely monotheistic as we saw; only that Egyptian society was not prepared for a single god of absolutely all things in Akhenaten’s time.

Egypt only had a single god when they were under Roman rule and Christianity spread throughout the Nile. Like today in which Orthodox Christianity is still professed together with Islam.

What about the unknown life of Queen Nefertiti? Adds Anne.

Thomas reminds her when she located him in Berlin; he was better inspecting the queen’s bust.

If she answers of course, I convinced you to come to Egypt and you will help me with the note about the inauguration of the National Museum of Egyptiam Civilization (MMEC).

I contemplated that bust overwhelmed by so much beauty, but its history is even more incredible, since it is believed that I came to be one of the Pharaoh Queens who ruled this vast ancient empire.

The modern world first heard of its existence in December 1912. As part of the second of several winter campaigns organized by the German Oriental Society, the architect and Egyptologist Ludwig Borchardt undertook the excavations of the ruins of the defunct city of Ajtaton. The scientist, who since 1907 directed the German Institute of Egyptian Sciences of Antiquity in Cairo, was looking for, at the express request of Kaiser Wilhelm II, objects of artistic value and archaeological interest with which to supply the Royal Museums of Berlin. The company had its good dose of national pride, megalomania and rivalry with France and Great Britain: the Louvre and the Brirish Museum had long shown interest in the treasures of ancient Egyptian civilization as well.

The bust was discovered on December 6, 1912, by the German archaeologist Ludwig Brochardt, it is believed that this limestone sculpture preceding the Great Temple of Aton in Ajetaton, only 50 centimeters tall, was completed by the artist Tuthmosis in 1345 BC The piece immortalized Nefertiti as an ideal symbol of feminine beauty.

It is said that shortly after stopping for lunch, as Borchardt wrote in his diary, they claimed his presence at house P47.2 as soon as possible. Fragments of a life-size bust had just appeared in room 19 of the sculptor Tutmosis’s workshop. The workers continued to excavate towards the east wall, through a pile of rubble of more than one meter. More pieces came to light, especially short busts. Various of Nefertiti. And then a flesh-colored nape appeared with ribbons painted in red. The men put their shovels aside and continued to dig and remove the sand with their hands. By exposing the bottom of the piece, they recognized the back of a dark blue royal crown. What Borchardt’s team exhumed from the Amarna rubble that afternoon was something fabulous: a two-foot-high, 3,260-year-old polychrome bust. His ears were damaged and the inlay from the iris of his left eye had disappeared, but the tooth was otherwise unscathed. Excited, Boechardt noted in his diary: “We had in our hands the most vibrant work of Egyptian art.” In compliance with the law, which stipulated that all the finds should be made known, the researcher then began a negotiation with the Frenchman Gustave Lefebvre, representative of the Egyptian archaeological authority. Borchardt, a member of the German Oriental Society, then sent the bust to Berlin, where it was kept under lock and key for twelve years before being presented to the public for the first time in 1924.

Madness broke out; the Berlin exhibition caused a sensation. Nefertiti rose to fame overnight. Turned into a silent star, she immediately filled the covers of magazines around the world.

The bust has become his image in the eyes of the modern world, especially for its characteristic blue crown. She is one of the most famous icons of Ancient Egypt, and yet the queen she portrays is still surrounded by mystery and intrigue. Although she was not a ruler, Nefertiti is key figures in history thanks to her influential position as wife and queen, something that is reflected in the representations of her that survive to this day. Historians have deduced that Nefertiti was one of the main defenders of Akhenaten’s religious and cultural movements, she represented the feminine aspect of Aton while her husbands represented the masculine, together they acted as a bridge between Aton and the Egyptian people.

What else do we know about her? As expected at the time, Nefertiti married Amenhotep IV when she was only 15 years old.

It is also believed that she had royal lineage, for some historians, she was the daughter of Ay, an important advisor to several pharaohs; including Akhenaten husband of Nefertiti (Ay even became pharaoh after Tutankhamun’s death in 1323 BC). Other scholars speculate that she was a princess from the kingdom of Mtani, located in northern Syria, what we know is that she had a sister named Mutbenret (or Mutnodjemet), and it appears in Amarna art that has survived to this day.

Nefertiti was Akhenaten’s favorite consort, or Great Royal Wife, from the beginning of his reign. According to historical records, Nefertiti had six daughters with Akhenaten named Meritaten, Meketaten, Ankhes-em-pa-aten, Neferneferuaten-tasherit, Neferneferure, and Setepenre. Despite not having male children, Amarna art portrays that the couple had a strong and loving relationship. Nefertiti also appears in a wide variety of roles, be it driving floats, in ceremonial acts with the King, and killing her enemies. One theory holds that she became co-regent with her husband under the name of Neferneferuaton. It is even thought that, on the death of her husband, she became queen-pharaoh for a short period of time under the name of Semenejkara.

We only know that he lived almost 3,500 years ago in a fascinating period in Egyptian history. However, the details of his biography are an enigma and a field on which archaeologists do not agree. I undoubtedly hold a leading role in the royal court of Amarna, the horizon of the sun, the new capital founded by the great Akhenaten in honor of the solar disk.

Some experts advise not to overestimate the position of the queen; others argue that he enjoyed the same prerogatives, if not more, than Ajenaton himself. Recently the merited German Egyptologist Hermann Schlogl perplexed the academic world by claiming that Nefertiti was the true engine of the religious revolution of her time and responsible for such radical transformations. Schlogl has re-translated a long-known inscription from the Great Hall of Columns in the Karnak temple, and in his reinterpretation argues that the queen claims to have pulled Aton, which would be evidence of her active role. Added to this is the fact that Nefertiti possessed two cartridges (names that appear in the inscriptions surrounded by an oval rope with knotted ends), a privilege reserved for the pharaoh, while the other pharaoh wives were assigned a single cartridge.

Schlogl’s claims are controversial. The specialist in the Amarna period Christian Loeben, professor at the University of Gotina and director of the Egyptian collection at the August Kestner Museum in Hannover, flatly rejects what he calls fantasies. “Nefertiti had neither voice nor vote, on the political or religious level - he asserts-. The only reason that his role was so prominent, always alongside Ajenaton, was because it suited Pharaoh’s theology. “

Not even his grave has been found, although several times they have been slow to award him one.

For the English Egyptologist Nicholas Reeves, he believes that the tomb of the legendary queen is hidden behind walls located north of the burial chamber of Tutankhamun. Based on several recently published high-resolution photographs, he deduces that the walls of the burial chamber of tomb KV62 in the Valley of the Kings reveal marked linear features beneath the stuccoed surface with painted scenes, Reeves says in a recently published study. Reeves describe these hidden features in the walls as “two doors that had not been recognized until now.” According to the most recent analysis, behind the north wall there is a “hole” up to 1.5 meters in diameter and 2 meters deep. That wall to the north is the same one that contains the remains of organic materials and metal, according to the Egyptian antiquities holder, Mamdouh El Damaty. If these organic materials correspond to the remains of Nefertiti, “it could be the discovery of the century for Egypt, said the minister.

And he considers that these doors give access to two independent chambers: a storage chamber to the west of Tutankhamun’s burial chamber and a continuation of KV62 to the north, prior to Tutankhamun’s time, “which would contain the owner’s intact burial original from the tomb, Nefertiti.”

Last November, a group of archaeologists led by the Japanese Hirokatsu Waranabe analyzed the walls of the tomb with infrared radar, managing to confirm the existence of empty spaces behind the two walls of the burial chamber of the monarch Tut Ankh Amon.

It is believed that these hidden chambers could be the final resting place of the legendary Nefertiti, who reigned in Egypt during the 14th century BC and is presumed to be the stepmother of Tut Ankh Amon.

Also according to Reeves, he must have occupied the kingdom, after Akhenaten’s death in 1336 BC a brief interregnum during which Nefertiti had to occupy the throne of Egypt under the name of Semenejkara, then his immediate successor was Tutankhamun who died prematurely at the age of 19 age. It is here that he believes that “During Nefertiti’s burial in KV62 there was surely no intention for Tutankhamun to occupy” the same tomb in due course. This idea materialized until the early and unexpected death of the king a decade later. As there was no excavated grave for him, the KV62 was used, reopened and made accessible to include a new camera.

Another tomb that was discarded was KV35. Other archaeologists claim to have found the remains of Nefertiti along with other mummies, such as the younger brother of the Pharaoh as well as Princess Tiye, the possible mother of Akhenaten, these remains were found in the tomb KV35 in a place called the Valley of the Kings. And although there were disputes about the veracity of the find, the very Director of the Higher Council of Antiquities of Egypt, affirmed that the existing tests are inefficient to determine that this is the mummy of Queen Nefertiti. Leaving the results of the investigation invalid.

Of all the stages of Egyptian history, none seems to be as captivating and full of mysteries as the so-called Amarna Schism. One of the great questions is, precisely, the existence of one of the characters with the name of Neferneferuaton (exquisite is the beauty of Aton).

The first time this name appears is in the fourth year of the reign of Amenhotep IV, when his name is definitively changed to Ajenaton. At the same time, the Great Royal Wife Nefertiti acquires the aforementioned name, and has since become known as Neferneferuaton Nefertiti.

In the 14th year of Akhenaten’s reign, Nefertiti disappears from the annals and the figure of the great royal wife is replaced by her eldest daughter, Meritaton. At the same time, a correjente of Ajenaton appears whose name is Anjet-Jeperu-Ra Merit-Ua-RaNefer-Neferu-Aton (or Anjetjeperura Neferneferuaton, Ajenaton’s beloved). This indicates that the co-regent was a woman, and since Meritaton already the great royal wife, suspicions fall on Nefertiti, who would not have died, but changed her name.

This Anjetjeperura disappears again shortly afterwards and is replaced by another name, which is identical to the previous one, but in masculine: Anj-Jeperu-Ra Mery-Ua-En-Ra Nefer-Nefer-Aton (or Anjjeperura Meryuaenra, the beloved of Ajenaton). Which indicates this, or that Ajenaton had a homosexual relationship with this substitute for Nefertiti or that this co-regent was nothing more than Nefertiti herself who, like Queen Hatshepsut, would have “changed” her sex, in order to be able to act as pharaoh. Yes, for some she became the successor queen-pharaoh by renaming herself Smenkhkare. If true Nefertiti occupies a position similar to those of Hatshepsut, who ruled Egypt in the manner of a king, even wearing the false ceremonial beard.

Shortly after, until Ajenaton’s death and shortly after, the name Neferneferuaton ended up disappearing and it was replaced by that of Semenehkara (or Amjjeperura Semenehkare). The ideas expressed above suggest that there was a last name change, either of Nefertiti or of that male lover of the king.

As you can see, the figure of Nefertiti is very elusive, and so many changes of name only mislead the experts. Thus, opinions are divided between those who say that Nefertiti died (or fell into disgrace, or returned with King Tut Ankh mon from Amarna to Thebes) in the year 14 or, on the contrary, was promoted to the rank of male co-regent and just to succeed her husband on the throne. (I prefer to believe that, comment Thomas Dee) The question is to determine if Semenhkare was a man or a woman and, until it is known with certainty whose body of the famous Tomb 55 is, nothing can be assured.

If Semenhkare was a woman it was undoubtedly Nefertiti, as data in favor of this theory is that Semenhkare inherited each and every one of the titles of the great royal wife, that there is no record of a royal prince with this name or grave or that Nefertiti does not It was the woman who fell from grace but it was Kiya (the second wife of Ajenaton, possible mother of Tut Ankh Amon).

If Semenhkare was a male, he would be a close relative of Ajenaton (perhaps a son or brother). The data in favor of this theory are: he was married to the great royal wife Meritaton, the leather of Tomb 55 (related to Tutankhamun, according to studies) may be his, and that there is nothing to show for sure that Nefertiti was hiding under that name.

To conclude Neferneferuaton was a name used by a great royal wife and later a co-regent (if they were not the same person) of Ajenaton, therefore it should be included in the royal lists with all the honors and rights.

In the family facet where she is portrayed, it was in relation to art, since her children were portrayed in sculptural works in different facets of her life, in addition, the moments when she was with the intimate couple, they were also part of great artistic works, in addition to other special moments.

In the reliefs they were portrayed attending religious ceremonies, as well as holding hands and in the company of their six daughters. The artists portrayed them showing affection, crying at the bedside of their dead daughter Meketaton, with the other girls on their lap. Nefertiti appeared as a loving mother. A divine and jubilant family.¿Expression of closeness and affection?

¿From a new value system?¿Or perhaps they intended to convey the image of the monarch as the supreme god of life in all its facets?

Egyptian art, for millennia hieratic and monumental, gave way to emotion. It is said that the pharaoh himself instructed the royal sculptors to create a new, freer style. Overnight the iconographic repertoire changed. And in the center of this iconography, the figure of Nefertiti began to shine with its own light, represented as a paradigm of elegance, beauty and eroticism.

Any claims about this queen are purely speculative, which has not prevented the perfection, timelessness and attractiveness suggested by the famous painted bust of Nefertiti from gaining legendary status and forming the ruling canon of beauty in the industrialized West. But if the self-propaganda plan suggested by many Egyptologists was being put into practice in the Akhtaton of more than a thousand years ago, was the public image of Nefertiti, which appeared in reliefs, stelae and altars, in figurines and statues, a bullring? of media manipulation? Did the court sculptors have the mission of chiselling a perfect face to promote a renewing image of royalty and the new solar theology?

The researchers identify two periods well marked stylistically speaking of this period, the grotesque with androgynous figures with widened hips at the beginning and the second that of the iconic beauty of Nefertiti, a new style of public exteriorization of the new political system product of a new ideological motivation.

A few years ago Dietrich Wildung, then director of the Egyptian Museum in Berlin, conducted a study of the queen’s bust at the La Charite university hospital in the German capital. The piece was subjected to a computerized axial tomography (CT), an imaging technique with a scanner that, millimeters by millimeters, revealed a finding that left the researchers speechless: inside the famous bust there was a sculpture, the sculpted face limestone of an elderly woman, drooping shoulders, skinny neck, and deep wrinkles around her mouth. The artist from the workshop of the master sculptor Tutmosis had applied one layer of plaster on it after another until he modeled the perfect face that we know today, relying on a precise system of squares that ensured the exact repetition of the ideal shape at any scale.

“There is no doubt,” says Laboury. Nefertiti’s face is the volumetric projection of the grid”. In reality, there is no person with such absolute symmetry of the two facial hemispheres. After analyzing all the measurements and the CT data, the Egyptologist concludes: “It is simply too perfect. It is impossible for someone to have each of the two eyes located at the exact same distance from the tip of the nose”.

This suggests, first of all, that the Nefertiti of the statues and busts was the result of a popular ionization that was carried out using chain-made pieces, cult objects mass-produced for the temples of Egypt. And secondly, that the queen’s beauty, whatever she might actually look like, was intended to be a display of political power.

There are very few experts in the Amarna period capable of making a clear portrait of Nefertiti based on archaeological evidence and knowledge of the sources. One of them Friederike Seyfried, director since 2009 of the Egyptian Museum, and the Papyrus Collection of the Berlin State Museums. She is one of those who view every new speculation about the role of the queen with great reservations.

As the royal couple had no male children, Tutankhamun was Akhenaten’s son with another inferior consort.

Now it’s time to talk about the child king, King Tut who married his sister on the father’s side, the third daughter of Nefertiti and Akhenaten: Anjesenpaaton. Other historians believe that the queen separated from Akhenaten in 1368 BC, and moved with her son-in-law and daughter to Thebes, achieving a reprieve for her heresy.

The new royal couple must be relatively young. Some theories maintain that Nefertiti, who was still alive, although already deprived of her crown, would have influenced them. If the theory were true, this influence, and probably his own life would end in the third year of the reign of Tut Ankh Amun, in 1331 BC. That was the year in which the pharaoh renounced the monotheistic cult of his father and manifested himself a supporter of the cult. of Amun. At the same time, the royal family left the city of Amarna and restored the capital in Thebes, present-day Luxor.

The Stele of the Restoration is a proof of how the Child King began with the restoration of the worship of the god Amun, which offers an extremely negative description of the consequences that Akhenaten’s reforms had left to the country, something comparable to a modern tabloid newspaper. In this stela it is told how the temples of the gods had become ruins and how their cults had been abolished; as the gods had left Egypt, in the sense that if prayed to them, they did not respond. He remains as proof of the normalization to the extensive pantheon of Egyptian deities, this document known as the Restoration Stele was written, where the reestablishment of the previous Egyptian religion and its abandoned temples is broken down.