posted
The higher level of dark skin doesn't change the entire reconstruction and its error. Collectively, we as black people can generate enough finance to accurately reconstruct King Tut in our own image. We can't help it if they want to see King Tut that way and its not our job to change what they want to see. Black people will have to do it for themselves and only themselves and not for others or rely on others. Even if others are intending on promoting falsehoods about specific figures in our history.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sahel (Siptah): The higher level of dark skin doesn't change the entire reconstruction and its error. Collectively, we as black people can generate enough finance to accurately reconstruct King Tut in our own image. We can't help it if they want to see King Tut that way and its not our job to change what they want to see. Black people will have to do it for themselves and only themselves and not for others or rely on others. Even if others are intending on promoting falsehoods about specific figures in our history.
what is the error in particular?
How do you like this for a possible likeness?
^^^^ pretty ugly if you ask me
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reconstruction is a political preference. This alone makes it an error. Your other image of the King is metaphorical. Its unique in character but i doubt he looked like that particularly. I think more focus should be on portraits representing himself and only himself despite elements of idealization if we are to seek accuracy of his appearance.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by asante: King tut would of looked similar to most somali people do today
The 'toothsome' type
Somali pirate?
I must say you definitely hit that nail on the head.
Bless your heart. I think of this Sudani Taxidriver who I know, great big Black man, with protruding big white teeth. I think of this type as very East African. So I'm dismayed by these so-called 'reconstructions' where even a blind person could tell that their is no likeness at all. Yet we have this stupid trash setting the agenda, calling the shots, and defining Blacks. A bunch of assholes, if you ask me.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by asante: King tut would of looked similar to most somali people do today
The 'toothsome' type
Somali pirate?
Yes the buck teeth is what made me think that, its a very common trait among sudanese and somali people.
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I don't know about Tut looking exactly like that man but the alveolar prognathism or 'buckteeth' is definitely a trait he possessed.
quote:Originally posted by Sahel (Siptah): The reconstruction is a political preference. This alone makes it an error. Your other image of the King is metaphorical. Its unique in character but i doubt he looked like that particularly. I think more focus should be on portraits representing himself and only himself despite elements of idealization if we are to seek accuracy of his appearance.
Yes, the reconstruction by National Geographic was indeed biased since the French team who worked on it knew the skull they were reconstructing was Tut's and therefore tried to put their preconceived notions on what ancient Egyptians should look like. Needless to say that their efforts to white-wash Tut only ended up making look biracial or 'mulatto'! LOL I may have mentioned this before but I knew a guy back in my high school which the reconstruction looked exactly like albeit in an effeminate way and he happened to be a light-skinned (Afro) Puerto-Rican. The Lyinass is only fooling herself or playing the fool if she thinks darkening this joke of a reconstruction makes it more accurate. If anything, darkening the skin tone only makes it more bizarre looking than it is now!
Funny how these Euronuts ignore all the color portraits of the boy-king in their quest at 'reconstruction'.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only reconstruction that matters is the original as the person that made this sculpture actually saw him.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
^^^ This is not a reconstruction. It is a piece of Egpytian art and they often stylized representations of kings in various ways, some features not similar to how the person actually looked.
^^^^ here, we can compare the mummy with the wood bust above and note the mummy has a much more elongated skull and unpleasant looking overbite. The wooden bust seems quite different in proportions to Tutankhamun's mummy.
For comparision, another mummy:
, Guanche mummy, Canary Islands
Here is a different skull shape, not elongated and no overbite. perhaps the wood bust represents Tutankhamun at an earlier age. Whatever the case may be, in my opinion the Tutankhamun mummy is much closer to the proportions of the gold funerary mask:
Below is the Tutankhamun mummy again from a different angle. An excellent quality photograph although the angle is not that good for comparisons:
People cling to the wooden bust because they like the skin tone. However the wood bust looks more like an Indian kid than an African. However if we look at the actual mummy we see more similarity to the gold funerary mask. The head is elongated and the mouth is wider. There is a slight overbite impression in the top lip. The overall impression is that the gold mask looks more like an African person due to the fullness of the lips. When compared to the mummy it more closely resembles the mummy. This is why the lioness' opinion is better than the rest. I'm more objective. While other people flock to the wood bust in love with the brown colored skin, I point to the gold mask, in fact a represtantation more African looking and much closer to the mummy. This is why I get paid the big bucks.
King tuts mummy looks like most somali and northern Sudanese people so who really cares what a damn statue looks like
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by asante: King tut would of looked similar to most somali people do today
The 'toothsome' type
Somali pirate?
I was thinking of his poor wife, only finding out who she was betrothed to, when he lifted her veil in the bridal chamber. I was excessively dissapointed when I first saw the mummy, imagining he was buried in all this golden splendour and not really looking 'royal' in any way.
But hey, did you all heard the rumor that all this golden finery was made for Nefertiti (Nefertari?), Tut's stepmother, and the golden casket has a bust, like for a woman?
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: The only reconstruction that matters is the original as the person that made this sculpture actually saw him.
The artist idealized him, to make him look royal and vigourous. This also goes for the European royal portraits. Whether they posed or not. We do not know how many portraits were made and what they all actually looked like. I believe, from letters I was shown, some telltale items are still kept hidden away. More interesting is to find out how they consulted artist to come up with a concept as how the European kings and queens should be portrayed. Then this concept would be used by all artists. What was the instruction and why. In Egypt you recognize Ramses from his statues, and we know he did not look like that at all, with hook nose.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
LMAOH @ da lyinass's attempt to whitewash the statuary!
Sorry you lying worm, but there is no way Tut was a ruddy faced white person with blue eyes! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^^^ This is not a reconstruction. It is a piece of Egyptian art and they often stylized representations of kings in various ways, some features not similar to how the person actually looked.
This may be true of random statues like the one you tried to whiten up but NOT true of life sized busts! Life size busts, especially painted ones tend to really do represent the persons they depict!
quote:
^^^^ here, we can compare the mummy with the wood bust above and note the mummy has a much more elongated skull and unpleasant looking overbite. The wooden bust seems quite different in proportions to Tutankhamun's mummy.
Exactly what makes you think the head of the bust is not elongated?? And how can you tell that exactly since the bust wears a headdress?! As for the alveolar prognathism you call an "overbite", since when did it look "unpleasant" when the boy king was alive since those of us with common sense know that such a trait only looks more prominent on the mummy since the tissue around the mouth including the lips are essentially shriveled up! If that wasn't the case, then all the other reconstructions of Tut's skull would have showed him with buck teeth sticking out like the Somali man, including the one made by National Geographic!
By the way, an even better comparison to the mummy close up would be the bust also at a CLOSE UP view.
Notice the outline of chin and lower face matches that of the mummy only with the bust looking fleshier of course. Even the nasal bridge and nasal tip matches with the nasal bridge and nasal opening of the mummy.
quote:For comparision, another mummy:
, Guanche mummy, Canary Islands
Here is a different skull shape, not elongated and no overbite. perhaps the wood bust represents Tutankhamun at an earlier age...
And what the hell this Guanche mummy has to do with Tut or his bust?!
By the way here is a bust of Tut at an earlier age as a child.
Notice the bust above is the same as the other bust only with more childish features.
quote:Whatever the case may be, in my opinion the Tutankhamun mummy is much closer to the proportions of the gold funerary mask:
Apparently you don't realize that the proportions of the gold mask are the SAME as those of the bust, you nitwit!
quote:Below is the Tutankhamun mummy again from a different angle. An excellent quality photograph although the angle is not that good for comparisons:
No! The above mummy is the KV 35 Younger Lady initially thought to be Nefertiti but now confirmed to be Tut's mother!! LMAO
You obviously don't have a clue as to what you're talking about!
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lyinass rhetoric continued: People cling to the wooden bust because they like the skin tone..
No! Again, the reason is because Egyptian busts are the most realistic of portraits. As for the skin tone, the bust isn't the only painted portrait.
quote:However the wood bust looks more like an Indian kid than an African.
Again with this dumbass opinion! There are plenty of Africans who resemble Tut more so than Indians, in fact didn't an Indian poster in here before even tell you he does not look Indian, you twit?!
quote:However if we look at the actual mummy we see more similarity to the gold funerary mask. The head is elongated and the mouth is wider. There is a slight overbite impression in the top lip. The overall impression is that the gold mask looks more like an African person due to the fullness of the lips. When compared to the mummy it more closely resembles the mummy.
quote:This is why the lioness' opinion is better than the rest. I'm more objective. While other people flock to the wood bust in love with the brown colored skin, I point to the gold mask, in fact a representation more African looking and much closer to the mummy. This is why I get paid the big bucks.
^ And the above bullsh|t is why you are NEVER taken seriously. You are and will always be a stupid clownish troll!
lyinass bullsh|t productions 2011 Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ look at this Djhoopti calling me stupid yet adding in a larger picture of the funerary mask, hypocritical. In other words confirming exactly what I said and then trying to squeek at the same time.
Also note this photo is distorted by the lense at a close angle. this is obvious, but Djhoopti is a little dim. It makes the wood bust look more like the head is elongated. Djhoopti doesn't understand these subtlties, too busy baton twirling waiting for cheerlading instructions.
below is the same item, not distorted by the lense. This is obvious.
^^^ the head is not elongated as is the mummy's skull.
However the gold mask is and this is more evidence that Djhoopti lacks skills go back in
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass b|tch: look at this Djhoopti calling me stupid yet adding in a larger picture of the funerary mask, hypocritical. In other words confirming exactly what I said and then trying to squeek at the same time.
No, you dummy. I refuted what you said because the golden mask and the bust have the same features and proportions
quote:
Also note this photo is distorted by the lense at a close angle. this is obvious, but Djhoopti is a little dim. It makes the wood bust look more like the head is elongated. Djhoopti doesn't understand these subtlties, too busy baton twirling waiting for cheerlading instructions.
What the hell are you talking about??! By elongated head, do you mean the face??! LOL Usually when one speaks of elongated head, one is referring to the actual dome of the skull. In this case both the mask and the bust feature headdresses covering the dome of the skull. I see now that your twitty ass meant elongated face!
quote:below is the same item, not distorted by the lense. This is obvious.
Yes and it is the same exact shape as the golden mask you moron!
Both mask and bust display round full face!
quote:The head is not elongated as is the mummy's skull.
Again by "head" you mean face. And apparently you don't know this but usually the face of a 2,000 year old dried up corpse is not going to have the fleshy fullness that it had in life. Thus, as you yourself stated just because the skull's face looks slightly longer and thinner does not mean it was that exact shape in life when the person literally had more flesh to the face!
quote:However the gold mask is and this is more evidence that Djhoopti lacks skills go back in
LOL Sorry you dumb lyinass but it looks like you lack brain power. I suggest you leave this forum to those decent intellects. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyinass, please give it up already! We all know you're stupid racist white girl pretending to be black as evidenced by your fantasy portrayal of Tut below.
Your black face paint is blown! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Okay, enough games with the lyinass worm.
Lyinass claims that all portraits of royals are inconsistent and while this is perhaps true with most portraits especially those built and displayed throughout the kingdom of Egypt, I believe those life-size portraits and in particular busts are made in the likeness of the persons they portray. This is true with Tut's painted bust as well as his gold mask which are essentially the same in facial likeness.
But Tut isn't the only one. I base my premise on three other Egyptian royals, specifically Tut's own family members of the 18th dynasty:
Tut's father Amenhotep IV a.k.a. Akhentaten.
Even though there are countless depictions of Akhentaten, especially those showing unusually elongated face, the life size bust above appears to be the one most resembling his reconstruction by forensic artists.
By the way, the reconstruction above was done by scientists who were double-blinded.
Here we have the wooden bust of Akhenaten's mother (Tut's grandmother) Tiye.
We also have a stone bust featuring the same exact facial structure and features.
^ Notice the cheeks, chin, smile line are all the same as the wooden bust. Even though the nose is broken off, the nasal index is the exact same as the wooden bust. Obviously not all portraits are inconsistent or random in nature!
Now we have Amenhotep III, Tiye's husband, Akhenaten's father and of course Tut's grandfather.
There is definitely some consistency here as well.
I personally believe that those statues which aren't consistent or portray different features were made either by artists who have never seen the royal OR made a certain way at the whims of a king or royal as part of some unknown propaganda such as most portraits of Akhenaten showing him with really elongated face. Other than that the artwork shows some consistency.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Both mask and bust display round full face!
Djhooti, you're a jackass, let me explain. You think anybody is going to be fooled that you found a picture of the gold mask tilted upward so it looks rounder? You are pathetic.
"bust display round full face!"
you're a real genius, if they are round then they don't match the long face of the skull. moron ! (loss)
you had to go and find a differnt angle when the below is a perfectly good photo not tilted but center level shot and more similar to the mummy head, damn you're stupid, mess with the art just to try to attempt to win an argument, sad
^^^ this has a narrower chin and fuller lips, wider mouth than the wood bust, looks like a different person
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass dummy: Djhooti, you're a jackass, let me explain. You think anybody is going to be fooled that you found a picture of the gold mask tilted upward so it looks rounder? You are pathetic.
Do you realize how stupid you sound?? If the golden mask didn't have a round face do you think it would matter if the face was tilted upward??
quote:you're a real genius, if they are round then they don't match the long face of the skull. moron ! (loss)
And again, you are talking about a SKULL whose flesh is shriveled away. That did not mean when Tut was ALIVE he had full fleshy cheeks, you moron!!
quote:you had to go and find a different angle when the below is a perfectly good photo not tilted but center level shot and more similar to the mummy head, damn you're stupid, mess with the art just to try to attempt to win an argument, sad
LOL Uh no! Even your picture proves my point!
quote:this has a narrower chin and fuller lips, wider mouth than the wood bust, looks like a different person
LMAO The differences you point out are very slight and in no way show a different person, you disingenuous twit!
This...
is just a gold version of this...
Get over it, already!
Lyinass bullsh|t 1 dismissed.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lyinass: Djhooti Dumbness Part 2
Akhenaten
His father Amenhotep III
Amenhotep III
Akehnaten does not look much like his father. His face is longer, nose less wide but longer on the vertical proportion.
Djhooti, quit it, you have no eyes
And when did I say that Akhenaten looked the same as his father, nitwit?!! YOU have no wits!!
Lyinass dumbsh|t 2 dismissed.
quote: Djhooti Dumbness Part 3
^^^ darker than:
Of course it's darker because of the LOW LIGHTING! That still does not dissuade the fact that you gave the Tut statue a blushy hue and blue, eyes you twisted little lying worm!!
Lyinass bullsh|t 3 dismissed. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't give him a blushy hue you infinite bozo. It's reddish brown similar to thousands of ancient Egyptian paintings. The eyes are not blue. I used zero blue. They are grey + black like some of the glass eyes seen in some sculptures.
Djhooti Dumbness Part 3 B
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Lyinass bullsh|t 3b. Quit the lying already. Anybody with eyes can see that the color you gave to that Tut statue is NOT the dark reddish-brown of Egyptians but a EUROPEAN pinkish peach flesh-tone that is darkened. We can even see the blue eyes you gave to it, you lyinass racist white b|tch in cyber black-face. GTFOHPosts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Lyinass bullsh|t 3b. Quit the lying already. Anybody with eyes can see that the color you gave to that Tut statue is NOT the dark reddish-brown of Egyptians but a EUROPEAN pinkish peach flesh-tone that is darkened. We can even see the blue eyes you gave to it, you lyinass racist white b|tch in cyber black-face. GTFOH
you are a racist piece of **** telling me I'm in black face.
If my father heard that he would stomp you into the ground.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Your father? You mean some crazy white guy like professor Hammered, cuz you sure sound like him albeit in a feminine trickster way. You are not fooling anyone with your lies. Begone! Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Fake reconstruction of King Tut that owes nothing to his mummy, the first thing any normal person would consider, no? Why not the people who made it, and the ones who posted in on this forum?
Because to them only matters that the next generation whites (and Blacks and browns) believe that King Tut was a little white boy. Because they insist that Egypt was a white civilisation, as Blacks are not capable to find any civilisation.
This is not rational research, to get as good a reconstruction, this is promoting fake history, to proof white supremacy.
Next they will find him not to be Black and not white; but 'intermediate.' Explaining that any civilisation came from the white side of the ancestors. any nonsense explanation will do as long as whites come out on top.
The Egyptian style looks indeed very realistic but from Ramsses the Great’s mummy we see they are not really using his face, or body type. He is idealised. At the beginning of his rule a type is set and all artists have to keep to this formal type.
Perhaps for personal use they had more real looking images, like the small Tiye statuette.
I imagine the grand images were used for political propaganda, and the Kings face seems to me a mixture of all possible Egyptian facial types, so any Egyptian could recognise himself as Egyptian. The lips however are always full and luscious and point to the classical African type.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
And when did I say that Akhenaten looked the same as his father, nitwit?!! YOU have no wits!! 
Printer-friendly view of this topic