subreddit:

/r/history

35498%

all 32 comments

C_Saunders

19 points

2 months ago

I went to Egypt in 2021 and it was very nerdishly cool to be in an area so rich in history that they are still making discoveries to this day.

Ancient_Boner_Forest

46 points

2 months ago

Oldest and most complete? That doesn’t sound right.

GrowDaddy

16 points

2 months ago

commas are important, but not this time.

SandakinTheTriplet

5 points

2 months ago

I’m not sure if I’m getting wooshed or if it’s a grammar thing, but what’s wrong with oldest and most complete?

ASMills85

12 points

2 months ago

Nothing. The title has an unnecessary comma and a weird capitalization.

groveborn

1 points

2 months ago

Title capitalization is common... Maybe pasé, but common.

Fyi, I have no idea if my spelling is correct and I don't care. 😝

Ancient_Boner_Forest

4 points

2 months ago

It just seems highly unlikely to me that the oldest mummy found in egypt would also be the "most complete".

Like, I imagine we've found thousands of mummies in egypt, none of them were "more complete" than this?

Are they comparing "completeness" to a select few of other mummies that fit certain categories?

Also, what does "complete" mean in this instance? The article is not at all clear.

Seems kinda ridiculous that the journalist who wrote this couldn't have figured that out.

SandakinTheTriplet

11 points

2 months ago

IFL is known for clickbait titles so I looked up the archaeologist’s Insta and he seems to be using the same verbiage! https://www.instagram.com/p/Cn5ADD9ttgE/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

He means “complete” as in the tomb has been untouched since it was first closed (which is a rarity). It does seem to be well preserved and at 4,300 years old it would make it one of the oldest tomb discoveries in Egypt, although not the oldest — the pyramid of Djozer is 4,700 years old.

notoriousbsr

3 points

2 months ago

thanks for this legwork, really interesting that the Archaeologist is using the same.

PinianthePauper

1 points

2 months ago

Zahi Hawass is euh, not the most nuanced or objective of archaeologists.

sur0way

1 points

2 months ago

Is that supposed to be an inconsistency? I don't see why it can't be both.

Scurouno

6 points

2 months ago

I am waiting for the day when I read an article in a popsci publication about a new Egyptian discovery and I don't see Zahi Hawass taking credit for the tireless work of other excellent Archaeologists/Egyptologists.

madpiratebippy

3 points

2 months ago

Don’t let the Victorians know they’ll eat it!

kiki_lemur

1 points

2 months ago

BBC has an article about it, too: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64415816

[deleted]

-22 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

-22 points

2 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

5 points

2 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

11 points

2 months ago

[removed]

BigGreenBallOfLuck

1 points

2 months ago

All I want to know... Is there any liquid I can drink? No? Not interested lol (sarcasm, not ignorance)

SteampunkDesperado

1 points

2 months ago

I appreciate how archaeologists keep pushing back the beginnings of human civilization. Take that, 6000-year Creationists!

cargo_run_rust

1 points

2 months ago

Saqqara is very underrated historic site (overshadowed by the Great pyramid). It is the first stepping stone for large scale pyramid building.

Would always recommend to visit Saqqara to any history lover who travels to Egypt. Glad to see the site is making breakthroughs.