THE FIRST FOUR years or so of Akhenaten’s reign at Thebes seem to have been without hostility toward Amun, his temple, and the other gods of Egypt. The priestly establishment may have raised eyebrows as the Aten temples proliferated in Amun’s domain, but there had been no overt attacks on Amun’s temples or images, although perhaps there was benign neglect.
From the 9th Pylon at Karnak comes an offering list on a large sandstone block (1.94 X 1.05 X.22 m = 6ft 4 in x 3ft 5 in x 8.7/8 in), indicating that it is from the first year or two of Akhenaten’s reign.787 This list records that offerings were being made to “Aten on the offering-tables of Re‘ from Memphis to Diospolis (in the 17th Lower Egyptian nome)” by Amenhotep IV “to his father Re‘ as daily offers of every day in Memphis.”788 The second list on this block is devoted to “Re-Harakhty who Rejoices in the horizon in his name of Shu (or light) which is in the Aten.”789 These texts suggest that Re’s altars were now receiving Aten’s offerings from Memphis and into the Delta, which illustrates that the Aten cult was not restricted to Thebes, even in the earliest years of Akhenaten’s reign (on other Aten temples, see below).
A papyrus letter found at Gurob in the Fayum contains a report from the steward (city manager) of Memphis, named Apy, that dates to “regnal year 5, third month ofprt (winter or growing season), day 19” of Neferkheperure-waenre, Amenhotep.790 This date means that the letter was recorded a month before the early proclamation at Amarna (“Regnal year 5, fourth month of prt, day 13”).791 It gives the impression that all is well in Memphis, no apparent crisis there. Apy reports:
[This is] a communication [to my lord], l. p.h, to let One [i. e., the king] know that the temple of your father Ptah, South-of-his-Wall, the lord of Ankhtowy,792 is prosperous and flourishing; that the house of Pharaoh, l. p.h., is in good order; that the palace complex of Pharaoh, l. p.h., is in good order; and that the quarter of Pharaoh, l. p.h. is in good order and security. The offerings of all the gods and goddesses who are on the soil of Memphis [have been issued] in full, and nothing therein has been held back, but is offered—pure, acceptable, approved and selected—on behalf of the life, prosperity and health of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, who lives on Maat, the Lord of the Two Lands, NEFERKHEPRURE-WAENRE; the Son of Re, who lives on Maat, Amen-hotep IV. . .793
Not only are the royal quarters in good running order, according to Apy, so is the temple of Ptah, the city’s patron, and other gods and goddesses are receiving fully their proper offerings. This suggests that even while the move to Amarna was being planned, the temples of Memphis (the political capital) flourished. No pogrom had been launched against the divinities and their cults; rather they had continued to enjoy royal patronage. For some reason, it appears that this letter was never sent, as it was discovered along with its duplicate794 (one would have been sent and the other archived at Memphis). While the letter suggests that all is well at Memphis with the cult centers of the various deities, the fact that it apparently was not sent may indicate that such a report had become moot.
Building the vast temple complex to the Aten at Karnak would have required a huge labor force and major funding to achieve. To pull this off, resources had to be diverted from other projects, temples, and their estates. During the New Kingdom, temples had become major holders of land, animals, and manpower, thanks to the foreign campaigns of earlier kings and the tribute and taxes that had continued to pour in. Kings would redistribute taxes and tribute to the various temples as they saw fit.795
Among the Karnak talatat blocks studied by Claude Traunecker in the 1980s is a group that gives an impression of the vast numbers of individuals and materials involved in temple operations, even if they reflect an enlarged staff in connection with celebrating Amenhotep IV’s Sed-festival.796 The number of men exceeds 13,000. A major building operation would have required even greater numbers of workers and artisans.
Some idea of the numbers used in quarrying and mining expeditions help shed some light on the size of workforces that would be required for a major building project. The aforementioned quarrying expedition of the vizier Amenemhet on behalf of Montuhotep II in the iith Dynasty included 3,000 men just to obtain a sarcophagus.797 The figures 3,000 and 4,000 are the numbers of men involved in turquoise-mining missions to Sinai recorded on recently found inscriptions on the Red Sea site of ‘Ain Sukhna.798 Also from the 12th Dynasty comes a text from the reign of Senusert I, year 38 (ca. 1905 B. c.) that had a quarrying force of 17,000 workers.799 These figures simply illustrate the numbers of workers used on quarrying expeditions, which in turn suggests that even higher numbers were required for major building endeavors. The focus of so much manpower on temple building for Aten at East Karnak, and shortly thereafter at Akhet-Aten, would surely have had some impact on refurbishing and adding to existing temples throughout Egypt.
Temples from all over Egypt would have had to contribute to Ahhenaten’s Theban temple program, both for building and the ongoing operations. Among those named in the talatat offering list from Lower Egypt and Delta area are the temples of Horus at Athribis, Thoth of Hermopolis Parva,800 Osiris of Busiris, Hathor of the Fields of Re (possibly Abu Sir), and all the way to Egypt’s frontier town of Tjaru/Sile, where Horus was lord.801 The list further includes the temples from southern Egypt, that is, the temples of Min of Coptos, Khnum of Esna, Hathor of Dendera, Nekhbit of El-Kab, and Khnum of Elephantine in Upper Egypt.802 This offering list indicates that from one end of Egypt to the other, from the farthest north (Tjaru/Sile) to the most southerly city of Elephantine, temples were taxed. This means that taxes and income—operational expenses for these temples—were being directed to Aten temples from all over Egypt.
The Theban official Parennefer803 (who had attended Amenhotep IV while a young prince) reports that the gods were receiving offerings, but “in superabundance are they measured for the Disc,”804 clearly showing some favoritism. This text leads Donald Redford to opine that “Parennefer strongly implies that the diversion took place at the expense of the temples.”805 Perhaps the thought of building a new city to Aten was too much for the religious establishment, resulting in some sort of rebellion in Thebes while Akhenaten was out of town searching for what would be the new holy city, Akhet-Aten. Could this be the bin (evil thing) and mr (offensive thing) he heard while at Akhet-Aten (see Chapter 5)? The plan of leaving Thebes for Amarna in middle Egypt must have been hatched sometime in regnal year 4,2° which signals the beginning of the second phase of Akhenaten’s treatment of Amun and other deities, following William Murnane’s understanding of the religious de-velopment—that is, abandonment.
What is becoming increasingly clear is that Akhenaten’s temple-building efforts to Aten were not limited to the Theban area. Some edifices may have been built concurrently with the construction of the Aten temples at Karnak, while others may have been established after the move to Amarna. In the following section we will review the evidence for these Aten temples and shrines.
World History
