I was giving some insight into how strange it is that we consider perhaps the least famous pharaoh the most famous, which I think is quite interesting. At the same time as I underline why we see him as famous.

You are the one responding trying to correct something that was already showing both sides, by arguing for a statement no one made. So who is trying to be pedantic here?

> Most famous in our time, not his

No one said that though.

I'm also pointing out that in history, that is the written record of the past, he is very unknown.

He's actually one of the least famous pharaohs in history. The only reason we know much about him is that he was so forgotten that even his tomb was lost, and therefore it avoided being looted until we discovered it in modern times.

So when we look at all the treasure that was found in Tutankhamen's tomb, we have to remember that this was the tomb of one of the most insignificant and un-famous (as much as that can be said of a pharaoh) rulers of his time. Just imagine what Rameses the 2nd was buried with.

I don't think that is a question.