James Patterson and Martin Dugard dig through stacks of evidence--X-rays, Carter's files dealing with the discovery of a long-lost crypt, forensic clues, and stories told through the ages--to arrive at their own account of King Tut's life and death. The result is an exhilarating true crime tale of intrigue, passion, and betrayal that casts fresh light on the oldest mystery of all.
7 comments:
I liked this story. It was such a fast read. But I do disagree that they proved their case against the queen. Interesting. I so want to travel to Egypt and tour the valley of kings.
I agree with Linda. I'm not sure their conclusions regarding the queen were legit. I like to think she loved him and would never have done anything like that :) This was a fast read and if anything, made me want to visit Egypt even more. By the way, when I moved out of my small town to go to college, my first choice of career was to be an Archeologist. I wanted to travel the world and dig for the past...especially in Egypt. That all changed when I went to my first Archeology class. The professor was a joke and I cringed every time he said human...(he pronounced it yumen). Made me crazy enough to change my major.
Oh, gosh, Annell, I say 'umen, too. And 'umid. And anything like unto it. My kids make fun of me all the time. It must be a dialect. (My sister closest to me in age does it, too.) I honestly can't hear the difference.
Oh, and Ethan's teacher is Mrs. (H)ugus. He says I'm not allowed to talk to her. He is not kidding.
I enjoyed this book although I had to look up the definition of a nonfiction book after I finished it. I think James Patterson assumes to much. I liked the part about Carter the best and wanted to read more about his life when I finished.
Annelle, I too wanted to go into archeology but being out in the sun is what deterred me. I need to stay in the air conditioning...like a library and just read about archeology.
I enjoyed the book, but have to agree about the queen. You can't write an entire book without offering any proof someone is guilty, and then insist he or she did it in the end.
And if everyone who benefits from a crime is automatically guilty of it (Patterson's reasoning), then the police and Patterson (as a mystery writer) are both out of jobs. He should know better!
Post a Comment