Yea yea, Tutness. I know. Like now, for instance. Haha just playin.

GOOD NEWS.... IM FINALLY DONE. 5 pages and about a gajillion hours later my paper is done. Just have to finish my works cited and fix up my outline and im off to bed. Nothing like finishing a paper on Sunday nigh.. Monday morning.

Well thanks for you help everyone, i really enjoyed learning about this stuff and heck you might've sucked me in. No Unas im probably not close to being a fanatic like you

Congratulations on doing homework! It was always one of my favorite parts of school - proving that you learned something.

And me..? Fanatic? I wouldn't use so strong a word. "Interested" "Intregued" and "Obsessed" come to mind.. but never fanatic! lol

Unas - I'm sorry but I find your primary post not only slightly demeaning, but also plain wrong in places. I might get carried away here, so sorry in advance!

Tutankhamum was not a dreadful King. As far as I can discern he never really got the chance to be King - all he got was the title. I find it sad and pitiful to think that you can laugh and jeer at a child who wound up in such a terrible situation. Think of it. A young boy inheriting the throne of one of the most powerful civilisations on the planet, stuck amidst a struggle for power in a time of immense religious and political turmoil. His demise was guaranteed, and he could do nothing to prevent it. We do not know how he died, but whether accidental or deliberate it is unlikely he would have lived to see his heb-sed festival. Once more when his father died we can deduce that he tried in vain to stay on the throne, reverting the old religion and moving away from Akhetaten. He was a truly tragic King, and certainly one who I do not feel ready to mock.

The discovery of Tutankhamum did not (as you seem to be insinuating) begin 'Egyptomania' in Britain. The craze had begun more than 100 years earlier - remember that by the 1920s almost all the other tombs in the VOTKs had been raided, discovered or ransacked. Belzoni had found the tomb of Seti I and sparked waves of enthusiasm worldwide, with scale replicas being constructed in London and New York. The Clifton Suspension Bridge, completed in the 1880s near where I live was originally designed by Brunel to incorporate Egyptian sphinxes! Believe me when I say that the Tomb of Tutankhamum is not soely responsible for this Egypt 'craze.' It also goes without saying that had this Egyptomania never been induced, this forum would probably not exist.

Also you link with the Aswan dam is tenuous at best. The construction of the Dams has nothing to do with Egyptology at all. The second dam actually put many Nubian mastabas underwater, which amazingly enough has actually preserved them astoundingly well, and kept them far away from human damage. Also the first dam was built in 1889 (I believe) so this link seems even weaker. The Aswan dam is a tricky topic and I agree that it does have disadvantages and has had a great cost on Egypt. I do however believe it is not at all linked the the discovery of four rooms in a distant corner of Egypt.

Besides which, the information supplied by the tomb is completely invaluable. Nothing of that kind survives from the same period.

No. I don't think butts are her thing. The phrase would be either 'on your tail' or 'in your face'

Just messing with you DM. You know it.

Anyways, very true, Student. You shouldn't go there.


In the words of the famous Adminstress, Dark_Meryetamun_28:

"TOPIC PEOPLE!"

Speaking of which, I was wondering if anyone else had anything to say on the subject?

What does anyone else think the discovery of Tutankhaten's tomb impacted on today's world?

pros and cons aside, I'm sure everyone will admit that the opening of Tut's tomb started a huge surge of interest in all thing ancient Egypt. Everything was influenced--from fashion to furniture styles.
I can see where Unas is coming from, though. His criticizm isn't so much for Tutankhamen as a person as for the tremendous, and often, waaaaaay off base (as in curse!) hub-bub created by the opening.

I think that maybe some of you have forgotten one thing...that the Tomb of Tutankhamen is the ONLY essentially intact ROYAL tomb ever discovered. That in itself is enough reason to open the tomb....and to continue the study of the tomb, it's contents, and the context in which that tomb was created and utilized. Also, if it weren't for Howard Carter's meticulous methods of excavation, there would not have been nearly as much information gleaned from the tomb as there were. He was, essentially (IMHO), the "Father of Modern Egyptology".

Bastet_Joyce, I do not think that Howard Carter can be called the Father of Modern Egyptology, because he was really one of the last proper Egyptologists. After Carter the world had had its fill of Egyptology. Throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, findings had grown steadily more spectacular, the mystery of the hieroglyphic language had been unravelled, and there had been a boom of Egyptian influenced art in Europe. The opening of Tutankhamum marked the apex of 'Egyptomania,' but by the same token it also spelt the end of it.

In late 1969, Wernher von Braun proclaimed to his team at NASA, "We've run out of moons." And it true. In the same way that the conquering of the moon essentially ended the 'Space Race' between the USSR and USA, the discovery of Tutankhamum's tomb marked the end of the age of the great Egyptologists. There was little more for the world to see, and every later discovery was dwarfed by the findings of Carter.

Ironically the only discovery to date even remotely on par with that of Tutankhamun's tomb was made in 1939, just weeks before the outbreak of war. It failed even to make newsstuff. The discovery of the Tanite burials, in which the exquisite mask of Psusennes I was discovered (which you'd be able to see if my avatar hadn't failed) was completely ignored and now only makes it occasionally into obscure Egypt quizes and trivia.

Sob.

I'm sorry, Psusennes I, but I must disagree with you. While it is true that there hasn't been any really "spectacular" finds in Egypt...there have been important ones. The discovery of the tombs of Queen Tiye's parents (Tuyu and Yuyu), the discoveries in KV5 by Kent Weeks, and the finds by Zahi Hawass in the Tombs of the Golden Mummies....these are all important to the accumulation of knowledge of how the ancient Egyptians lived, thought, and died. Each new discovery brings new information. And you must admit that there is always a thirst for new knowledge...whether it be about ancient Egyptians or about our own culture.

So, please forgive me if I offend you...but let's just agree to disagree about this.

I am not at all offended. I too was merely expressing my opinion, and of course this matter is highly subjective.

I am not claiming that Carter's find was the 'last' to be made in Egypt, nor that he was the last Egyptologists - merely that he cannot be called the 'father' of Egyptology. This is because he made his findings when Egyptology was at its height - at the turn of the 20th century. I just believe this marked the apex of our inquest into Egyptology. We learnt more about Egypt between the late 19th century and early 20th century than in any other period, and to me Carter was really one of the last people to fit into that whole era, if you understand.

Since 1922 there has been no single Egyptologist who has managed to surpass (or even come close to) Carter in fame. Before Carter however there are a host of characters who fill the history books - Champollion, Belzoni, Drovetti, Budge, Thomas Young, Petrie, Mariette , Maspero (I could go on).

All these people made history before Carter, and I think Carter is probably the least deserving of the title 'Father of Modern Egyptology.' I understand the point you are making though - Carter did pave the way for much of our modern Egyptological understanding, even if his find did mark the end of the Egyptological 'honeymoon' period.

I do not wish to discuss Hawass' Golden Mummy fiasco. My uncle was there with him at the the time, and was quite frankly appalled by Hawass' conduct. I do not speak from first hand experience, but I find his aura and the presence he evokes on television to be annoying and frustrating. Maybe if I met him my opinion would be changed. I do not know.

Psusennes I,

Perhaps I should have called Carter the "Father of Modern Egyptological Methodology"....as I see it, he was the most careful of the excavators at that time and used methods that were not in common usage for that era. And I certainly see your points. That's what these forums are for, healthy debate and discussion of different points of view. And I, for one, certainly respect a healthy discussion and relish a good debate

As for Hawass, I do find him a bit overbearing and sometimes even obnoxious in the way he treats others. Even some of the Egyptologists that he is supposed to work with intimately have been subjected to his "manner". I think I would rather sit and talk to Kent Weeks about KV5 than Hawass about the "Golden Mummies".

In my opinion, Howard Carter got the short end of the stick over KV62. But his manner was brash and abrasive toward the Inspector General of Antiquities and his deputies. Understandable when they wanted him to interrupt the excavation for all those dignitaries who had no business in the tomb other than curiosity. However, it would not have taken as long as it did to clear KV62 if it weren't for the restrictions and interruptions placed on Carter. It was sad that he died destitute and unrewarded for the greatest find of that era.