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

http://www.h2g2.com/A494354
I am happy with this entry and welcome comments

Some points:

1. I don't think your use of the word "succeeded" is correct. Check it out in a dictionary.

2. Ikhnaton's religion worshipped the Solar Disk, Aton or Aten, instead of the old sun god, Amun or Amen. He called his son Tut-ankh-aton and his daughter as you have given it. It was when Tut became pharaoh and decided to bring back the old gods that he changed his name to Tut-ankh-amun. I suspect that the sister/queen would have changed her name at the same time, not when she married Tut.

3. The reason the treasure is so important is that it is the only example of a tomb ever discovered which still had all the original stuff in it. This should be mentioned. The only reasons it escaped grave robbers in ancient times were because with the takeover of the new king, times were troubled and no record was kept of the tomb's location, and soon afterwards, another much bigger tomb was built almost on top of it.

4. You should put something about the Egyptian belief in the afterlife: the pharaoh needed to bring with him everything he would need to survive in the afterlife, such as (fake) food, (fake) servants, chariots etc. The fake stuff would all become real in the afterlife.

5. Tut's body was taken from the tomb and examined, then replaced in the tomb. All the other stuff has been moved to the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. A complete list would be impossible, but you might mention the following:

Body mummified. Jewelry placed on mummy.
Solid gold deathmask with face of pharaoh placed over head.
Body and mask placed in solid gold coffin in shape of pharaoh.
This placed in wooden gold-covered coffin in shape of pharaoh.
This placed inside a series of four wooden gold-covered boxes, the largest entirely filling the room of the tomb.
The other room of the tomb was filled with literally thousands of items that the pharaoh would need in the afterlife.

Egyptian pharaohs had two names. Tut's other name was Neb-kheperu-ra.

The exact pronunciation of Egptian names is not known, because the alphabet did not write down all the vowels. As a result, there are often a number of different versions of every name, such as:

Tut-ankh-amen
Tut-ankh-amun
Tut-ankh-amon

Thank you for your comments Gnomon, I have incorporated the details you mentioned and named you as referenced researcher.
Would you care to re-read my entry and comment again?
Thanks very much for your time.

~Galaxy Babe~

The information in the entry is good, but there are two things:

The tomb was not re-sealed after Tut's body was replaced in it. It is open to visitors, although there is not much to see: some wall paintings and one of the coffins, with Tut's body in it. The wall paintings are reckoned to have been done in a hurry and are not up to the same quality as those in other pharaoh's tombs.

The article now has a number of disjointed sentences, each set up as a paragraph. For example, in the "tomb" section, there are about six separate sentences in a row. Try and group these together or write a bit more about each.

Good work!

The only danger with putting my name as a referenced researcher is that I get equal credit when the article is published. You may not want this, as you wrote the article. I think it would be better if you left my name out. But if Duncan is in, then I'm in too!

Yes you are both in, you both deserve it.
My article is so much better with your help.
I just read your "Recorder" entry. {and commented there}.
I'll amend the sentences and the tomb reference, I could have sworn the tomb had been resealed.
Thanks for all your help

It certainly was not sealed in 1986 when I was there. It might have been done since then.

You've been?
Oh, I'm ~so~ jealous!

OK, changes done...

Hi GB!

Great subject for an entry - it makes for a very interesting read. A couple of points need to be made, though.

Firstly, the pictures are great, and although IMO they are of fundamental importance to the entry, they will probably be removed during the editing process.

The bit about the flowers being in such close proximity that only his widow could have put them there sounds rather like a romantic supposition. I'd be inclined to leave that out, or at least re-word it so that you get rid of 'it can only have been...' or whatever.

It wasn't Howard Carter that died of the infected mossie bite, it was the man who financed the expedition, Lord Caernarfon. It would be great if you could write a bit more on the whole discovery of the tomb, as it is very much a part of archaeological folklore. For instance, the oft-quoted moment when Carter holds his lantern or candle or whatever up to the crack in the wall of the tomb and was asked if he could se anything. His response? "Yes... Wonderful things..."

And no mention of Lara Croft? Fie!
Just kidding!

Thanks Nexus...I'll get on it right away

I have done the corrections, I will get back to writing about the tomb discovery tomorrow.
Thanks

Ok, written about the tomb discovery...would you like to re-read?
Thanks a lot...
Oh, btw, I've quoted you as referenced researcher too, Nexus...

Great entry, and I can see you're already in better hands than mine. Just a couple of points:

- I'd always encountered Tut's dad's name as Akenaton, or something like that. What's up with the different name you give him?

- Can we get a little more on the curse of the mummy's tomb? After all, it did inspire a whole slew of B-movies.

With everything that has come out of Hollywood, it's difficult to know what is real and what is made up!
Do you know any exact facts, formerly GB?
I'll check the spelling on Akenaton...

I really don't know too much about the curse of King Tut's tomb. All I know was that there was supposed to have been a few coincidental tragedies that happened to some of the discoverers that gave credence to the legends. But the main guy lived to a ripe old age, thus dispelling the myth. That's all I know... I was flipping channels when I came across the subject on the History Channel, but it was almost over at the time. If I could be more help, I would be.

Thanks, anyway!
I ~had~ heard the same thing, trouble is I watched "The Mummy" that many times...I'd be hard pressed to tell the correct story. Also, writing about myths & curses is a bit of an iffy subject, for the Guide, isn't it? Someone please tell me if it's OK to write about the curse, the deaths of the workers, etc...

I'd stay away from any references to popular fiction on the subject, other than to close it with something like "this has inspired a slew of B-movies, from Boris Karloff to the newest crap." The part I am interested in is the factual parts of the story.. the things that actually happened to the actual workers at Tut's actual tomb, and then describe how this was interpreted by people.

Here's the way you settle dealing with mythology and the Guide... don't come off like you believe it, and don't come off like you don't. Present the facts, and let people draw their own conclusions.

I noticed the discussion about the tomb being sealed or not - it was closed to the public when I visited the Valley of the Kings in the autumn of 1992, due to restoration of wall paintings

Bummer! I'd have been ~so~ miffed at that!
OK formerly GB, I'll research what I can & present the facts.
Thanks for your comments, everyone!
{currently}GB

OK, I have written about the curse, and what happened to the main "players"