Talk:Howard Carter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
High traffic

On 9 May 2012, Howard Carter was linked from Google, a high-traffic website. (See visitor traffic)


I would question that KV62 is unplundered. Markh 11:19, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Is this wording acceptable? Hajor 13:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Isn't there some plausible conspiracy that he actually found the tomb years before, plundered it then restored some of the artifacts years later for the 'discovery'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xstackx (talkcontribs) 4 September 2006


I think it's irresponsible to not make mention of the questionable ethics involved in the colonialist British policy of ransacking Egypt's historical burial sites in general, not to mention the multiple controversies that surround Howard Carter specifically. To quote Dr. Christian Loeben, an Egyptologist at the August Kestner museum in Hanover, Germany, "All objects from the tomb should be in Egypt, and if they're not in Egypt, they didn't get out legally"[1]. Carter was an eager participant in this Western grave-robbing fad, violating even what little law was in place to protect these sites. "A little-known document written by a member of Carter's team, Alfred Lucas, in 1947 claimed that Carter knocked a hole into the doorway linking the antechamber to the actual burial chamber, and illegally entered it without waiting for Egyptian officials"[2].

In addition, Howard Carter was caught on a number of occasions stealing or attempting to steal artifacts from the various sites for his own personal possession and use. Carter and his compatriot, the Earl of Carnarvon, "gave a clasp that showed the pharaoh on a war chariot as a present to Egyptian King Fouad I, for example. American oil baron Edward Harkness received a gold ring"[3]. There is evidence that the looting and historical damage goes beyond what history has recorded: "Doubts about Carter's methods are not new but the debate keeps resurfacing with the discovery of Tutankhamen artefacts in museum collections around the world. This, Egyptologists claim, suggests that they were secretly brought out of Egypt by Carter or members of his team"[4]. In additioning to the multiple incidents of material losses, it is a real tragedy that "experts claim that his actions did lasting damage to research into ancient Egypt, because it will never be reliably known what the tomb looked like when he found it"[5].

It is also worth noting the fascinating fact that Carter "never went to university and taught himself Egyptian and hieroglyphics"[6].

I'm also posting this in the KV62 talk section. SymWebb (talk) 07:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

It's more complicated than what is presented above. The convention of the period was that excavators shared with the Egyptian authorities the proceeds of what was recovered from a tomb. The Egyptians lacked the funds to carry out the work themselves so rich foreign patrons were encouraged to spend their money on the basis that some reward would be given from items recovered.
The rules were changed during the period these excavations were taking place and there was ambiguity relating to what was termed a "sealed tomb", i.e. an intact tomb was supposed to be excluded from the agreement, but in this instance some robbing had taken place not long after the King was buried. Caernarvon had spent a small fortune in the Valley of the King without "recompense" prior to Carter's discovery of the tomb and they believed that they would receive some of the contents. They probably didn't regard it is as theft and neither did the Americans who received the items. It took a long time before Caernarvon received recompense in the form of money for the costs incurred in the dig but that left the problem of what to do with objects already taken.
Whilst a colonial mindset may be a contributing factor it's worth noting that Carter in particular mixed with the local people, spoke their language, and was respected by them. His own relatively humble background perhaps played a part here.
Carter immediately sought and obtained the help of experts in the field of Egyptology as soon as the tomb was found, people like James Henry Breasted and Alan Gardiner and the experts from the Metropolitan Museum were readily made available to him. He trained under Flinders Petrie and kept meticulous records, backed up by photographs, of every stage of the excavation. It took his team ten years to empty and catalogue the tomb, so it is quite wrong to suggest that his work was incompetent, for its day it was actually quite advanced. The way the Kings body was handled is another matter but apparently that doesn’t annoy people today judging by the way the Royal Mummies continue to be treated in order to make documentaries that satisfy our puerile curiosity.
As best I know most of the small artefacts which were taken from the tomb have now been returned but modern Egypt doesn’t regard this as purely an issue relating to the Tomb of Tutankhamen. Much of what we see in American and European museums was taken by people who didn’t have our modern notions relating to the cultural past of other countries. It’s ironic that one of the most iconic images of ancient Egypt (Nefertiti Bust), that the present authorities claim was stolen and want returned, is presently residing in the homeland of the scholar who is so harsh on Carter. As regards the reference to robbing the American treasury, all I can say is that many people think has has been well and truly done on a vast scale, and not by a foreign power, by what has happened since 2008 and nobody has been brought to justice. Greed is not limited by nationality or geographical boundaries. If you doubt this try asking an Native American. Yt95 (talk) 16:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Months instead of years?[edit]

I saw a NatGeoTV documentary where, as far as I remember, the search for the tomb of Tutankhamun has lasted 6 years. In the article it says 'few months' - might be that I am wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 23:28, 7 March 2006 no it did last 6 years —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ashmol Site[edit]

What's up with the Ashmol site ( It appears to be offline, which is very unfortunate because three of the four external links are on this site. And where are the references? As of now, this Wikipedia article has no references for the material here save for the books listed. The only other external link is just about Howard Carter's grave. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greevous (talkcontribs) 00:37, 2 October 2006

Swaffham, Norfolk, England[edit]

I have just read an article in the Eastern Daily Press about Howard Carter 26.03.2007 that states Carter was born in Swaffham not Kensington ,London.The town of Swaffham is very proud of its link with Carter and is devoting large area of its museum to him .We will have to clear up this confusion of his birth place. Northmetpit 12:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The picture of the Howard Carter house[edit]

I have just come back from Thebes and the picture of the Howard Carter house in this article seems to be incorrect. The local Egyptians were conviced it was a house nearby, surrounded by trees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffball70 (talkcontribs) 15:59, 29 January 2007

The depicted building is indeed the 1950 Stoppelaëre House, overlooking Carter House. --Hvd69 (talk) 10:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Picture of Carter himself?[edit]

There are 3 pictures in this article, which is in my opinion a little much for the size of this article, and not one of them is of Carter himself. It seems ridiculous to me to have this many pictures on such a short article and not have one of himself - no matter how relevant the current pictures are. I suggest removing the pictures of "KV62" and "Tutankhamun's tomb" as those pictures can already be found in their respective articles, and finding a picture of Carter himself. Anyone agree? --Kurotsyn 23:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Shweeet! Someone got a picture! :D Well, the "Tutankhamun's Tomb" section looks a bit cluttered with all those pictures. I still want to remove those images, but... I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do that myself. So... uhhh... hmmm..--Kurotsyn 18:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The fate of his canary[edit]

I read somewhere in a history book that a snake ate his canary. I don;t know how it is relevant but the book made it seem iconic. Any thoughts on adding something in? Reginmund 05:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

apparently the death of his bird was from a cobra after the discovery of the tomb king tut something to do with a mummys curse or so!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Discoveries Of King Tutanhkansetamun[edit]

In the early 1920's the frequency of King Tut's. tomb was discovered by Howard Carter. Howard Carter is an archeologist also an Egyptologist. He was inspired by his father 'John Frawly Beckham Vincent Brumby Malinga Lee Carter'. So Howard Carter's real names is 'Howard John Frawly Beckham Vincent Brumby Malinga Lee Carter'. The discovery of King Tut's tomb was a draw of luck. One of his helpers(workers) had fell from walking in the heet of the deserts of Egypt. It did not feel xlike a rock so Howard and his men started digging. Then finally Howard's hard work had finally paided off he had found what he was looking for. The Tomb of Tutanhkansetamun. He was known as the world's best archeologist and Egyptologist of the year for achieving what he wanted. After six expeditions success struck. It was nothing but luck. He soon passed away when he reached the age of 64. He is remembered today as the discoverer of King Tutanhkansetamun.

Howards last words were "King Tutanhkansetamun's death was sudden and it shall remain a mystery"

Written by: Fazan Jazoor —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 11:07, 16 October 2007

Years, not months, of fruitless searching[edit]

The article says "After a few months of fruitless searching" he found the tomb. Isn't that several years of fruitless searching? Riordanmr (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

BBC Documentary[edit]

After watching a BBC documentary about the discovery of Tutankhamun I realised the influence of the archeologist Sir Leonard Woolley should be included in the article as according to the programme he suggested to search in the dig site which led to its discovery. HappyWanderer (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Restored the external links from before, and removed the phrase 'That is so stupid' which had no place in the text. Pikle (talk) 14:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


I think the additional sentence on his gravestone should be added "Egyptologist, discoverer of the tomb of Tutankhamun, 1922"

Ref: (talk) 21:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved.--RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 19:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

This appears to be a straightforward case of WP:PRIME, but I thought it would be a good idea to get some opinions first. The archaeologist is world-reknowned as the man responsible for the discovery of Tutankamun; the other two Howard Carters listed on the Howard Carter page (used as a disambiguation page) are a basketball player who doesn't seem very well known and a founder member of the Assemblies of God Church. Assuming last month was unexceptional in terms of visitor numbers, here's some quick evidence that most readers are after the archaeologist:

  • Howard Carter (the disambiguation page) get ~6,000 views a month. The following articles are linked from there:

From this, I think it's reasonable to draw the conclusion that most of the people who end up at Howard Carter are looking for the man who popularised Egyptology.

If this article was to be moved to the new title of "Howard Carter", the current Howard Carter page would need to become a disambiguation page. Nev1 (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

  • You present a compelling case. I'm somewhat hesitant only because of the fact that one of the articles involved deals with a sports personality. Fame has a tendency to skew the perception of notability (which is one of my fundamental problems with that guideline, but that's a whole difference subject). Essentially however, barring any significant opposition, I'll Support this.
    V = I * R (talk) 23:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Support as primary topic. Jafeluv (talk) 08:11, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Support: clearly primary topic. Sceptre (talk) 01:56, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Though there's a redirect already in place, I've wikilinked and changed 'Tell el Amarna' to Amarna to be consistent with the usage and explanation here. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 08:22, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Was the Saqqara Affair an affray?[edit]

There was a recent edit that changed affray to affair in the sentence about the Saqqara Affair (see ). I only discovered this when I was trying to figure out what the Saqqara Affair was all about (and saw the more descriptive affray in earlier versions of the article quoted elsewhere). I think affray is a better word choice (once I found the definition -- note: affray should be linked to associated article if its rightful place in the article is restored). Thoughts? --Jhfrontz (talk) 18:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I've restored it and linked the term. It would be great if someone could elaborate on the Saqqara Affair. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Why is this page locked??[edit]

I thought wikipedia was open for everyone to edit. Silly users! =) (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Lymphoma is uncited[edit]

Please can someone locate a source for cause of death as lymphoma? I have been unable to find a source quoting this so far. The current NYT source does not mention cause of death, only date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)