Posted by Kate Phizackerley on Friday, July 16, 2010


This article seems to answer some questions:

  • There is no direct evidence that it was addressed to Akhenaten, just that it is contemporaneous with the letters found at Amarna and of the standard of royal correspondence.  It is probably part of the local copy of letters sent to Akhenaten.
  • The dating seems to be on stylistic grounds
  • I have wondered why it couldn't be a letter to the king of another country and I am still not entirely convinced that Akhenaten was the recipient.  He clearly may have been but it seems to be supposition rather than fact.


Marianne Luban said...

Had Akhenaten been the recipient, the letter would have been found in Egypt, one would think.

tim said...

Hi Kate

I agree the letter most likely is in the wrong city to have been sent to Akhenaten and I did not see any proof it has anything to do with him only that the discovery is the oldest evidence of writing found in Jerusalem and is in the language of diplomacy of the era.

Geoff Carter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Geoff Carter said...

Hi Kate
It is an interesting and significant find, but I tend to agree with Tim.

it's the kind of ancient celebrity endorsement that is almost mandatory to give a find significance for the media.

Lanh Tran Van said...


Admin Control Panel