website statistics The Murder of King Tut - PDF Books Online
Hot Best Seller

The Murder of King Tut

Availability: Ready to download

A secret buried for centuries Thrust onto Egypt's most powerful throne at the age of nine, King Tut's reign was fiercely debated from the outset. Behind the palace's veil of prosperity, bitter rivalries and jealousy flourished among the Boy King's most trusted advisors, and after only nine years, King Tut suddenly perished, his name purged from Egyptian history. To this day A secret buried for centuries Thrust onto Egypt's most powerful throne at the age of nine, King Tut's reign was fiercely debated from the outset. Behind the palace's veil of prosperity, bitter rivalries and jealousy flourished among the Boy King's most trusted advisors, and after only nine years, King Tut suddenly perished, his name purged from Egyptian history. To this day, his death remains shrouded in controversy. The keys to an unsolved mystery Enchanted by the ruler's tragic story and hoping to unlock the answers to the 3,000 year-old mystery, Howard Carter made it his life's mission to uncover the pharaoh's hidden tomb. He began his search in 1907 but encountered countless setbacks and dead ends before he finall, uncovered the long-lost crypt. The clues point to murder Now, in The Murder of King Tut, James Patterson and Martin Dugard dig through stacks of evidence--X-rays, Carter's files, 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.


Compare

A secret buried for centuries Thrust onto Egypt's most powerful throne at the age of nine, King Tut's reign was fiercely debated from the outset. Behind the palace's veil of prosperity, bitter rivalries and jealousy flourished among the Boy King's most trusted advisors, and after only nine years, King Tut suddenly perished, his name purged from Egyptian history. To this day A secret buried for centuries Thrust onto Egypt's most powerful throne at the age of nine, King Tut's reign was fiercely debated from the outset. Behind the palace's veil of prosperity, bitter rivalries and jealousy flourished among the Boy King's most trusted advisors, and after only nine years, King Tut suddenly perished, his name purged from Egyptian history. To this day, his death remains shrouded in controversy. The keys to an unsolved mystery Enchanted by the ruler's tragic story and hoping to unlock the answers to the 3,000 year-old mystery, Howard Carter made it his life's mission to uncover the pharaoh's hidden tomb. He began his search in 1907 but encountered countless setbacks and dead ends before he finall, uncovered the long-lost crypt. The clues point to murder Now, in The Murder of King Tut, James Patterson and Martin Dugard dig through stacks of evidence--X-rays, Carter's files, 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.

30 review for The Murder of King Tut

  1. 5 out of 5

    Aaron

    Put your seat belts on because this is going to be a bumpy review. In all his arrogance, Patterson claims to have done a great deal of research as he and Martin Dugard try to solve the mystery of the boy king, Tutankhamun. This is not non-fiction as it claims to be, but historical fiction. The tale is told on three levels: chapters highlighting how Patterson visited the recent controversial Tut exhibit that toured America a couple of years ago, chapters that introduce readers to the life of arch Put your seat belts on because this is going to be a bumpy review. In all his arrogance, Patterson claims to have done a great deal of research as he and Martin Dugard try to solve the mystery of the boy king, Tutankhamun. This is not non-fiction as it claims to be, but historical fiction. The tale is told on three levels: chapters highlighting how Patterson visited the recent controversial Tut exhibit that toured America a couple of years ago, chapters that introduce readers to the life of archaeologist and Tut tomb founder Howard Carter, and chapters covering the short life of Tut himself. The writing is light and breezy as most of Pattersons other works, which makes it a comfortable and quick read. The main problem is that the book is simply full of errors. It is clear that Patterson and Dugard only did a cursory search of information about Tut and his family and the events surrounding his death as most of what is presented is connected to out of date theories. For example, the vizier Aye, which is traditionally spelled Ay, is generally considered the father of Nefertiti (Tut's step mother). It is quite bothersome to see Patterson have him practically ruling over her through most of the early part of the book. It is generally believe that Tut lived for quite some time as he ruled, and he and his wife are considered models of ancient romance. During his reign, much was done to reinstate the gods and both he and his wife Ankhesanamun dropped the Aten from their names to be replaced by the traditional lord of the gods Amun. As a result, major holes are punched into the theories presented by Patterson and Dugard as to who killed the boy king. Howard Carter is also presented as a talented archaeologist who worked hard to find success and was beaten down by others. In some ways, this was true, but he was also considered by many of his contemporaries to be arrogant and boorish. Few wanted to work with him or respected him before and after the finding of Tut's tomb. He is well-known and respected for the findings, but he was not well-loved. To be honest, it almost feels like Patterson and Dugard basically sat down and watched The Face of Tutankhamun, a pretty good, but outdated 3-part documentary put out by the BBC in 1993. Much of the proposed theories in the book are similar, though many have been overruled by new scientific techniques and further findings in the field. For example, the head injury cited in the book as possibly playing a major role during his death is now believed to have been caused by the embalming process after Tut's skull has been examined with modern MRI technology. It irks me that a book filled with this many errors is being marketed as non-fiction, particularly in light of the fact that the format of the presentation is novelization. Those with any knowledge of ancient Egypt's 18th Dynasty will see the wholes, and the general public will find themselves misled. Writers of historical fiction are allowed to take liberty with the facts as the storytelling is at the core of the presentation. Writers of non-fiction should not since they are presenting things as being fact. This is the first time I have not enjoyed Patterson ... I am actually disgusted. He should be ashamed and should maybe consider actually contacting an Egyptologist if he would like to try this again. Those looking for great mysteries set in King Tut's time, should read the Lord Meren series by Lynda S. Robinson. There is also the mystery series by Lauren Haney that focuses on Lt. Bak, a Medjay detective during the time of Hatshepsut. Other great writers with stories centering around ancient Egypt include Judith Tarr, Pauline Gedge, and Michelle Morin. For those looking for mysteries relating to archaeologist, the best choice is the Amelia Peabody series by Elizabeth Peters, the pen name of well-respected egyptologist Barbara Mertz. Both Amelia and Dr. Mertz would greatly disagree with the view of Carter presented in Patterson's work. As for looking for biographies about Nefertiti, Tut, Akenaten, or any other of the people presented in the book, there is no shortage of great works by specialists in the field. Any of them would be better than this.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Kevin

    I'm half way through with the book and like a few of other reviewers have mentioned.....as soon as I read how much time and effort went into the researching of this book, my cynical side came out...I'm thinking don't tell me how much time you put into it but let me gauge that for myself after I've read it....I'm no Egyptologist by any stretch but for a book that has been heavily researched it is definitely light on details...another thing I don't like is when the author places himself within the I'm half way through with the book and like a few of other reviewers have mentioned.....as soon as I read how much time and effort went into the researching of this book, my cynical side came out...I'm thinking don't tell me how much time you put into it but let me gauge that for myself after I've read it....I'm no Egyptologist by any stretch but for a book that has been heavily researched it is definitely light on details...another thing I don't like is when the author places himself within the story....ego, ego & more ego..... I had stopped reading Patterson because I was just so dammed tired of the Dr. Cross super hero and Lyndsay Boxer and her posse... I was hopeful when I saw his latest book but after half way through, it's more of the same from Patterson...a book to read on the the bus commuting back and forth to work. I'm done with this book and yes it is official....I will not read Patterson from here on out... Yeah, I can't get over the fact that set aside entire chapters for himself....Get over yourself already.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Charlie

    UNBELIEVABLE. The worst book I've ever read in my life. Laughably bad. This idiot thinks he was the first to consider that Tutankhamen may have been assassinated, and that he alone has "solved" his murder. I mean I don't think he ACTUALLY believes that, but I do think he believes it's easy as hell fool adults into believing that. Which by the way, is fucking insulting. It's painfully obvious that he considers his adult audience to be dumb as fuck. There are a million "chapters" in this shitty bo UNBELIEVABLE. The worst book I've ever read in my life. Laughably bad. This idiot thinks he was the first to consider that Tutankhamen may have been assassinated, and that he alone has "solved" his murder. I mean I don't think he ACTUALLY believes that, but I do think he believes it's easy as hell fool adults into believing that. Which by the way, is fucking insulting. It's painfully obvious that he considers his adult audience to be dumb as fuck. There are a million "chapters" in this shitty book, but why one chapter ends and another begins is very often incomprehensible. There are more than a few instances of a chapter ending in the middle of a scene, and then the very next chapter beginning EXACTLY where the last left off, with no discernible reason for the break. Most every chapter is literally only about 2-4 pages long, and in between each one is a chapter heading that takes up about half a page. I also noticed that Patterson or possibly his editors, ended each chapter as early or high-up on the page as possible, and the font is fucking huge, and his sentences and paragraphs are incredibly simple and short, so the thing reads almost as quick as Everybody Poops, despite being 350 pages. Except it's oh so very adult, with lots and lots of disgusting underage sister-fucking that Patterson tries to portray as romantic. Patterson also finds a way to write himfuckingself into the book as a heroic scholarly history buff, who does a buttload of research trying to crack the case. But oh yeah, actually all he did was attend 2 Tut museum exhibitions. He admits that he's not really that interested in Tut, what really interests him is that so many others are. I've never read any other Patterson shit and don't plan to. The guy is a turd, and a joke. He's a joketurd. Fuck him.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Lindsey

    I randomly picked this up at the library and am so glad I did. I knew almost nothing about King Tut and am now fascinated and need to know more. James Patterson was true to his writing style and love for short chapters which helped move this book along.

  5. 5 out of 5

    Megan

    This has got to be the most awful book I have read in a long time, if not my entire life. I have never read a James Patterson book, never had an urge. The only reason I picked this one up was because it sounded interesting as an historical novel. He bills this book as a 'non-fiction thriller'. This is complete and utter bulls**t. I was a history major in undergrad. I have read PLENTY of non-fiction books. This is NOT one of them. Patterson is making crap up as he goes along. He's making these re This has got to be the most awful book I have read in a long time, if not my entire life. I have never read a James Patterson book, never had an urge. The only reason I picked this one up was because it sounded interesting as an historical novel. He bills this book as a 'non-fiction thriller'. This is complete and utter bulls**t. I was a history major in undergrad. I have read PLENTY of non-fiction books. This is NOT one of them. Patterson is making crap up as he goes along. He's making these real people into fictional characters. It's a huge shame. And there is no 'thriller' anything about thing book. It is written on a child's level. It's very simple, the dialogue is too easy. There are over 100 chapters in this book and it is not that long. Each chapter is about 1-3 pages each. Patterson goes as far as making himself a character in this book. That just shows you how much this books sucks when the author decided to insert himself in it as a self-righteous detective. Patterson's 'theory' on Tut's death is completely absurd and he shows no evidence of his thesis, even though he says he studied the history of the boy King extensively. He basically wrote a historical fiction and then at the end randomly states that this is my thesis on how Tut died, and it's the truth. I solved the mystery of his death. Case closed. When there wasn't even a mystery to begin with. For God's sake skip this piece of crap. It's not worth anyone's time.

  6. 5 out of 5

    Brittany

    I am a huge lover of history, especially during mythological religions. I also have been deeply sucked into the Alex Cross series and love James Patterson's writing. Understandably, that left me VERY excited when I discovered this book.... but it was a big let down. The book is told in 3 parts, so I will assess each The Egyptian back story that spans across generations to backfill the reader into events that meet up to Tut as Pharoah... I LOVED this section, 4 stars, and only becuase there was so I am a huge lover of history, especially during mythological religions. I also have been deeply sucked into the Alex Cross series and love James Patterson's writing. Understandably, that left me VERY excited when I discovered this book.... but it was a big let down. The book is told in 3 parts, so I will assess each The Egyptian back story that spans across generations to backfill the reader into events that meet up to Tut as Pharoah... I LOVED this section, 4 stars, and only becuase there was so much skipping around, when I wanted MORE. Howard Carter, the Egyptologist. I mean maybe he was successful, and I'm sure his character was based on reports about him. But man did I NOT like him and really even got to the point where I didn't want him to be successful because he was such a jerk. Then there was the story of James Patterson himself and research cohorts as they studied to unearth the story and try to prove his theory of murder. Overall, the pace was excrutiatingly slow, especially on the Carter sections and I found it hard to enjoy the story. It was definitely not the best work of James Patterson. He had a great theory and I was interested in it, but the delivery made it hard to enjoy the process. I can't rate it higher than. It was OK, which is 2 stars on Goodreads.

  7. 5 out of 5

    Shannon

    Mildly engaging. It mostly goes back and forth between Ancient Egypt and the people who would later discover his hidden tomb. It also focuses on how Tut was murdered and the turmoil happening during his reign. OVERALL GRADE: C plus.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Scott Rhee

    I don’t like James Patterson, and here’s why, in four long-winded personal reasons that most Patterson fans will simply write off as nit-picking, petty, or just plain wrong, but whatever: 1) Nobody can convince me that he actually writes his own books anymore. I have no actual proof that he doesn’t, but I’m fairly certain—-based on the circumstantial evidence that I’m about to lay down—-that he does NOT, in fact, write his own books. I’m sure, early in his career, he actually did his own writing. I don’t like James Patterson, and here’s why, in four long-winded personal reasons that most Patterson fans will simply write off as nit-picking, petty, or just plain wrong, but whatever: 1) Nobody can convince me that he actually writes his own books anymore. I have no actual proof that he doesn’t, but I’m fairly certain—-based on the circumstantial evidence that I’m about to lay down—-that he does NOT, in fact, write his own books. I’m sure, early in his career, he actually did his own writing. Now, though, I’m pretty sure that he shops his book ideas around to other writers, which is why you never see a James Patterson novel with just his name on it anymore. There is always a co-writer’s name on the cover, usually in half the font size below Patterson’s giant-fonted size name. I’m sure these co-writers are getting a pretty penny in royalties, while Patterson is getting the main credit, but these co-writers are probably doing all the writing. And, I’m sorry, but no writer can single-handedly write the number of books he seems to churn out in a month without the help of a co-writer or a ghost writer getting co-writer credit. Unless, of course, Patterson is on a cocktail of meth, cocaine, and No-Doze. Which could explain the next reason… 2) His writing sucks. He tends to write at a fourth-grade level, which is probably insulting to most fourth-graders. I often can’t tell if his intended audience is young adult or people who think Donald Trump is a genius. To be fair, I’ve read plenty of young adult authors who are far better wordsmiths than Patterson. Listen, I’m not putting down Patterson simply because he writes at a fourth-grade level. It’s also what he writes. The sentences are sloppy. The details he includes tend to be extraneous, while he, on more than a few occasions, leaves out significant details. His notoriously short chapters may make the story seem to go by quicker but it does nothing to improve the actual story. Patterson seems to live by the motto “less is more”, but, in some cases, “less is just less”. 3) I read “The Murder of King Tut”, which claims to be nonfiction (it says so on the cover), but for a book which claims to be nonfiction and, supposedly, full of factual information, there is not an iota of an attribution, credits, footnotes, endnotes, or sources anywhere in the book. The parts set during Ancient Egyptian times (14th century) read like sections from a novel, which is what they are, because I am sure that there is no way Patterson knew what the hell King Tut ate or wore on any given day or who Tut slept with. I could be wrong. Patterson may very well have a time machine, was able to go visit Tut, interview him, talk to his servants and relatives and concubines and the Egyptian man on the street. But I doubt it. If Patterson had simply called his book a “novel”, I wouldn’t be complaining. Okay. Yeah, I would. It would still suck. Sadly, Patterson isn’t just ruining his own reputation with this, he’s also hurting the street-cred of his co-writer, Martin Dugard. (If the name sounds familiar, it’s because he’s the co-writer for Bill O’Reilly on all his “Killing” books.) My guess is Dugard did all the hard research and fed it all to Patterson, but Patterson didn’t feel the need to share all the hard work that went into the research. Why not? Because Patterson didn’t do it himself, so it doesn’t matter. 4) Patterson annoyingly interjects himself into his own narrative in such a meaningless and distracting way, that, even if the book were in any way interesting (which it’s not), it actually makes the book more stupid. I don’t need Patterson to tell me, three times, that he knows who murdered King Tut. Especially when, in the end, he essentially leaves the reader hanging with the worst cop-out ending. It worked in the movie “Clue”, but it doesn’t work here. Note to writers: don’t keep telling the reader you know who the killer is and then—-bam!—-get to the end and surprise them with “Ha! Just kidding! I don’t really know who the killer is! Just speculation!” Besides pissing off the reader, you’re actually killing your own credibility. Why the fuck would I ever want to read another Patterson novel after this one? Answer: I wouldn’t.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Kenny

    To say Patterson writes ten books a year is supposed to be a compliment. It shouldn't be. Obviously, his co-writers do most of the work and I suspect in this case Patterson merely wrote the self-serving self-descriptive entries and broke the book down into his famous "two page" chapters, because he thinks his readers are such numbskulls that they cannot concentrate for more than sixty seconds at a time. He may be right, if you judge his readers by the writer. Was Tutankhamun murdered? As an affici To say Patterson writes ten books a year is supposed to be a compliment. It shouldn't be. Obviously, his co-writers do most of the work and I suspect in this case Patterson merely wrote the self-serving self-descriptive entries and broke the book down into his famous "two page" chapters, because he thinks his readers are such numbskulls that they cannot concentrate for more than sixty seconds at a time. He may be right, if you judge his readers by the writer. Was Tutankhamun murdered? As an afficionado of Egytian history, I'm well aware of the controversy in the scientific community over this very issue. But Patterson et al. do not resolve the mystery, so be forewarned. In short, Tut either died by an accident or was murdered by someone in the royal household. That is the extent of Patterson's revelation. I'm not kidding. James Patterson is a pedestrian writer whose books are the literary equivalent of daytime television: you can skip entire chapters/episodes and not miss a thing. In fact, in this case, you can even skip the ending. I wish I'd skipped the beginning and the middle, too.

  10. 5 out of 5

    Margaret

    I am not going to glorify this with any stars. I got qualms about it when I came across the tomb building slaves being slaughtered in the desert. As the tomb builders were highly skilled artisans, this was a load of bollocks to start with. Ask John Romer... he excavated their village and wrote a book about them. Many of his finds are in the British Museum and I have seen them with my own eyes. When I got to around page 52 and Ay (misspelled Aye) was ogling Nefertiti, only the fact that I had got t I am not going to glorify this with any stars. I got qualms about it when I came across the tomb building slaves being slaughtered in the desert. As the tomb builders were highly skilled artisans, this was a load of bollocks to start with. Ask John Romer... he excavated their village and wrote a book about them. Many of his finds are in the British Museum and I have seen them with my own eyes. When I got to around page 52 and Ay (misspelled Aye) was ogling Nefertiti, only the fact that I had got the book from the library saved it from being hurled across the room with great force. Ay was the FATHER of Nefertiti. This is verifiable FACT. Ay and Teya were the parents of Nefertiti, who had one sister who was married to Akhenaten's war leader, Horemheb (who later became pharaoh himself). The "research" that Mr Patterson boasts about at the book's beginning is laughable crap.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Emrys

    The writing in this book is abysmally poor and the historical inaccuracies were astounding. A certain level of bad writing might be worth overlooking if the plot were especially strong or if recent findings were revealed, but the plot is weak and the premise is not based on any archeological findings. This book is advertised as a nonfiction thriller, but it's really a fictional non-thriller. The author begins the book with much pomp about how the materials were thoroughly researched so that the The writing in this book is abysmally poor and the historical inaccuracies were astounding. A certain level of bad writing might be worth overlooking if the plot were especially strong or if recent findings were revealed, but the plot is weak and the premise is not based on any archeological findings. This book is advertised as a nonfiction thriller, but it's really a fictional non-thriller. The author begins the book with much pomp about how the materials were thoroughly researched so that the reconstructed story of Tutankhamun would be accurate and the theory would be sound. He then proceeds to write insanely bloated, inaccurate sub-Harlequin Romance prose about Ancient Egypt and Howard Carter. The two timelines are ocassionally interrupted by the author's modern-day soliloquies about how puzzling everything is when one is looking across the lake at one's yacht, thinking about how wealthy one is. I really don't care about Patterson's yacht or bank account, but I do find Ancient Egypt to be fascinating. Sadly, there are huge pieces of important information about Tut's life missing from this book, most obviously the simultaneous name changes of Tutankhaten to Tutankhamun and Ankhesenpaaten to Ankhesenamun. Those name changes were extremely significant, but Patterson ignores history and instead uses only the names Tutankhamen and Ankhesenpaaten alongside each other with no regard for accuracy. There is also no evidence given for Patterson's relationships between characters, relationships that either vary from historical evidence or have no historical evidence to back them up. Such disregard for historical facts is behind Patterson's cheez-whiz of a "murder theory." My incentive for reading further was to find out what evidence proved his theory, but Patterson never mentioned any evidence. He never attempted to tie his theory to any evidence of any nature, which astounded me. When zero evidence is ALL Patterson and his "researcher" come up with after spending thousands of dollars and years doing HEAVY DUTY RESEARCH, someone owes someone a refund! There is a LOT of current information out there, and none of it is in this book. If you must read this, check it out from your local public library. But don't be suckered into buying it!

  12. 5 out of 5

    Laura

    I always have to remind myself after reading a James Patterson book that I have never liked any of his books so I should stop trying to read them! This book is supposed to be nonfiction and Patterson goes on about how he did so much research for this book, more than he has ever done for any other book. However, none of this research is evident. No footnotes, no end notes, no sources. He also mentions that his assistant did the bulk of the research (so not sure why he claims in other places he di I always have to remind myself after reading a James Patterson book that I have never liked any of his books so I should stop trying to read them! This book is supposed to be nonfiction and Patterson goes on about how he did so much research for this book, more than he has ever done for any other book. However, none of this research is evident. No footnotes, no end notes, no sources. He also mentions that his assistant did the bulk of the research (so not sure why he claims in other places he did the research). It's too bad, because it would be interesting to find out from actual academics and Egyptologists why there is the belief that King Tut was murdered. Patterson said he had a hunch - not sure that a hunch is enough evidence to claim that King Tut was actually murdered. Patterson also mentions that he was working on a few other projects while writing this book. I have to say that is pretty obvious because he repeats sentences only pages apart (I'm talking word for word). And also, making paragraphs one sentence long and chapters only 2 or 3 pages long is super annoying. Again, I really wanted to like this book because it sounded so intriguing, but I was definitely disappointed.

  13. 4 out of 5

    Christopher Saunders

    James Patterson is a perfectly serviceable writer of thrillers and police procedurals. What on Earth possessed him to write a book billing itself as a "nonfiction thriller"? This wretched book, which parallels the short, unhappy reign of King Tutankhamen with Howard Carter's discovery of his tomb, makes obnoxious pretenses to fastidious accuracy ("fake nothing, even a bee sting" Patterson implores in his introduction), yet the actual book offers a thin, lazy caricature of real events. Besides bu James Patterson is a perfectly serviceable writer of thrillers and police procedurals. What on Earth possessed him to write a book billing itself as a "nonfiction thriller"? This wretched book, which parallels the short, unhappy reign of King Tutankhamen with Howard Carter's discovery of his tomb, makes obnoxious pretenses to fastidious accuracy ("fake nothing, even a bee sting" Patterson implores in his introduction), yet the actual book offers a thin, lazy caricature of real events. Besides building a story around the (mostly discredited) idea of Tut's murder by political enemies, Patterson plumps his narrative with cardboard characterizations and lame invented dialogue that bears less resemblance to Ancient Egypt than a Yummy Mummy cereal box. My favorite howler wasn't the Egyptian nobles joking about their divine status or the Pharaoh enduring jibes at his impotence, but a mean teacher telling grade school Tut to "sit down and practice your hieroglyphs." As historical fiction this would be bad enough; as a book pretending to be history it's inexcusable.

  14. 5 out of 5

    Mindy

    I have never read any of Patterson's books. I see them every time I go to the library. They're all over the freaking book tables at Costco, and he takes up an entire bloody shelf at Borders. My only thought on an author that produces that many books that quickly is... How could all of his books possibly be that good without being repetitive? When I saw this title at Costco, I jumped on it immediately. I've always loved archeology--Egyptian history was the trigger for my passion. So when I saw a b I have never read any of Patterson's books. I see them every time I go to the library. They're all over the freaking book tables at Costco, and he takes up an entire bloody shelf at Borders. My only thought on an author that produces that many books that quickly is... How could all of his books possibly be that good without being repetitive? When I saw this title at Costco, I jumped on it immediately. I've always loved archeology--Egyptian history was the trigger for my passion. So when I saw a book on King Tut and his "murder," I was excited. Screw the fact that I'd sworn to never jump on the Patterson bandwagon. I'm gonna give this guy a chance. It sucked, to say the least. His opening talks about the extensive research he put into this book, blah blah blah. That's how the book basically went for me. Blah. Blah. BLAH. His conclusion? What conclusion? I wish I hadn't wasted the time reading this thing. It was repetitive, it was not "non-fiction" and maybe this guy is a really good fiction writer, but he needs to stay away from the truth and facts section. He clearly injected facts with absolutely no support, and frankly, I thought I'd read it wrong and picked up a historical fiction novel. After a few of his ridiculously short chapters, I wanted to give up. But I thought, Maybe he redeems himself. He doesn't. Implementing yourself as a detective in a "non-fiction thriller?" Really, James Patterson? Thank god Costco's return policy is amazing.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Jennifer

    I really had high hopes for this book, as I love history and am fascinated with all things Ancient Egypt....but was sorely disappointed. I was expecting something along the lines of Patricia Cornwell's investigation into the Jack the Ripper case, with a summary of evidence and supporting documentation. Patterson fro some reason chose to mask all of his "evidence" with a narrative that comes off as more of a fictionalized account. There are "scenes", including dialogue, between Tut and his family I really had high hopes for this book, as I love history and am fascinated with all things Ancient Egypt....but was sorely disappointed. I was expecting something along the lines of Patricia Cornwell's investigation into the Jack the Ripper case, with a summary of evidence and supporting documentation. Patterson fro some reason chose to mask all of his "evidence" with a narrative that comes off as more of a fictionalized account. There are "scenes", including dialogue, between Tut and his family and servants, as well as between Carter and others. This, in my eyes, was a loss of credibility and made it seem more of a story as opposed to making me think about any genuine evidence or documentation. Patterson added in a few chapters to illustrate why he was so excited by this story and chose to write it. These chapters further irritated me because they were filled with name-dropping and pompous ramblings, as in his description of how his editor always takes his calls, he likes to walk along Trump's golf course, he looks out over the lake behind his property at all the enormous houses, and his "remarkable ability" to work on several projects at once. I think this book has turned me off of Patterson for a while, unfortunately. I had his next book on pre-order and cancelled it.

  16. 5 out of 5

    Jeanette Bowyer

    A disappointment to Egyptology. I don't believe that the information for this book was researched well enough. A historical non fiction book should have loads of footnotes and references telling the reader where he obtained his information. A disappointment to Egyptology. I don't believe that the information for this book was researched well enough. A historical non fiction book should have loads of footnotes and references telling the reader where he obtained his information.

  17. 4 out of 5

    Christine

    This book is an insult to every other nonfiction book out there. James Patterson should stick to fiction, although after reading this I won’t be picking up another book by him. I know that James has a following of fans, has been on the bestseller list for always, and puts out quite a few new books each year. He’s a machine. But he’s also arrogant, which is evidenced in his “present day” sections of this book. For example: p. 7 “As I waited for Michael to come on the line – he usually take my calls This book is an insult to every other nonfiction book out there. James Patterson should stick to fiction, although after reading this I won’t be picking up another book by him. I know that James has a following of fans, has been on the bestseller list for always, and puts out quite a few new books each year. He’s a machine. But he’s also arrogant, which is evidenced in his “present day” sections of this book. For example: p. 7 “As I waited for Michael to come on the line – he usually take my calls, night or day – I looked around my second-floor office.” p. 7-8 “The last thing I needed right now was another writing project. I already had a new Alex Cross novel on the fires, and a Women’s Murder Club brewing, and a Maximum Ride to finish. In fact, there were twenty-four manuscripts – none of them yet completed . . .” p. 226 “That’s pretty much the way of my workday: up at 5:00 a.m., write and edit, take a break – maybe golf, maybe a movie – then get back to it. Seven days a week. I have an ability, or a curse, to focus on several projects at once.” Seems to me he just wants everyone to know how busy he is and what a wonderful writer he is. Barf. The Murder of King Tut reads like a fiction book, but as Patterson says himself, “I don’t think I’ve ever done more research for a book . . .” Yet, the only evidence of research we have is Patterson saying he visited the Tut exhibit in NY and Fort Lauderdale. There are no citations. No references to other works. No bibliography. And that is a big problem for me, especially when you claim you did so much research. Seems like he pulled a lot of it out of his ass, if I’m being honest. And don’t even get me started on the idea that James Patterson “solved” the murder of King Tut. This idea is laughable, and for him to even think that he is some amazing archaeologist just proves my point that he’s totally conceited. I could go on and on about why this book is total drivel – insanely short chapters (there are 100 chapters and an epilogue in a 332 page book!) that start and end at random points that don’t even make sense, breaking the story into three different parts, and just the absurdity of him thinking he actually solved the murder mystery of King Tut. Save your time and avoid this one. You’ll thank me later.

  18. 5 out of 5

    Gabrielle

    This is the last time I borrow a book from the library based only on its subject matter before checking goodreads first, that's for sure. Though I put this book in my nonfiction shelf because that's how the library sorts it, this book is actually historical fiction. And I use the term historical loosely. Though the author might want us to believe he single-handedly solved the mystery of King Tut's death, his level of research indicates he did far less than that. I do not consider myself well-rea This is the last time I borrow a book from the library based only on its subject matter before checking goodreads first, that's for sure. Though I put this book in my nonfiction shelf because that's how the library sorts it, this book is actually historical fiction. And I use the term historical loosely. Though the author might want us to believe he single-handedly solved the mystery of King Tut's death, his level of research indicates he did far less than that. I do not consider myself well-read in the field of egyptology, but even I could see that some things were imagined, inaccurate or plain wrong. The writing itself is not helping this book's case: the phrasing is awkward, the historical "reenactments" are incredibly painful to read, stilted and fake and the short chapter length is annoying. The self-congratulating sections where the author describes his own work were thankfully short, at least in the audiobook. There were still unnecessary. The audio was in itself a flaw, as the narrator's voice did not fit most of the characters. Unfortunately, this book is not even entertaining in its failings. It was a pain to get through and a waste of time. Hopefully the next nonfiction audiobook I borrow will be better. It would be extremely difficult to find worse.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Nicky

    The Murder of King Tut has chapters covering the lives of the mysterious boy-king and those around him, the life of Howard Carter, the archaeologist who discovered his body, and a couple of chapters on James Patterson's own writing of the book. It's simple writing, easy to read, and I finished the whole book in an hour. It's a little sensational, of course, and caters to the lowest common denominator -- I don't think Nefertiti would have called Tutankhamen 'Tut', somehow. There were inconsistenc The Murder of King Tut has chapters covering the lives of the mysterious boy-king and those around him, the life of Howard Carter, the archaeologist who discovered his body, and a couple of chapters on James Patterson's own writing of the book. It's simple writing, easy to read, and I finished the whole book in an hour. It's a little sensational, of course, and caters to the lowest common denominator -- I don't think Nefertiti would have called Tutankhamen 'Tut', somehow. There were inconsistencies with things I know from my childhood interest in Egyptology, and I found the whole style just far too flippant. What's more, I already read this theory, back in 1999. Bob Brier's book, The Murder of Tutankhamen, is more professional and convincing, though I believe his theories were discredited by modern scans on the mummy of Tutankhamen. Still, though Patterson tries to have a more personal touch, depicting real love affairs between Nefertiti and Akhenaten, and between Tutankhamen and Ankhesenamen, I found it less interesting and less absorbing than Bob Brier's more historical, detailed account of Tutankhamen's life and death.

  20. 5 out of 5

    V. Briceland

    I have never read any of Mr. Patterson's other books, and therefore can't state with certainty that they're all written as if for developmentally-challenged seventh graders. But this one certainly made me feel as if I were reading while riding on the short bus. Mr. Patterson's begins his investigation into the death of everyone's favorite ancient boy king with a prologue reminding readers (in all capital letters) that the role of the historian is never to embellish, but only to illuminate fact. H I have never read any of Mr. Patterson's other books, and therefore can't state with certainty that they're all written as if for developmentally-challenged seventh graders. But this one certainly made me feel as if I were reading while riding on the short bus. Mr. Patterson's begins his investigation into the death of everyone's favorite ancient boy king with a prologue reminding readers (in all capital letters) that the role of the historian is never to embellish, but only to illuminate fact. He then follows up his decree with dozens of chapters filled with made-up dialogue and awkward, imagined sex scenes. As for the mystery itself, well, apparently this book need be the only last word on the cause of Tutankhamen's death. His solution must be correct because, as Mr. Patterson reminds us in a late chapter, Time Magazine called him "the man who can't miss!" It's tough to beat so sound and circular a logic.

  21. 5 out of 5

    Jacquie

    When something describes itself as a "Nonfiction Thriller" you know it's a bad sign. I requested this book because I needed an example of a BAD resource for a presentation. After receiving it I skimmed two pages, which ended up being an ENTIRE chapter. There are actually no words to adequately describe how appallingly horrific this book is. It was so bad I started reading it aloud to my coworker so we could laugh hysterically,: Ankhesenpaaten's face had turned a sickly shade of pale...It was as i When something describes itself as a "Nonfiction Thriller" you know it's a bad sign. I requested this book because I needed an example of a BAD resource for a presentation. After receiving it I skimmed two pages, which ended up being an ENTIRE chapter. There are actually no words to adequately describe how appallingly horrific this book is. It was so bad I started reading it aloud to my coworker so we could laugh hysterically,: Ankhesenpaaten's face had turned a sickly shade of pale...It was as if Tut and his advisers did not exist now. Alone with the child, she curled into a ball on the floor and sobbed bitterly, "I am not worthy of being called your queen." After skimming some more of the book the rest of the Ankhesenpaaten sections, which seem to make up most of the book, are in the same vein: pure speculative FICTION. The irony is he paints her as a loving wife who fears for her life once Tut is dead, then at the end accuses her of being a part of the conspiracy that killed him (he can't even keep his fictional facts straight). The Carter sections were marginally better, though he does take the high road with Carter and paints him as an ideal archaeologist who does things by the book. As a conclusion he states, "Tut was killed by a conspiracy of the three people closest to him in life...Case closed." He then devotes three sentences to summarizing decades of REAL RESEARCH done by ACTUAL SCHOLARS and then arrogantly contradicts it with brilliant statement of "But Tut was murdered." Author Steven Saylor writes several lovely historical FICTION series about the Roman Empire that have loads more historical research that this piece of garbage. Patterson and his army of ghost writers should stick to mass market fiction!!!

  22. 4 out of 5

    Tina

    This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. I was disappointed in this book, especially considering what a prolific author Patterson is. I file this under historical fiction, because it most certainly is not nonfiction. While it's clear that Patterson has done some research to lend authenticity to the scenes he creates, his "evidence" and the book in general are severely lacking. I would expect a work that claims to be nonfiction to have citations or footnotes, none here. A high school history essay would be better written and documented. I was disappointed in this book, especially considering what a prolific author Patterson is. I file this under historical fiction, because it most certainly is not nonfiction. While it's clear that Patterson has done some research to lend authenticity to the scenes he creates, his "evidence" and the book in general are severely lacking. I would expect a work that claims to be nonfiction to have citations or footnotes, none here. A high school history essay would be better written and documented. That said, it was a quick read and does leave the reader wanting to know more. Perhaps this would be a good book for older teens interested in Egyptology (yes, teens; the writing style is not so sophisticated for me to recommend it as adult reading). I would caution parents that there are some descriptions that are graphic in nature, including sex, violence, and one instance of rape. If you want to read historical fiction about Ancient Egypt, there are countless authors more qualified to spin a thrilling tale than Mr. Patterson (my personal favorite is Christian Jacq, an actual Egyptologist turned novelist). If you want to read nonfiction about Ancient Egypt, go to your local library and ask a librarian to point you to the 932s.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Jared Della Rocca

    The absolute WORST book I've ever read. It appears James Patterson saw an exhibit on King Tut and got interested, and thought, "I'm James Patterson. I can write whatever I want and I'm so great that if I think something's interesting, I can make everyone buy a book about it." At that point, his editor should have stepped in and stopped this abomination. But instead, the editor rolls over and fawns at James Patterson's feet (their conversation is recounted in the book. No really, the conversation The absolute WORST book I've ever read. It appears James Patterson saw an exhibit on King Tut and got interested, and thought, "I'm James Patterson. I can write whatever I want and I'm so great that if I think something's interesting, I can make everyone buy a book about it." At that point, his editor should have stepped in and stopped this abomination. But instead, the editor rolls over and fawns at James Patterson's feet (their conversation is recounted in the book. No really, the conversation of Patterson telling his editor he wants to write this book and thinks he's SOLVED the murder of King Tut is part of the book. No, not the prologue, part of the actual book.) This is marked as non-fiction historical fiction, but since there are ZERO footnotes and a total of ZERO references, it's hard to determine what is fiction and what is non-fiction. But we can deduce that it is FICTION that James Patterson "solved" the murder of King Tut, and NON-FICTION that James Patterson needs to spend more time golfing (a favorite hobby he mentions not once, but TWICE in a book about King Tut) and less time writing.

  24. 4 out of 5

    Jenn

    I think that I can count on one hand the number of times I've put down a book without finishing it. This is one of those books, so some may deem me unqualified to review it. Whatever, I had my reasons. There's a difference between doing research and filling in the pieces with a little fictitious flare and doing what Patterson has done - written a story that's to his liking and filled in historical information when it went along with his own speculation. I don't consider myself an Egyptologist by I think that I can count on one hand the number of times I've put down a book without finishing it. This is one of those books, so some may deem me unqualified to review it. Whatever, I had my reasons. There's a difference between doing research and filling in the pieces with a little fictitious flare and doing what Patterson has done - written a story that's to his liking and filled in historical information when it went along with his own speculation. I don't consider myself an Egyptologist by any sense of the word, though I have been to Egypt and am an avid viewer of National Geographic documentary movies on the subject. There are certain facts that Patterson just didn't include. Facts like Tut's biological mother was most likely murdered, according to her mummy, and the fact that Tut wasn't even his given name (he changed it after becoming Pharaoh.) Instead, Patterson fills in blanks with silly stories about 8 year old Tut skipping hieroglyphics class (seriously?) and terribly corny dialogue coming from Carter. I've always steered clear of Patterson books because he seems like a quantity over quality kind of guy and this book proves just that.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Colin Baumgartner

    Imagine if a pulp mystery writer had the audacity to try to solve a real world murder mystery by sorting through mounds of overlooked evidence—but plot twist, the victim died in ancient Egypt. The book is as bad and outrageous as the idea sounds. The Egypt portions read like a bad 1920s noir and Patterson has cast himself as the edgy private eye (who also has a smoking femme fatale wife just in case anyone was wondering). Stuck with the book to the end for some reason... maybe because I have some Imagine if a pulp mystery writer had the audacity to try to solve a real world murder mystery by sorting through mounds of overlooked evidence—but plot twist, the victim died in ancient Egypt. The book is as bad and outrageous as the idea sounds. The Egypt portions read like a bad 1920s noir and Patterson has cast himself as the edgy private eye (who also has a smoking femme fatale wife just in case anyone was wondering). Stuck with the book to the end for some reason... maybe because I have some lingering nostalgia for my childhood obsession with mummies and ancient Egypt?

  26. 5 out of 5

    Kimberly Wilson

    lolol. I adore the idea of the Free Little Library. But it's filled with books like this one. I took a chance. This book calls itself nonfiction. Can you just do that?? Let me just give you a red flag excerpt: "There was that gut instinct of mine again—the reason, I think, that Time magazine had once called me 'The Man Who Can't Miss.' " That was in the book. lolol. I adore the idea of the Free Little Library. But it's filled with books like this one. I took a chance. This book calls itself nonfiction. Can you just do that?? Let me just give you a red flag excerpt: "There was that gut instinct of mine again—the reason, I think, that Time magazine had once called me 'The Man Who Can't Miss.' " That was in the book.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Erika

    James Patterson is an arrogant prick and this book is terrible. Terrible, awful, horrible.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Megan Farve

    Not good. Things I would rather have done than read this book: 1) hold a spider, 2) lay on a bed of nails, 3) be forced to listen to “This is the Song that Never Ends” for 24 hours straight, 4) eat prunes, 5) get maced, 6) get a zit on the crease of my nose, 7) drive behind a scary truck that might “Final Destination” me, and 8) clean up dog vomit.

  29. 4 out of 5

    Dan

    Although there are lots of reasons to dislike this book ..... I did find it to be a fast and interesting read and a somewhat engaging introduction to Egyptology via Carter’s great discovery. This book is also much more speculative than the book jacket suggests. In short it can’t be considered non-fiction. 3 stars.

  30. 5 out of 5

    Laura

    My daughter had the book, so I thought I'd give it a whirl. I've not read any James Patterson before, but I know he is a prolific writer/co-writer. This is definitely aimed at middle school kids. I wasn't convinced with his conclusion, but I did find the narrative interesting. Three stars My daughter had the book, so I thought I'd give it a whirl. I've not read any James Patterson before, but I know he is a prolific writer/co-writer. This is definitely aimed at middle school kids. I wasn't convinced with his conclusion, but I did find the narrative interesting. Three stars

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.