This thesis studies how three Greek writers differentiate between each other in their texts about ancient Egypt. The three writers included in this thesis are Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch. Their texts describe Egypt and its many aspects, and the names of their texts are as following; Histories and Library of History by Herodotus and Diodorus, and De Herodoti malignitate, De Iside et Osiride and Placita Philosophorum by Plutarch.        This thesis is comparing these writers with each other using two case studies; The Nile and Egyptian cleanness for their gods. The case studies were chosen to limit this thesis upon two aspects of Egypt that the writers should have encountered if they went to Egypt. This brings a theory to light; if the writers' texts are truthfully representing Egypt or if their texts are nothing but literature constructions. This thesis is also looking at how Egyptians are portrayed by the writers with use of the theory the other.        By reading the texts and modern literature about the writers a conclusion is made. The writers are different from each other in their descriptions of Egypt. Herodotus and Diodorus view Egypt as a wonderful land with a wonderful culture. Plutarch is also portraying Egypt with respect as Herodotus and Diodorus but does at the same time view Egypt with a more negative view. This is because Plutarch believes that the Greek culture is the foremost culture in the world.        A problem with all the writers’ texts is based upon that they did not speak ancient Egyptian and could therefore not make use of all the sources presented to them. Herodotus is viewed to not even have visited Egypt. Their texts are to be looked at with a grain of salt even though they clearly tried to represent Egypt as well as they could in their texts. Their texts are to be view as a literature construction simply because the writers did not understand Egyptian and therefore relied on earlier texts about Egypt made in Greek.