Scientists and special-effects experts on three continents have teamed up to recreate a face which they say is the closest image yet of the boy king

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooInvolved:
Very cool.

---

For you
http://www.network54.com/Forum/414038

quote:

---

King Tut's Face Reconstructed

Ted Chamberlain

National Geographic News
May 10, 2005

Is this the true face of Tut? This silicone-skinned bust is billed as the most accurate forensic reconstruction ever of ancient Egypt's Pharaoh Tutankhamun. It was based on recent 3-D CT scans of the mummy of the "boy king," who is believed to have been about 19 when he died some 3,300 years ago.

Led by Zahi Hawass, head of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, a National Geographic Society team commissioned French experts to create the lifelike bust. Using the CT scans, French forensic anthropologist Jean-Noël Vignal determined the basic measurements and features of Tutankhamun's face. Vignal deduced that Tutankhamun had a narrow nose, buck teeth, a receding chin, and Caucasian features. Such features are typical of European, North African, Middle Eastern, and Indian peoples.

Paris-based forensic sculptor Elisabeth Daynès then created the bust shown above. She used Vignal's estimates of skin thickness and other data, plus wooden sculptures of Tut made in his youth. Soft-tissue features, such as the nose and ears, had to be guessed at, though within a scientifically determined range. Daynès based the skin tone on an average shade of Egyptians today and added the eyeliner that the king would have worn in life.

Finally, National Geographic gave the CT data to a U.S. forensic team, who were to work "blind" -- not knowing who the subject was. Their findings validated the French team's conclusions. And their plaster cast, a photo of which will be published on the National Geographic magazine Web site later this month, turned out remarkably similar to the silicon bust.

The reconstruction will be featured in the June issue of National Geographic, in the touring exhibit "Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of the Pharaohs," and on the National Geographic Channel's King Tut's Final Secrets, airing Sunday night.

---

quote:

---

CT Scans Show What King Tut Looked Like

Forensic Reconstruction of King Tut Shows for the First Time What Boy Pharaoh Looked Like

By MAAMOUN YOUSSEF
Associated Press Writer

CAIRO, Egypt May 10, 2005 — The first facial reconstructions of King Tutankhamun based on CT scans of his mummy have produced images strikingly similar to the boy pharaoh's ancient portraits, with one model showing a baby-faced young man with chubby cheeks and his family's characteristic overbite.

That model, a photo of which was released Tuesday, bears a strong resemblance to the gold mask of King Tut found in his tomb in 1922 by the British excavation led by Howard Carter.

The beardless youth depicted in the model, created by a French team, has soft features, a sloping nose and a weak chin and the overbite, which archaeologists have long believed was a trait shared by other kings in Tut's 18th dynasty. His eyes are highlighted by thick eyeliner.

Three teams of forensic artists and scientists from France, the United States and Egypt each built a model of the boy pharaoh's face based on some 1,700 high-resolution photos from CT scans of his mummy to reveal what he looked like the day he died nearly 3,300 years ago.

"The shape of the face and skull are remarkably similar to a famous image of Tutankhamun as a child where he was shown as the sun god at dawn rising from a lotus blossom," said Zahi Hawass, secretary-general of the Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities.

The CT scans the first done on an Egyptian mummy have suggested King Tut was a healthy, yet slightly built 19-year-old, standing 5 feet, 6 inches tall at the time of his death.

The three teams created their reconstructions separately, the Americans and French working from a plastic skull, the Egyptians working directly from the CT scans, which could distinguish different densities of soft tissue and bone.

The French and Egyptians knew they were recreating King Tut, but the Americans were not even told where the skull was from and correctly identified it as a Caucasoid North African, the council said in a statement.

"The results of the three teams were identical or very similar in the basic shape of the face, the size, shape and setting of the eyes, and the proportion of the skull," Hawass said.

---

Egyptian Reconstruction:

French Reconstruction:

American "Blind" Reconstruction:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Three very recent and more accurate King Tut reconstructions:

French Reconstruction:

---

the skull seems to be of the black africans, whereas the skin isn't black. i remark.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mazigh:
the skull seems to be of the black africans, whereas the skin isn't black. i remark.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dahlak:
what are you talking about, there are light skin blacks and have his skin colour. what is your point?

---

what i would like to say, is that the skull in the above image, belongs to the black race on the basis of the shape of the skull, but the skin has brown coulour (like as the colour of the modern egyptians).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
anyone who thinks King Tut was a black African is an uneductaed idiot

---

how about this skull:

What is it with “White” people? How many sculptures does it take to convince them that Tut wasn’t White? They totally ignore the artifacts left behind. THE WRITING IS LITERALLY ON THE WALLS. Tut and Egyptians weren’t Euro or Asiatic. Any fool could see this...well most would.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
tdog...you get sillier everytime you write. Go into any university and spout that baloney and they will laugh you out of the place.

---

You do realize most of a person's education is outside of the classroom. If all you have is classroom knowledge, your ignorance is explained.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
tdog...you get sillier everytime you write. Go into any university and spout that baloney and they will laugh you out of the place.

---

no Horemheb, you do. the only people who believe Tut is a white European or an Arab are white surpremists who need to take credit for other people's accomplishments.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
Oh thats it...we can get on a message board full of people with no degrees and learn more than we can in a university. Now there is some real wisdom.

---

I'm not saying a university degree is worthless. You just seem to be a narrow-minded person stuck in his university textbooks. BTW, a university degree isn’t the end all to be all. A degree doesn't mean you know what you're talking about Sir.

quote:

---

tdog...you get sillier everytime you write. Go into any university and spout that baloney and they will laugh you out of the place.

---

Hor, How are you today? Hope you're well. Hor, I want to share a little secret with you. You know the universal laughter you're always hearing from scholars, academics and others? It probably correlates well with the laughter coming from members of this board. Guess what: they're laughing at you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Horemheb:
tdogg, You seem to be a smart guy....get an education and make a real contribution. I wouldn't do it in African history if I were you, you seem to have a deep bias that would not be helpful. latin Americ is what i would study if I were starting over.

---

Hore, I’m not biased. You are the biased one. I’m open to all information.

quote:

---

Originally posted by tdogg:
Hore, I’m not biased. You are the biased one. I’m open to all information.

Since I’ve been a member of this site I haven’t seen you supported any of your positions. Even though Evil keeps getting owned, at least he tries to support his views. You on the other hand just talk out the side of your neck.

---

Quite true!

He looks like boy george.

Just a matter of where we draw the line.

The features and even the color used in the reconstruction are similar to this person's features:

Socially both are considered Black.

So, here is our reconstruction with thicker lips matching the gold mask:

Read Dr. Ahmed Saleh's website for more details:

Considering this, we have difficult problems when we dealing with the Egyptian skulls because there is no studies either for ancient Egyptians or for modern Egyptians.
http://www.mummyspeaks.net/ENGLISH/facial_reconstruction.htm

The Forensic team that does reconstruction even admits that the ears and nose are two parts of the reconstruction that cannot be done with complete accuracy.

[image]http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/jeter_mariah.jpg[/image]

North African Caucasoid just because of a single feature - Nose. I don't care what the majority says, they are wrong. Anyone with unbias eyes can see that those features are clearly Negroid or perhaps intermediate. The Blind reconstruction is the most unbias representation and also the most Negroid. And as stated by the person who did the reconstruction, Race was difficullt to determine due to the skull shape but the European like Nose is why it was classified as North African Caucasoid. A single feature, which we already knew. This is a stupid thing to debate. We already knew what Tut looked like and we don't need the reconstruction to argue over those features. We can pick various East Africans with those features and argue about them. We can even take various African Americans and argue about their racial classification. Fact is fact, those features accompanied by a Dark brown pigmentation and tight curly hair makes one socially Black in the great USA.

quote:

---

ausar...why am I not suprised at your comments. If he had been presented as negroid you would not have questioned the work. The man was a North African caucasoid regardless of the ranting that goes on here, that is the way it will be presented

---

Yes, actually I would have questioned the reconstruction. Obviously you can't read what I posted. The people doing the reconstruction are still using facial thickness for ancient Egyptians using Europeans models. Read the website with Dr. Ahmed Saleh that said there is no precise study on either ancient Egyptian remains or modern Egyptians.

I don't trust forensic reconstructions no matter how they come out.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Of course, none of those reconstructions exhibit any Negroid features, as all three teams identified King Tut as Caucasoid. And bear in mind that anthropologists can determine race from the shape of the skull alone, so possibly inaccurate features like the nose and lips are ultimately irrelevant to that assessment. But when they come out similar in three independent reconstructions -- including a "blind" one -- the probability of their accuracy increases greatly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by osirion:

And Native Americans are called Indians by the majority. Doesn't mean that they are from India.

North African Caucasoid just because of a single feature - Nose. I don't care what the majority says, they are wrong. Anyone with unbias eyes can see that those features are clearly Negroid or perhaps intermediate. The Blind reconstruction is the most unbias representation and also the most Negroid. And as stated by the person who did the reconstruction, Race was difficullt to determine due to the skull shape but the European like Nose is why it was classified as North African Caucasoid. A single feature, which we already knew. This is a stupid thing to debate. We already knew what Tut looked like and we don't need the reconstruction to argue over those features. We can pick various East Africans with those features and argue about them. We can even take various African Americans and argue about their racial classification. Fact is fact, those features accompanied by a Dark brown pigmentation and tight curly hair makes one socially Black in the great USA.

---

Currently I am in the process of emailing Dr. Susan Anton. I will post her comments on the crania of Tut-ankh-amun.

quote:

---

Of course, none of those reconstructions exhibit any Negroid features, as all three teams identified King Tut as Caucasoid. And bear in mind that anthropologists can determine race from the shape of the skull alone, so possibly inaccurate features like the nose and lips are ultimately irrelevant to that assessment. But when they come out similar in three independent reconstructions -- including a "blind" one -- the probability of their accuracy increases greatly.

---

The American examiner named Sustan Anton admited that ''race'' was the hardest call. She said that the crania was African but the nose opening was European. If we found a person like a Beja or even some Nilotic groups that have narrower noses and less prognathism than a Bantu they would have automatically place that person into the caucasoid bracket.

See Susan Anton's observation:

Feminine face of King Tut revealed http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/std/World/GE12Wd02.html

"Race was ``the hardest call.'' The shape of the cranial cavity
indicated an African, while the nose opening suggested narrow
nostrils - a European characteristic. The skull was a North African.
With these guidelines, Anderson was able to build the shape of the
face by attaching the muscles to ridges in the plastic skull and
building the nose and ears from parameters developed by anatomists.

?Race was "the hardest call." The shape of the cranial cavity indicated an African, while the nose opening suggested narrow nostrils - a European characteristic. The skull was a North African
The resulting plaster cast is perhaps midway between the square-jawed, high-cheekboned Egyptian Tut, and the strikingly androgynous French Tut.?

- Seeing King Tut for the first time, Houston Chronicle, May 10, 2005, http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/3176462

The Canadanian police department using about the same methods as what was used with Tut-ankh-amun considered the following:

UGHAN, ONT. - York Regional Police have released drawings of an unidentified woman whose badly burned body was found in an industrial park more than 10 years ago.

A police officer made the gruesome discovery on Sept. 1, 1994, after noticing a fire behind a building on Bradwick Drive near Highway 7 in Vaughan.

When the fire was put out, the body of a young woman was found in the remains of a suitcase. Gasoline and tires had been used to fuel the fire.

On Tuesday, investigators released drawings of a clay reconstruction of the victim's face, along with previously unpublished information that they hope may help someone identify her.

Forensic testing indicates that [b]the victim was likely a dark-skinned Caucasian from a North African country such as Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia or Egypt. Her estimated age was 17 to 18.[/quote]

She stood five feet, four inches, and had a very slim build, weighing between 85 and 100 pounds. She had dark curly hair, which may have been dyed a reddish colour, and protruding front teeth, which were in good condition.

Police say the victim had suffered broken bones in her back and lower limbs that had been left to heal untreated. As a result, they say she was likely immobile and in constant pain.

Drawing of 1994 homicide victim
[IMG] http://toronto.cbc.ca/gfx/Toronto/photos/cold_case20050125.jpg http://toronto.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=to-coldcase20050125

It always takes a few couragous people to step out and risk persecution and tell the truth: Martin Luther (reformation), Galilaeo and lets not forget the Martyrs that died for a non-Corrupt English translation of the Bible. Often, only the minorities have the truth and they are persecuted for it, laughed at, and sometimes killed.

Science is not politics.

North Africans are called Caucasoid by default and it is a political choice. In terms of phenotype, the classification of Tut is based on a single feature - period.

This is not a Caucasian profile:

This is a Caucasian profile:

If you haven't notice, the profile of Anwar Sadat is very similar to that of the reconstruction of Tut.

And I will up you one more:

This:

Is similar to this:

real typical pure black people

king tut

get the picture?

quote:

---

Originally posted by leba:
King Tut looks like a white feminnine looking fag I don't see anything black about him.

real typical pure black people

king tut

get the picture?

[This message has been edited by leba (edited 02 September 2005).]

---

Actually, based soley on that reconstruction, I would say he looks Ethiopian.

quote:

---

Registered: Aug 2005
<http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/icons/icon1.gif> posted 02 September 2005 05:50 PM [Click Here to See the Profile for Mazigh] [Edit/Delete Message] [Reply w/Quote] i see there is a serious similarity between the front of anwar assadat and that one of tut, but less similar as far as the head back of them is concerned (he is the most similar untill now).
if there is a one white man wich such head back like that of tut, it will be logical to discuss thereabout.
as far as i know that head back can't be but black. if i'm correct, such skulls, are similar with that of congo.
(i don't claim that i have the answer, but it is difficult to believe that that head back of tut weren't black

---

The trait is called Dolcephallic I believe. You will find many Nilotic groups like the Massai in Kenya with head shapes like the crania of Tut-ankh-amun.

People forget that a study by Kent R. Weeks was already done on Tut-ankh-amun and can be found in a book entitled X-raying the Pharaohs.

One thing that many postulated was that the head shape found in Tut-ankh-amun and Akenaten's daughters was from head binding that was praticed by the Mangbetu in Zaire[modern day Congo] and by Pervuian natives.