I think you may be trying to view the ancient Egyptians through the eyes of moderns.

Bob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [ one might well ask what the 50 yr old Hatshepsut
> was doing in the same tomb as her wet-nurse, but
> we'll press on ].

Actually, these wet nurses were members of the royal family who had been assigned these duties. She may have been the daughter-wife or sister-wife, etc, of Hatshepsut's father and held other titles in her lifetime.

While we dismiss wet nurses as unimportant in our society, to the royals of ancient Egypt they were quite important.



> firstly..., why would a tooth in any casket
> inscribed with a pharoah's name necessarily have
> anything to do with that particular pharoah[ maybe
> someone just had toothache and hoped for a
> reprieve by positing an old tooth into the shrine
> of a powerful personage]

Because the tombs were hidden. If they were going to do that (you mention something that's an European practice but not an ancient Egyptian practice), then they would take the tooth to one of the temple shrines.

> And the other thing.., even Zahi had to admit that
> the cadaver of this particular mummy was not that
> of your average run-of-the-mill ancient AE beauty
> queen..., which is seriously at odds with the few
> unmutilated effigies of Hatshepsut.., who was a
> delight to the eye.., a real little charmer.

I've seen the images (the tour of the Hatshepsut material came to Dallas last year) in person, and frankly they're not 'beauties' but rather the fstandard and stylized portraiture of the day. Hatshepsut was not necessarily beautiful... or even pretty. But she was powerful and could have her portrait done to suit her.

Heck, if I was going to order a portrait for posterity, I assure you it wouldn't be of this longhaired dumpy little middle aged woman (which I am) but an athletic and young and vibrant and attractive woman (which I never was.)