Magorn: The idea that common Eyptians would rob them beggars belief simply because even if they could overcome the taboos associated with such an act, how the fark would they be able to fence any of it? It was all embossed with the Pharoh's cartouche so it's origin wouldn't be much of a mystery.

The gold could be melted down, and the precious stones pried out. Wooden and other objects could have the cartouche defaced to be unreadable, and in any event, most Egyptians of the time were likely illiterate anyway. As always, the stupid ones would get caught, and the smart ones would get away with it so long as they didn't make any major mistakes.

Magorn: I've always thought tere must be a serious back story to the fact that King Tut-a very minor and short-lived ruler in the grand scheme of things- was the ONLY intact tomb we've ever found.

He may have been short-lived, but his father is among the most famous and weird Pharoahs, so maybe his membership in that cult had something to do with it? Hard to say. This could also simply be a weak anthropic thing - no matter who's tomb we found intact, we'd assume it was weird that was the particular one we happened to find, so we would build a story around it.

hydroplane: DamnYankees: zipdog: Yes, because the Egyptians left Tut's tomb alone out of respect for the dead and national antiquities.

Seriously, if Egyptians had found Tut's tomb before Carter then we would not have a single piece from that tomb in any museum.

I'm not sure who or what you're responding to, or what the point of this post was.

its obviously a response to subbys comment infering that Carter was a grave robber. If this wealth of culture was found by modern Egyptians it would have at best been on the black market and at worst completely destroyed by the religion of pieces

I've always thought tere must be a serious back story to the fact that King Tut-a very minor and short-lived ruler in the grand scheme of things- was the ONLY intact tomb we've ever found.

I've always had the theory that most tombs were probably robbed almost immediately after completion, either by the Pharoh's heirs (Could they really afford to drain the national treasury every time a king died?) or perhaps the Temple priests or maybe the Tomb-building clans themeselves. The idea that common Eyptians would rob them beggars belief simply because even if they could overcome the taboos associated with such an act, how the fark would they be able to fence any of it? It was all embossed with the Pharoh's cartouche so it's origin wouldn't be much of a mystery.

I have to think key to the anamoly of Tut's tomb being undespoiled has to involve the nexus of the fact that he was very likely murdered, that his death set off a sucession crisis, and the fact that Egypt was still in upheaval over his dad's "civil war" against the priests of the Ra and Amun cults. It's always seemed that Tut was rather hastily buried in atomb meant for somebody else. I wonder if that and the dynastic intrigues caused everyone to be too busy fighting each other to remmeber to loot his tomb?

DamnYankees: zipdog: Yes, because the Egyptians left Tut's tomb alone out of respect for the dead and national antiquities.

Seriously, if Egyptians had found Tut's tomb before Carter then we would not have a single piece from that tomb in any museum.

I'm not sure who or what you're responding to, or what the point of this post was.

I think he's offering a facetious response to those who criticize the British for collecting antiquities from places under their control at the time and putting them in museums. Many of those people get all foamy and bent and scream that their ancestral stuff be returned out of respect for the dead. Now, I can see that with the Maori pieces and parts taken from New Zealand since you have direct descendants of those people living there today. Not sure how much of who is in Egypt today is kin to who lived there 3000 years ago, what with yer invasions and occupations and migrations and whatnot. I think he's also suggesting the fight is less about respect for the dead and more about the right to exploit the Interesting Stuff found within one's borders. With some good ol' cloud yelling thrown in.

gameshowhost: Did anyone else go to the King Tut exhibit at the Field Museum in '77? That was pretty spiffy.

/even if it was a 3 hr wait just to get in the goddamned door ~:-|

That year my family was taking a cross country road trip and we just happened to be right outside Seattle in the Olympic Rainforest National Park when we heard the exhibit was going to be at a museum in Seattle. I was too young to really be impressed by (7) it so I chose to stay behind at the campground with my mom and 4 year old sister while my four older siblings went with my dad to go see it. The rainforest was a lovely 78 degrees that day and the river cool and wonderful to swim in. Seattle hit 103 that day and the line to enter the museum was 3 1/2 hours long.

I have no doubt I chose the better option, even as much of a history geek as I turned out to be since.

doglover: It's no longer your birthday if you've died.

Everyone has only one birthday. The rest are just celebrations of the anniversary of said day.

gameshowhost: Did anyone else go to the King Tut exhibit at the Field Museum in '77? That was pretty spiffy.

/even if it was a 3 hr wait just to get in the goddamned door ~:-|

I did! My father worked for a museum, so he got us special VIP passes or something like that. The line to get in went around the block but we got to walk right in. It was kind of awesome. I remember poring over the exhibit book for a long time after we got home. Wish I had saved it. But we also bought Motel of the Mysteries, which I still leaf through occasionally for a chuckle.

It's no longer your birthday if you've died.