As to the rumor of Akhenaten's body having been burned in Amarna...
From other evidence, it seems that the mummy that was burned was a Roman-era mummy (Amarna was inhabited by Romans for a short period of time if I remember correctly). There is no proof that it was indeed Akhenaten's mummy, and why would villagers in the late-1800's burn a mummy anyways?
About the body in KV 55, the one that many people think is Smenkhkare...
If you read Nicholas Reeve's book Akhenaten: Egypt's False Prophet it says that two people did a comprehensive medical exam on the mummy and discovered that the body was older than before thought, old enough to be Akhenaten. However, they didn;t release their records, so no one can know the true facts of the autopsy. Others believe that the body is of a young man in his 20's, too young for Akhenaten, old enough to be the mysterious Smenkhkare (Unless you're one who believes that Smenkhkare and Nefertiti were one and the same, in which case it wouldn't make sense).
Hi Akhenaten, thanks for your long and interesting post. It gave me hope again. About the KV55 mummy: I always thought it's Smenkhare, because I heard somewhere that he is a young boy - but you say they said the mummy can be old enough to be Akhenaten? (I was always interested in that mummy, but really never thought that h is
And, I think Smenkhare and Nefertiti were not the same - but that's not only my opinion.
I also believe that Tutankhamen was the son of Akhenaten and Kiya. Who else could it have been? If you do the math, there is no was that it could have been Amenhotep III: If Akhenaten ruled for 17 years after his father's death and then Smenkhkare ruled for 2 years after that, it makes 19 years. Tutankhamen was 9 or 10 when he started ruling. How could Amenhotep have fathered a child after he was dead for 7 years?????
Oh, that's correct. Just food for thought: I read in a book that Akhenaten and Smenkhare had joint ruling in the last 2 years. But the counting is still okay, then.