I found Valley of the Kings by Cecelia Holland to be a rather odd combination of two stories. Originally published in 1977 under a pseudonym the novel is divided into two distinct parts. The first part, and in my opinion, the better part is the story of Howard Carter, the Englishman who discovered King Tut’s tomb in 1922. The second half of the book travels back in time to ancient Egypt under the rule of Tut.

I was fascinated to read about Howard Carter, his relationship with Lord Carnavron, and the devious way he had to circumvent the British bureaucrats and officials in order to dig where he wanted. Many of the archaeologists of that time were much more interested in treasure hunting than in learning the history and culture of ancient Egypt and although Carter was rather stiff and self-righteous, he was definitely not in it for the treasure. When the story abruptly changed and jumped back in time, I was disappointed as I wanted to learn more about Carter and how the tomb was excavated. The second story takes us back in time and is set during King Tut’s reign. I found this overdone and rather silly and in the end I was left wishing the author had simply written about Howard Carter.

Cecelia Holland is the author of many very good historical novels, unfortunately this isn’t one of them. ( )

Short book with an unusually ambitious structure. There are two narratives, Howard Carter's search for and eventual discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb and the story of how the clues and the tomb ended up where they were.

Though written in Cecilia Holland's usual manner (a manner which you either like or don't, I happen to like it quite a bit), it is also a species of meta-fiction. The archaeologist, although meticulous and dedicated, is partly correct, but also sometimes wildly wrong in his interpretation of the sculpture and artifacts. He acknowledges he might be wrong, but he can only justify himself by being correct. This is self-aware fiction, if the archaeologist does not get it right, how can the novelist and really, why should they? We only really know ourselves.

Alas, I didn't quite grasp the overall workings of the plot. On the other hand, it is neat to follow up the incidents during Tutankhamun's reign and burial which led to the artifacts and tomb being found as they were. A most imaginative reconstruction. ( )

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this book. It's historical fiction with a twist. Howard Carter's first-person narrative of his search for Tutankhamun's tomb alternates with a story of life in ancient Egypt during Tutankhamun's reign. Although well researched, in general, I noticed some factual errors, especially in the ancient Egypt saga. I'm not sure, however, how much this has to do with what was known at the time this book was written (1977), versus what we know or believe to be true now. But countering this criticism is the fact it's a novel written for reading enjoyment, not a textbook. "Valley of the Kings" is an interesting, engaging book.

(A side note, the copy I have states the author is Elizabeth Eliot Carter, which is a pseudenym for Cecilia Holland, who is the stated author of other editions.) ( )

A more straightforward story than her other novels and easier to read than some. The 1922 section is fairly exciting in places, though the ancient Egyptian characters never come across as real to me. ( )