To the pagan Egyptians, the pharaohs were gods. Each had their own special privileges of divinity. The pagan Egyptians had their own pantheon of gods like the pagan Greeks, several of which the Greeks adopted. (Set and Typhon are convenient examples.) The pagan Egyptians were also idolaters like the Greeks; their temples, architecture and art are replete with sacred idols. They both practiced human sacrifice. (These practices extended to the pagan Romans as well.) Is Oedipus representative of the pharaoh Akhnaton?
The parallels to the story of Oedipus and to the pharaoh Akhnaton are remarkable. Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky ignited some historical debate that is yet to be resolved by historians concerning the chronology of the reign of Amenhotep IV (Akhnaton). The actual dates of history are fluid since we know about so little, except for the artifacts and remnants of literature left behind. However, as the debate rages, Oedipus and Akhnaton; Myth and History shows some compelling ideas related to the topic.
Akhnaton effaced all of his father’s names from the records, in the temples, and changed his name. To the Egyptians this destruction of someone’s name was akin to murdering their soul, robbing them of their eternity.
One of Sigmund Freud’s earlier followers, Karl Abraham, contributed an essay to the first volume of Imago, published by Freud in 1912, entitled Amenhotep IV (Akhnaton). This was of interest in that the essay talks about how Akhnaton did not entomb his mother Tiy next to her husband after her death, and that Akhnaton’s rivalry with his father for possession of his mother extended beyond death.
Velikovsky goes farther to say that Akhnaton actually did possess his mother. But, ignoring this, focus on the figurative implication:
In this connection it is interesting that Oedipus, whose parentage is regularly ascribed to Laius, is also called in some ancient sources the son of Helios (sun i).1 Oedipus’ descent from Laius is a vital element in the legend; such an unmotivated change in the parentage of the legendary hero seems strange but is understandable if the prototype of the legendary hero was Akhnaton.A royal son and descendent of the god Ra, like other pharaohs before him, his claim to divinity soon demanded an equality with his father, Aton, the sun.i
"Thou art an eternity like the Aten, beautiful like the Aten who gave him being, Nefer-kheperu-ra (Akhnaton), who fashions mankind and gives existence to generations. He is fixed as the heaven in which Aten is."2
So wrote his foreign minister in a panegyric to the king. Next Akhnaton insisted that he had created himself, like Ra. Of Ra-Amon it was said he was the "husband of his mother." The "favorite concrete expression for a self-existent or self created being (was) ‘husband of his mother.’"3
He claimed to be Ra-Aton, and in this spirit he also took over his father’s name, Nebmare (Neb maatre), as if he himself was his own father. (Velikovsky, p 71-72)
1. "Auch ein Helios wurde als Vater des Oedipus genannt." L.W. Daly’ in Pauly-Wissowa, Real- Encyclopädie der classichen Altertumswissenschaft, article "Oedipus," Vol. XVII, Col. 2108. Cf. Also W.H. Roscher, Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie, article "Oedipus" by O. Höfer, Vol. III, Cols. 703, 708.
2. The Tomb of Tutu (Davies, the Rock Tombs of el-Amarna, VI, 13).
3. W.M. Flinders Petrie, Egyptian Tales (XVIII-XIX Dynasties) (1895), pp. 125-126. More properly translated "bull of his mother."
Dr. Velikovsky is not without critics, but his assertions are most profound. I attribute much of this to the ancient conflict between the pagan and the Judaic that still rages (even from within Judaism itself: The Rise Of Tikkun Olam Paganism)
Behold, I am Set, the creator of confusion, who creates both the tempest and the storm throughout the length and breadth of the heavens. (Naville, p. 39)
Naville, Edouard, trans. Egyptian Book of the Dead of the XVIII to XX Dynasties, Berlin, 1886.
Velikovsky, Immanuel. Oedipus and Akhnaten; Myth and History. New York: Doubleday, 1960