h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Surely the skin and hair are kept. The skull is discarded... Right?

HELL

Oh, I may have misread it. I was reading the entry quite quickly. Perhaps Farlander could check the wording to make sure it is clear that it is the skull that is discarded.

I'll put in the suggestions for the other half tomorrow.

Hello Gnomon,

Thanks for going through the article with a fine-toothed comb! In reply to your post:

1. Since there was no contact between the Chinchorro in South America and the Egyptians, the Egyptians also must get the credit for the invention of mummification, even if it had been invented previously.

--> Thanks for pointing that out. I've changed it to say that credit for being the first to *practice* mummification goes to the Chincorro.

2. When talking of the Melanesians, you say
"The practices were somewhat different from mummifications in the Far East and Western world". But you haven't yet discussed mummification in either of these regions, you've only talked about pre-Columbian South America, which is not the Western World.

--> My mistake again. I was going to compare the Melanesians' practices with that of other Eastern and Western civilisations - and then in my research discovered that the other famous practitioners of mummification were from ancient South America, Africa and Russia. I've corrected this as well.

3. "the purpose of mummification was to keep relatives around for a little longer" -- do you mean "to allow relatives to remain around a little longer"?

--> Um, I'm not sure what you mean by this... is it my grammar perhaps? Because as I understand it, they were aware that these people were dead; it's just that there is some unwillingness to part with them.

4. "no akhs would have made it into the Underworld at all, what more to say beyond" -- I'm mystified by that phrase at the end "what more to say beyond".

--> I was referring to the Afterlife, *if* the akh makes it through judgment in the Underworld.

5. "the majority of the populace was consigned to the necropolises" -- a necropolis is a city of the dead. Even the mummies were consigned to the necropolis.

--> I know what necropolises are, but thanks anway . But as I understand it, the non-royal folks who were mummified were consigned to places of *massed remains* while the Pharaohs and people of higher nobility had their own tombs? (except for the Theban mummies of rulers, who were shifted from tomb to tomb as each of theirs was plundered, but I don't think that really counts) I'm not sure if the royal *tombs* were officially classified as part of these necropolises, but from the sources I've come across, the writers take great pains to use these two different words...

6. I don't understand your description of the preparation of shrunken heads. You say the skin and hair is removed and discarded. They you say that they eyes are sewn shut. If the skin is removed from the skull, how can the eyes be sown shut? What is there to sow? And why worry about the hair falling off during boiling if it has already been removed?

--> I didn't say the skin and hair were discarded! it was the *skull*: "...facilitates the removal of the skin and hair from the *skull*, which is discarded into the river as a gift to the pani..." A shrunken head is actually a bag of skin, since the skull is removed.

7. Missing word:
"nuts and seeds found in the forests around the, "

--> The missing word is 'temple'. Sorry and thanks.

8. Thanks for spotting the typos I've fixed them... at least I *think* I've corrected them all. Oh my eyes...

Thanks again!

--Far.

Here are the rest of the corrections/suggestions.


"their skeletons and preserved flesh bared for all to see" -- the word flesh often means skin, so it is not appropriate here. Say "muscles" instead.

"Once in the ground, however, the body once again becomes a free-for-all for airborne bacteria and fungi" -- surely it is soil-borne bacteria?

"And as for the Summum facility - the name of the man behind this innovation? Corky Ra22. Go figure." -- is this really the place to be pouring scorn on a commercial venture?

The footnote on the Monthyon prize could be rephrased to make it a bit clearer. I presume the "each" refers to the different categories, but it is so far from the categories that I lost track.

h2g2 style:

in the 60s --> in the 1960s

Typos:

saltpeter --> saltpetre

aboveground --> above ground

infamous galore of figures --> infamous gallery of figures

at the school he taught in 1766 --> at the school where he taught in 1766

to present day --> to the present day

Alexander Butlerov (1988-1866) --> Alexander Butlerov (1828-1866)

Army Medical Corpse --> Army Medical Corps

a Confederates flag --> a Confederate flag

all contagious microorganism --> all contagious microorganisms

all gasses --> all gases

Juan Peron (who was injected with wax) --> Juan Peron, (who was injected with wax) -- this comma is essential

Unfortunately, for Lenin's widow --> Unfortunately for Lenin's widow

the corpse, who was beginning to decompose --> the corpse, which was beginning to decompose

has so far been scoffed at --> had so far been scoffed at

objects plaed in it --> objects placed in it

"the purpose of mummification was to keep relatives around for a little longer" - OK, I misunderstood. I thought you meant the relatives of the dead person. Leave that as it is.

"no akhs would have made it into the Underworld at all, what more to say beyond" - I'm still mystified. Those words make no grammatical sense to me. You might as well say "what no beyond sausage".

Hi Gnomon,

Thanks for spotting the mistakes! I've corrected them (I can't believe I wrote 'Army Medical Corpse'... ). I've also rephrased the Monthyon prizes section and removed the snide remark about Mr Corky Ra, despite my temptation to *add* to it.

Um, I'd always thought that 'flesh' referred to the soft tissue (largely consisting of muscle and fat, aka meat) padding the skeleton? Er, oops. I'll go change it... but as I was referring to all the inner works, should I change that to 'preserved muscles, blood vessels and nerves' instead?

Cheers,
Far.

Flesh-coloured is a sort of browny-pink colour, not bright red!

While flesh does relate to external appearance in terms such as 'flesh-coloured tights', 'flesh tones', etc, (though flesh-coloured is a bit of a vague term given the possible variations in human skin colour), I think it *is* often associated primarily with muscle in the general imagination when it comes to describing physical substance.

Is Jeremy Bentham (one opf founders of Uninversity of London) not worthy of a mention, under 'Modern Mummies?

Extract from Wikipedia:

After death, Bentham's body was (as requested in his will) preserved and stored in a wooden cabinet, termed his "Auto-Icon", at University College London. It has occasionally been brought out of storage at official functions so that the eccentric presence of Bentham would live on. The Auto-Icon has always had a wax head, as Bentham's head was badly damaged in the preservation process. The real head was displayed in the same case for many years, but became the target of repeated student pranks, being stolen on more than one occasion, and is now locked away securely.

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Good stuff