This is a slight, slim work, in more ways than one. Only 168 pages and very spare in style, I read this novella in little more than two hours, but I didn't feel it had much impact--it felt too lightweight to me. Akhenaten has been called the first monotheist--he's a terribly important historical figure and Ancient Egypt is to me a fascinating culture. Naguib Mahfouz for his part is a celebrated author--a Nobel Prize Winner. So I'm surprised I only liked this rather than loved it.
I think it's something in how he frames the tale, for all that it's not all that simple, and does draw you into the questions of what is the truth, it kept me at a distance. It's framed as the first person account of a young Egyptian, Meriamun, who, seeing the haunting ruins of the "city of the heretic" is moved to go among those who can still remember Akhenaten, and ask them to tell their stories. Although from time to time we get his impression of those he interviews, the novel is largely taken up with the different accounts of people as told to him years after the fact. That means I never felt truly immersed in what happens.
That doesn't mean that the approach doesn't have its fascinations. We get the views of those who hated the heretic pharaoh--the high priest of Amun, a neglected wife in his harem, his sister-in-law, and so obviously are they filled with malice, it's easy to dismiss their accounts of Akhenaten as "perverse," "mad" and "weak." It's also easy to accept much of what we're told by those who loved him, particularly since there is no benefit to them now to show any devotion to the dead heretic. They describe him as brilliant, "sweet" and a "noble soul."
Even so, there are aspects of this composite portrait that don't ring true to me, and make me wonder at Mahfouz's intentions. Mahfouz was himself a believing Muslim, one who spoke up for peace. So in painting this portrait of this man who believes in the "one and only God"--a god of "love, peace, and joy" I can imagine he sees in Akhenaten a forerunner of Muhammad.
But this I'm sure of--you can't ban religions other than your own, and have peace. And you can't be a ruler of an empire without force. You can't build an entire new city in a short space as Akhenaten did without forced labor and heavy taxes. I know of too many times in history where regimes have tried to force radical changes on the way of life of millions in the name of high ideals--whether it be Revolutionary France or Mao's "Great Leap Forward," they've all led to plenty of bloodshed. So the picture of this radical yet pacifistic pharaoh doesn't make sense to me. There's a great panoply of portraits of Akhenaten here--and I'm not sure I believe in any of them--something feels left out. Although maybe that's Mahfouz's intention.
