"This mummy of is one of the ancient Egyptian girls, she lived in later period and her mummy received scientific examination. So there are scientific clues in the hands of Naeve before making the girl’s face.

He had faced one problem, which was the bad condition of the skull, it was fractured to more than thirty pieces and had missed some parts but they were not the main parts which the facial reconstruction depend on.

When he finished the cast, he was surprised by the results. The features of the Egyptian girl were close to the European features not the Egyptian. So he **made some modifications to the nose and lips** after a visit to the British museum so study the Egyptians features in the Egyptian statues and human remains.

The accuracy of reconstruction the Egyptian faces on skulls:

When the anatomist His collected the measurements of the soft tissues thickness, he relied on the studies of the Caucasian people. Even Kollman and Buchly established the precise technical process on their measurements that they took from 159 European bodies. And also Manchester’ Mummy team had reconstructed the Egyptian faces (the two brothers and 1770’mummy) on the same bases but R.Naeve had realized that these measurements represent the **weakest point** in their facial reconstruction (op.cit, p.18) and he pointed that facial reconstruction needs “more information on soft tissue thickness of a far wider range of racial types”...

R.Naeve (1997, p. 19) stated the accuracy of resemblance of facial reconstruction on skull and the person when he was alive is really depend on three points:

• The experience of making Reconstruction

• The state of the skull

• The background of information of the skull
  

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.

In fact, Naeve faced this problem when he finished the reconstruction of mummy’1770 (1998, p. 177) which seems to be like European appearance. For that reason he and Dr. Rosalie David visited the Egyptian figures, either statues or bodies’ remains in British museum, and they studied the nose and the lips in these figures and Naeve made some modifications in these parts of the cast of mummy’ 1770(1984, p. 144).

Conclusion:

The results of Manchester Mummy Project’ team proved more needs to many studies in facial features of ancient Egyptians either through their human remains or the ancient Egyptian art. The team had realized the problem of depending on the existing measurements of soft tissue thickness, because the Egyptian faces carrying the Caucasian features so, it needs many studies on the anthropology of ancient Egyptians."

------

We do however have information on the background of ancient Egyptians through other avenues, including archeology, linguistics, molecular genetics and physical anthropology, climate and environment history, and so on. Matter of fact, remains of ancient Egyptian populations studied, exhibit tropical body plans. As for molecular genetics, one need not extract them from remains of ancient folks, to determine the bio-history of lineages in the region. We already know the language base of the ancient Egyptians. Again, as the author appropriately pointed out, further consideration has to be placed on ancient art, and importantly, much more diversified info on tissue thickness [rather than just relying on European templates to study foreign groups], including actual Egyptian remains. Melanin dosage tests would be good indicators of the level of skin shading, but possible contamination of remains is used as a basis for not endorsing such. It will be interesting to see other ancient folks get the same treatment as ancient Egyptians, i.e., facial reconstructions of Sumerians, ancient Americans, ancient Greeks, Indus Valley and so on, to see if they really belong in their respective lands.

Lets see:
1)They ignore the colouring of all of the life-like images that was done when king tut was living.
2)His limb ration is tropically (super-negroid- whatever that means) adapted as are the rest of africans.
3)His skull is african or black or negro; take your pick of euphamisms.
4)Prominent prognathism (not that all black african have this but its almost exclusive to black africans).
5)Caucasian nose myth: a narrow nose index and high nose bridge is not exclusive to europeans and can be found in many population in particularly native East africans with no admixture.
6)Soft tissue is molded after euroepans/caucasians when his images shows his soft tissue features.

CAN SOMEONE HONESTLY SAY THIS IS A SCEINTIFIC APPROACH AND NOT POLITICAL ONE?-NO!

Its interesting to see the extent that eurocentric anthropologist and egyptologist have gone to align themself with the AE, but the reality is its a pitiful display of racism and imperialism at its worst(what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine); as well as wishful thinking. The truth is coming out like it or not hor! That farse of a reactionary and politico-economic reconstruction made it very clear to people who are in search of and care about the truth. The next plot/plan for them is to "reclaim" native east Africans (kenyans, somolians, ethiopians, namibians,rwandans and sudanese) as kinky hair, dark skinned caucasians, because more and more the AE resemble them (as well as other black types).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
It pays to examine the author's notes in some more detail :

Conclusion:

The results of Manchester Mummy Project’ team proved more needs to many studies in facial features of ancient Egyptians either through their human remains or the ancient Egyptian art. The team had realized the problem of depending on the existing measurements of soft tissue thickness, because the Egyptian faces carrying the Caucasian features so, it needs many studies on the anthropology of ancient Egyptians."

------

We do however have information on the background of ancient Egyptians through other avenues, including archeology, linguistics, molecular genetics and physical anthropology, climate and environment history, and so on. Matter of fact, remains of ancient Egyptian populations studied, exhibit tropical body plans. As for molecular genetics, one need not extract them from remains of ancient folks, to determine the bio-history of lineages in the region. We already know the language base of the ancient Egyptians. Again, as the author appropriately pointed out, further consideration has to be placed on ancient art, and importantly, much more diversified info on tissue thickness [rather than just relying on European templates to study foreign groups], including actual Egyptian remains. Melanin dosage tests would be good indicators of the level of skin shading, but possible contamination of remains is used as a basis for not endorsing such. It will be interesting to see other ancient folks get the same treatment as ancient Egyptians, i.e., facial reconstructions of Sumerians, ancient Americans, ancient Greeks, Indus Valley and so on, to see if they really belong in their respective lands.

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

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keins:
TROPICAL body proportions! I like how they pretent to use all the available information to "figure out" how the AE (king-tut) looked when they ignore all of the information that ties them nicely with the rest of africa.

Lets see:
1)They ignore the colouring of all of the life-like images that was done when king tut was living.
2)His limb ration is tropically (super-negroid- whatever that means) adapted as are the rest of africans.
3)His skull is african or black or negro; take your pick of euphamisms.
4)Prominent prognathism (not that all black african have this but its almost exclusive to black africans).
5)Caucasian nose myth: a narrow nose index and high nose bridge is not exclusive to europeans and can be found in many population in particularly native East africans with no admixture.
6)Soft tissue is molded after euroepans/caucasians when his images shows his soft tissue features.

CAN SOMEONE HONESTLY SAY THIS IS A SCEINTIFIC APPROACH AND NOT POLITICAL ONE?-NO!

Its interesting to see the extent that eurocentric anthropologist and egyptologist have gone to align themself with the AE, but the reality is its a pitiful display of racism and imperialism at its worst(what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine); as well as wishful thinking. The truth is coming out like it or not hor! That farse of a reactionary and politico-economic reconstruction made it very clear to people who are in search of and care about the truth. The next plot/plan for them is to "reclaim" native east Africans (kenyans, somolians, ethiopians, namibians,rwandans and sudanese) as kinky hair, dark skinned caucasians, because more and more the AE resemble them (as well as other black types).

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

---

Sudanese people are dark caucasians? i think not.
http://www.3pministries.org/images/Sudanese%20children.jpg

and for that matter, Egyptians, Somalis, Ethiopians, Eritreans, and Kenyans are definitely not either.

I see you guys are again arguing with the old Hore on the long beaten issue of Tut's ethnicity!!!

Why?!!

Djehuti, did you read Dr. Saleh's comments?