At one side lay the coffin of Akhnaton, as it had fallen from the bier. The name of Akhnaton upon the coffin had been erased, but was still readable; and the gold ribbons from which his name had been cut out still encircled the body, back and front. The golden vulture lay as has been described above, and the necklace still rested on the breast, while the whole decaying body was found to be wrapped in sheets of gold. In a recess above this coffin stood the canopic jars, and in another part of the tomb Queen Tiy’s toilet utensils were found, from one of which the name of Amonhotep III. had been erased.
The bones, when examined by Dr Elliot Smith, F.R.S., were found to be those of a young man of not more than about twenty-eight years of age,—that is to say, the age at which Akhnaton has been shown in the above pages to have died. The skull was pronounced to be that of a man who suffered from epileptic fits, and who was probably subject to hallucinations. Curiously enough, the idiosyncrasies of this misshapen skull are precisely those which Lombroso has stated to be so usual in a religious reformer. The face had crumbled away, but the lower jaw was intact; and when this was placed in position one could see at once the great resemblance to the well-known portraits of Akhnaton which had survived the wreck of his city.
There could thus be no doubt that the mummy of this wonderful Pharaoh had at last been found; but since Akhnaton had always been thought, though without particular reason, to have been a much older man, the identity was questioned. It was suggested that the body was perhaps that of Smenkhkara, the successor of Akhnaton, which by some error had managed to be placed in Akhnaton’s coffin. But how, then, did the gold ribbons inscribed with Akhnaton’s name manage to be placed around the body? And apart from the extreme improbability that the mummy which was thus labelled with Akhnaton’s name, and which lay in his coffin, should be that of any other king but Akhnaton, one may ask in this case how it is that the body has the well-known physical characteristics of the great heretic if it be that of Smenkhkara, who was not related to the king?
It has been stated that the presence of the vulture upon the body is against the identification with Akhnaton. This has already been shown to be capable of explanation; but it may here be noted that if Smenkhkara would not have placed the vulture upon Akhnaton’s body, then by the same token the mummy is not likely to be that of Smenkhkara, and there is certainly no other prince of this period with whom to identify the body. In conclusion, it may be added that of all the royal mummies now known there is not one which can be so clearly shown to belong to the Pharaoh with whom it has been identified as this mummy can be shown to belong to Akhnaton. The body was lying in a coffin inscribed with Akhnaton’s name; it was bound round with ribbons inscribed with his name; it had the physical characteristics of the portraits of Akhnaton; it had the idiosyncrasies of a religious reformer such as he was; it was that of a man of Akhnaton’s age as deduced from the monuments; it lay in the tomb of Akhnaton’s mother; those who had erased the names must have thought it to be Akhnaton’s body, unless one supposes an utter chaos of cross-purposes in their actions; and finally, there is nobody else who, with any degree of probability, it could be.
Thus one may say that, without the vaguest shadow of a doubt, the body of this the most remarkable figure of early Oriental history has been brought to light; and with this assurance we may close this sketch of his life, which has been written partly for the purpose of thus explaining the significance of Mr Davis’s great discovery, and partly to introduce the general reader to one of the most interesting characters ever known. In this brief outline it has only been possible to touch upon the main characteristics which the few remaining inscriptions and monuments seem to reveal; but to the most casual reader it will be apparent that there stands before him a personality of surprising vigour and amazing originality, and one deserving of careful study. In an age of superstition, and in a land where the grossest polytheism reigned absolutely supreme, Akhnaton evolved a monotheistic religion second only to Christianity itself in purity of tone. He was the first human being to understand rightly the meaning of divinity. When the world reverberated with the noise of war, he preached the first known doctrine of peace; when the glory of martial pomp swelled the hearts of his subjects, he deliberately turned his back upon heroics. He was the first man to preach simplicity, honesty, frankness, and sincerity; and he preached it from a throne. He was the first Pharaoh to be a humanitarian; the first man in whose heart there was no trace of barbarism. He has given us an example three thousand years ago which might be followed at the present day: an example of what a husband and a father should be, of what an honest man should do, of what a poet should feel, of what a preacher should teach, of what an artist should strive for, of what a scientist should believe, of what a philosopher should think. Like other great teachers he sacrificed all to his principles, and thus his life plainly shows—alas!—the impracticability of his doctrines; yet there can be no question that his ideals will hold good “till the swan turns black and the crow turns white, till the hills rise up to travel, and the deeps rush into the rivers.”
MAP OF AKHETATON, THE CITY OF THE HORIZON OF ATON.
(Tel el Amarna)
