posted
Forensic reconstructions are made both with contemporary human remains and with historic/prehistoric material.
With the additional help of DNA technique and other kinds of analyzes we can get more and more close to how a person might have looked like in life.
Also with the new techniques and new knowledge we can also update and improve older reconstructions.
Also the state of preservation of remains helps to get a more or less faithful depiction. Artwork can also be of help, and written sources if such exists.
I hope we can post some reconstructions here and comment them, if they seem realistic and plausible, or if we think they could be improved.
Maybe start in Greece with a man from a tomb at the palace of Nestor on Peloponnesos from Mycenaean time.
What do you think? Are things like skin color or hair structure plausible?
quote: The face of Bronze Age fighter revealed: Scientists reconstruct face of the 'Griffin Warrior' who was part of an elite group 3,500 years ago Remains of the 3,500 year old 'Griffin Warrior' were found last year A team has reconstructed his face by layer facial tissue over his skull Face templates of average Greek males were used to create eyes and nose It produced a handsome face with a square jaw and powerful neck
quote: The face of Bronze Age fighter revealed: Scientists reconstruct face of the 'Griffin Warrior' who was part of an elite group 3,500 years ago Remains of the 3,500 year old 'Griffin Warrior' were found last year A team has reconstructed his face by layer facial tissue over his skull Face templates of average Greek males were used to create eyes and nose It produced a handsome face with a square jaw and powerful neck
yet there are no photos of the skull or skeleton just some illustrations from what looks like a top view and the rest of the skeleton still in the ground
That reconstruction sells magazines but I suspect they are not showing clearly what's left of that skull because there probably is very little of it left
It's pretty peculiar how they don't have pictures of the skull and hardly for the rest of the skeleton either, the only thing you can see is on the front title page, some of the rib cage and another limb bone, that the best they have. These bones are shown still protruding from the ground, nothing where the bones are isolated or removed from the burial, can't find the skull. At the website there are no description of each photo. You see some round objects that one might think could be a skull but when you look at the captions of the same photos in the Daily mail article they all turn out to be objects, bowls and so on, none of them skull or bones
I take all these reconstructions with a grain of salt. These old skulls don't versify the fleshier parts of the face, the nose tip shape, the shape of the lips or skin color. That is all conjecture
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
One could of course mail them and ask (if one has the energy and interest for it) for more details.
But in this case it seems that some parts of the skull around the nose and eyes were missing.
quote: However, due to the poor condition of the skull, Houlton was unable to accurately reconstruct the area around the eyes and nose. Instead, the team used average face templates of 50 modern Greek males that were 25 to 35 years old.
They also looked at artifacts from the Mycenaean and Minoan civilizations, such as wall paintings, to determine the Griffin Warrior's skin tone and hair color.
So a reconstruction of course depends on how well a skull is preserved.
Otherwise it is possible to reconstruct even rather fragmented skulls if just enough pieces remain. But I agree, it would be interesting to see the remains of the skull.
Otherwise it is fascinating to think about that when I was there (at the Palace of Nestor) this tomb and its content were still not known. But at least when we took a stroll in a nearby olive grove we found some Mycenaean ceramic shards, well visible on the ground.
There is also a Facebook page about the skull and the excavations
I'm looking at the sequence of photos trying to figure it out Looking at the second one there's a skull on a table, you can only see the back of it but the captions says "Toby Holton preparing for 3-D imaging of the Warrior" It doesn't say that is the Griffin skull It says "Toby Holton preparing for 3-D imaging of the Warrior" and he's doing something on a computer, not looking at that skull. Fir the following reasons I don't think that is the Griffin skull, just another skull in the same lab
but the other two pictures say
1) Lynne Schepartz excavating the Warrior’s skull — with Lynne A Schepartz.
and she is working on some big chunk of dirt something. Apparently the skull is in there on the other side that we can't see
then
3) "The Griffin Warrior getting his CAT-Scan"
and again see see this big hunk of dirt apparently and the skull presumably inside of it
Yet where is the CT scan image ?
Usually on reconstructions done like this they show the CT scan in articles. Also where is a basic photo of the skeleton? Not an illustration, a photo of it outside of the burial. It's hardly excavated in the burial pictures
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Facial reconstruction Reconstruction of the Griffin Warrior involved the following steps (Figure 3): A. Skull reassembly and biological profile assessment To restore the skull, initial manual reassembly was performed, followed by digital reassembly in Artec Studio 10 employing scans from an Artec Spider 3D surface scanner
__________________________________
Ok, top right, actual skull in sediment The say there was a manual reassembly but don't show a picture of it. Below a computer rendering of this made from a 3D scan of the reassembled skull
As we can see in A most of the nasal bone and area from there to eye sockets is missing although some of the lower opening seems to be defined
digital scan of what they physically reconstructed
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Than we of course have Ötzi the world famous frozen body from neolithic time found in the Ötztal Alps in Italy, near the border of Austria.
There have been some reconstructions but this one is the latest. He is shown more or less fair skinned on all of them, since it is thought that neolithic Europeans had relatively light skin.
Here is a well known image made after findings at Gobero in Niger, from the Kiffian culture about 10000 years ago to about 8000 years ago. The Kiffians were later followed by the Tenereans around 7000 years ago to about 4500 years ago. Kiffians were hunter gatherers and the Tenereans also had cattle.
posted
Then we of course have two reconstructed faces of 7700 years old Scandinavian hunter gatherers from Motala in Sweden.
They at least had a genetic disposition for light or medium skin color, light hair and light eyes. Probably those traits were inherited from early eastern hunter gatherers, who mixed with darker western hunter gatherers. One must remember that inferences about skin color from DNA are not 100%. The connection between skin color and different genes, and the effect of selection on such genes are not fully understood yet.
posted
big O stop spamming your cringe imhotep stuff
we're talking about forensic reconstructions not some amateur cartoonish stuff
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
Big O you are posting a lot of overbearingly large graphics and several off topic and with huge text lettering many of these back to back. They should be about 75% of that in size. I have deleted several for being off topic but left some, but they would be better a little smaller since there were many back to back. I have one big one but you do it too often one after the other and it's overbearing.
This thread is for reconstructions. That means skulls which are analyzed and then a hypothetical image of a person is methodically built over that.
Therefore I have removed a couple of posts of yours of Vikings because those are not based on a skull.
Similarly you had one of a sculpture of somebody thought to be Narmer. I have removed that, it's art not a skull.
And you had another image about modern Barrister wigs resembling the Egyptian nemes headcloth, not a reconstruction. And another post about eating mummy powder, has nothing to do with the topic
This is off topic spamming has been removed. You can repost that particular one wig one on the cultural diffusion thread in Egyptology if you wnat or make your own thread on Vikings if you want or another on that topic (but make it smaller please)
Also you have something you are calling "facial reconstruction of Tutankhamun" but I don't see any evidence that that image is something developed from the CT scan of the mummy skull
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
^^ random forensics, example of typical presentation by Parabon Labs who mainly do analysis for criminal investigation
quote:Originally posted by Big O:
^ I reduced the size here. Posting occasional big images is Ok occasionally but if you are going to do so many back to back they should be something like this size.
Anyway to have the critique of this image and no link to it's original presentation and you are covering up the middle face however below it appears on the left, not middle
Forensic reconstruction of the mummies JK2911, JK2134 and JK2888. (Image credit: Parabon NanoLabs)
3 Egyptian mummy faces revealed in stunning reconstruction By Mindy Weisberger published September 27, 2021
A forensic artist created the 3D reconstructions based on genetic data.
The faces of three men who lived in ancient Egypt more than 2,000 years ago have been brought back to life. Digital reconstructions depict the men at age 25, based on DNA data extracted from their mummified remains.
The mummies came from Abusir el-Meleq, an ancient Egyptian city on a floodplain to the south of Cairo, and they were buried between 1380 B.C. and A.D. 425. Scientists at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Tübingen, Germany, sequenced the mummies' DNA in 2017; it was the first successful reconstruction of an ancient Egyptian mummy's genome, Live Science reported at the time.
And now, researchers at Parabon NanoLabs, a DNA technology company in Reston, Virginia, have used that genetic data to create 3D models of the mummies' faces through a process called forensic DNA phenotyping, which uses genetic analysis to predict the shape of facial features and other aspects of a person's physical appearance.
^^ this is not the whole article but it is not long, the rest at the link on top of the quote
So Big O, using a quote from this article what exactly are you calling false? - need a verbatim quote of something false, not an interpretation please
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Umm Lioness you MISSED the part where it stated that the basis of the fallacy is that these three men cannot represent Khamet based on the fact that they are late dynastic Northern Egyptians.
"Dr. Sonia Zakrzewski. Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, UK.
Previous studies have compared biological relationships between Egyptians and other populations, mostly using the Howells global cranial data set. In the current study, by contrast, the biological relationships within a series of temporally-successive cranial samples are assessed.
The data consist of 55 cranio-facial variables from 418 adult Egyptian individuals, from six periods, ranging in date from c. 5000 to 1200 BC. These were compared with the 111 Late Period crania (c. 600-350 BC) from the Howells sample. Principal Component and Canonical Discriminant Function Analyses were undertaken, on both pooled and single sex samples.
The results suggest a level of local population continuity exists within the earlier Egyptian populations, but that this was in association with some change in population structure, reflecting small-scale immigration and admixture with new groups. Most dramatically, the results also indicate that the Egyptian series from Howells global data set are morphologically distinct from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Nile Valley samples (especially in cranial vault shape and height), and thus show that this sample CANNOT BE CONSIDERED to be a typical Egyptian series ."
quote:Originally posted by Big O: Umm Lioness you MISSED the part where it stated that the basis of the fallacy is that these three men cannot represent Khamet based on the fact that they are late dynastic Northern Egyptians.
Your graphic referred to the Livescience article
I posted that link as well as the Parabon labs links
so in order for you to say something is false we need to begin with what you are claiming to be false, a sentence or a few sentences, quotations from any of these articles related to the Parbon labs reconstruction, the three faces. It's simple if you say somebody is lying the first thing to do is quote the thing you are claiming to be a lie, the exact thing they said
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
off topic question - if you want to ask that question start a new thread. The question has zero to do with the topic of reconstruction and I just finished explaining another post was off topic and removed
[ 25. January 2022, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: the lioness, ]
Posts: 163 | From: England | Registered: May 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
In 2017 an interesting reconstructions of a 4000 years old Native American family went on display at two museums in Canada: the Canadian Museum of History in Quebec and the Tems Swiya Museum in British Columbia.
The reconstructions are made from skeletal evidence found on Shíshálh (a native community) land northwest of Vancouver, in Canada.
posted
Stop the pseudo propaganda. The oldest DNA we have from the ancient Native Americans show they were more related to todays Native Americans than to any other peoples.
Is it Lucia from Brazil you show there? Or Naia from Mexico? The pic is rather cropped. DNA from other individuals from Lagoa Santa (where they found Luzia) in Brazil showed that that they were mostly related to todays Native Americans.
The same with Naia, she is also more related to todays Native Americans than to any other peoples.
Here we have a reconstruction of Eve of Naharon. So far her remains are the oldest human remains found in the Americas. We have footprints which most probably are older but her skeleton is the oldest one, about 13600 years old.
One can have opinion about the skin tone of the reconstruction, but I think they got facial features and skull form rather right.
posted
About the Luzia skull from Lagoa santa in Brazil, it got partly destroyed by a fire in the National Museum of Brazil where it was housed. But there are casts and photos of the original skull.
One can see that the reconstruction of her face actually also can fit into now living Native American variability, like this Yanomami woman.
Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent.
posted
Archeopteryx, this is optional, please add skulls to the Naia and Luzia posts
This is to remind us that there is a lot of speculation when they make these reconstructions. The nose and lip shapes are partially guessed on to a significant degree Also some skulls are missing big sections, more guesswork
There is also DNA analysis on Naia (but not Luzia)
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think anthropologically considering to what degree something is "deep rooted African" is more useful then considering the much more vague term "black" or European instead of "white" and in some of these "deep rooted native American"
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I think anthropologically considering to what degree something is "deep rooted African" is more useful then considering the much more vague term "black" or European instead of "white" and in some of these "deep rooted native American"
I added skulls and also an article about Naias´DNA.
Yes reconstructions like these are not absolute, especially skin and hair must often be guesswork. And as you say sometimes parts of a skull are missing. So sometimes they fall somewhere between forensic science and art.
One aspect they talk about when they do reconstructions when it concerns criminal cases is if people who knew the deceased will be able to recognize him/her. But with these old skulls we of course can not know that.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2834 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I think anthropologically considering to what degree something is "deep rooted African" is more useful then considering the much more vague term "black" or European instead of "white" and in some of these "deep rooted native American"
Yes, labels are somewhat difficult sometimes. As "African". We all sometimes came from Africa. But how long time is it reasonable to call people Africans? If you lived outside Africa for thousands, yes even ten thousands of years, and your DNA has undergone changes, and you maybe phenotypically look different, are you still an African? And peoples who have been out of Africa very long time but superficially look a bit African, like Melanesians, Australians or Andamanese?
Probably labels will change over time, maybe black and white become obsolete, and geographical designations will be more common.
It reminds me of that the Swedes in the old Swedish colony New Sweden, often called those we today call Native Americans simply "Americans", or by their ethnicity name. But today also the descendants of 500 years of immigration are called Americans.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2834 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
From Egypt we have this famous reconstruction of a mummy from Graeco-Roman time in Fayum of a little boy whose face also was on a mummy portrait. Scans of its body were used as the basis of a face reconstruction which were compared to the mummy portrait.
The ancient Egyptian boy's "mummy portrait" (left) next to the newly created 3D facial reconstruction (right). (Image credit: Nerlich AG, et al. PLOS One (2020); CC BY 4.0)
quote: In Graeco-Roman times in the Lower-Egyptian Fayoum region, a painted portrait was traditionally placed over the face of a deceased individual. These mummy portraits show considerable inter-individual diversity. This suggests that those portraits were created separately for each individual. In the present study, we investigated a completely wrapped young infant mummy with a typical mummy portrait by whole body CT analysis. This was used to obtain physical information on the infant and provided the basis for a virtual face reconstruction in order to compare it to the mummy portrait. We identified the mummy as a 3–4 years old male infant that had been prepared according to the typical ancient Egyptian mummification rites. It most probably suffered from a right-sided pulmonary infection which may also be the cause of death. The reconstructed face showed considerable similarities to the portrait, confirming the portrait’s specificity to this individual. However, there are some differences between portrait and face. The portrait seems to show a slightly older individual which may be due to artistic conventions of that period.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2834 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent.
Interesting argument and also very hypocritical as well.
posted
In your map you show USA compared to Africa. I talked about the whole of the Americas, including North America, Central America, the Caribbean and South America.
As I wrote:
quote: Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent
But it is bit off topic, better return to facial reconstructions which is the subject of the thread.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2834 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is an Egyptian mummy, called "Thotmea". Cicero Moraes who was involved in the reconstruction of Shep-en-Isis was also involved in this reconstruction.
quote: Tothmea
Tothmea is a mummy that is part of the collection of the Egyptian and Rosa Cruz Museum in Curitiba (PR). She is an Egyptian who probably lived at the end of the Third Intermediate Period (1070–712 BC) or at the beginning of the Late Epoch ( c. 712–332 BC) – between the 6th or 7th centuries BC . It is estimated that she died at the age of 27. The Egyptian received the nickname “Tothmea” from a lord named Farrar, in 1888, as a tribute to the pharaohs Tutemés, who ruled Egypt during the 18th dynasty (between the years 1504 and 1425 BC ).
forensic facial reconstruction
The first forensic facial reconstruction of the Tothmea mummy was carried out in 2013. The work was the result of a partnership between the Egyptian Museum and Rosa Cruz, the archeologist Moacir Elias Santos and the 3D designer Cícero Moraes .
In 2019, the same team got together and the Tothmea+6 project was launched, alluding to the 6 years since the first presentation. On this occasion, the mummy's face was "upgraded", using the latest forensic facial reconstruction techniques available.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: In your map you show USA compared to Africa. I talked about the whole of the Americas, including North America, Central America, the Caribbean and South America.
As I wrote:
quote: Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent
But it is bit off topic, better return to facial reconstructions which is the subject of the thread.
Logic tells that Africa is larger than all these places combined, yet is not considered to be diverse as it is. lol smh However, this does apply to any other place, including the Americas. lol That’s the point I’m making here!
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: Logic tells that Africa is larger than all these places combined, yet is not considered to be diverse as it is. lol smh However, this does apply to any other place, including the Americas. lol That’s the point I’m making here! [/QB]
No it doesn't work like that since the american continent got colonized quite recently in human history meanwhile Africa is where it all began this is why it has the highest level of genetic diversity. Amerindians are much more homogeneous in comparison whether physically or genetically.
Posts: 1779 | From: Somewhere In the Rif Mountains | Registered: Nov 2021
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: Logic tells that Africa is larger than all these places combined, yet is not considered to be diverse as it is. lol smh However, this does apply to any other place, including the Americas. lol That’s the point I’m making here!
No it doesn't work like that since the american continent got colonized quite recently in human history meanwhile Africa is where it all began this is why it has the highest level of genetic diversity. Amerindians are much more homogeneous in comparison whether physically or genetically.
It's clear you don't really understand the argument. I know / we know there's a larger level in genetic and physical diversity in Africa, because mankind had a longer time to develop in Africa, into many different branches. Some migrated out of Africa earlier than others. This is why Africans have a higher diversity and gene and phenotype. Secondly comes the admixture in some African populations (over time).
I have been to the Amazon and I can tell that most Ameridians are very similar in phenotype, and probably also in genotype. So Amerindians came from only a few pipelines/ bottlenecks.
The original argument was:
quote: Originally posted by Archeopteryx:
Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent.
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent.
Interesting argument and also very hypocritical as well.
what's hypocritical? He's saying there's diversity in the Americas, not all natives Americans are the same type
So why are you bringing up Africa?
Native Americans all look the same to you?
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber Logic tells that Africa is larger than all these places combined
Africa´s area is 30 370 000 km²
The Americas area is together 42 549 000 km2 including Greenland. (without Greenland it covers 40 383 000 km²)
The population of the Americas is today 964 920 000
The population of Africa is about 1,216 billion so Africa has a larger population than the Americas.
Asia is the largest continent with 44 580 000 km².
Europe is not so big with an area of 10 180 000 km2.
Australia is the smallest continent with an area of 7 692 000 km².
All numbers according to Wikipedia.
You obviously aren't the smartest in the bunch. Most of Latin Americas habitation is by a people who are heavy mixed with Iberian and Africans, with some being actually being more Iberian and some actually more African. The actual inhibitors as Amerindian are a small group spread out over the Amazon. Actual native Amerindians are in the Amazon.
White European males did a great number of rapes in the Americas and Australia, which have shifted the ethnic demographic landscape to what it is now.
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: Native Americans are not all alike, there is a lot of variation, as one can expect from the inhabitants of a whole double continent.
Interesting argument and also very hypocritical as well.
what's hypocritical? He's saying there's diversity in the Americas, not all natives Americans are the same type so that someone in the Amazon might resemble that reconstruction more than a Native American say in Monatana
So why are you bringing up Africa?
I bring it up, because I actually know what I am talking about. I have been there and seen the people from up-close unlike people who scrap for pictures on the internet. Amerindians have very distinctive traits, no matter where they are. And these are very similar. All this variety he/ she is claiming is not even true. Is there a slight difference, that's a yes. But this great diversity babble is not true. It's illogical as well, since the Americans was only relatively recent inhabited by only a few incoming migrations. So Amerindians came from only a few pipelines/ bottlenecks.
And why I bring up Africa is because you in particular have trouble with Africans being diverse and indigenous to the continent. If someone slightly looks off from the "true negroe" that person had admixture because of some back migration. Yet, when it comes to a place like Europe, let it be Southern Europe even that place can be as diverse as we can imagine, without any admixture. You've been there done that. And I don't want to hear any excuses here. And Archeopteryx will fight tooth and nail when it comes to African diversity. That's the hypocritical part!
Posts: 22249 | From: Omni | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
I bring it up, because I actually know what I am talking about. I have been there and seen the people from up-close unlike people who scrap for pictures on the internet. Amerindians have very distinctive traits, no matter where they are. And these are very similar. All this variety he/ she is claiming is not even true. Is there a slight difference, that's a yes. But this great diversity babble is not true. It's illogical as well, since the Americans was only relatively recent inhabited by only a few incoming migrations. So Amerindians came from only a few pipelines/ bottlenecks.
And why I bring up Africa is because you in particular have trouble with Africans being diverse and indigenous to the continent. If someone slightly looks off from the "true negroe" that person had admixture because of some back migration. Yet, when it comes to a place like Europe, let it be Southern Europe even that place can be as diverse as we can imagine, without any admixture. You've been there done that. And I don't want to hear any excuses here. And Archeopteryx will fight tooth and nail when it comes to African diversity. That's the hypocritical part!
Again, he posted a picture of a reconstruction of Luzia, a skull found in Brazil and comparing that to a photo a tribal person from Brazil and made no remarks about Africa
So why are you bringing up Africa?
quote:Originally posted by Archeopteryx: [QB] Here is an Egyptian mummy, called "Thotmea". Cicero Moraes who was involved in the reconstruction of Shep-en-Isis was also involved in this reconstruction.
[QUOTE] Tothmea
Tothmea is a mummy that is part of the collection of the Egyptian and Rosa Cruz Museum in Curitiba (PR). She is an Egyptian who probably lived at the end of the Third Intermediate Period (1070–712 BC) or at the beginning of the Late Epoch ( c. 712–332 BC) – between the 6th or 7th centuries BC . It is estimated that she died at the age of 27. The Egyptian received the nickname “Tothmea” from a lord named Farrar, in 1888, as a tribute to the pharaohs Tutemés, who ruled Egypt during the 18th dynasty (between the years 1504 and 1425 BC ).
forensic facial reconstruction
He also posted this. It a reconstruction of an 18th dyn Egyptian mummy and looks African, so what is the problem?
Posts: 43093 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: You obviously aren't the smartest in the bunch. Most of Latin Americas habitation is by a people who are heavy mixed with Iberian and Africans, with some being actually being more Iberian and some actually more African. The actual inhibitors as Amerindian are a small group spread out over the Amazon. Actual native Amerindians are in the Amazon.
White European males did a great number of rapes in the Americas and Australia, which have shifted the ethnic demographic landscape to what it is now.
You claimed Africa was larger than North America, Central America, the Caribbeans and South America together. I showed it is not so. Of course I know that the demographic situation in the Americas of today is quite different from what it was in precolumbian times. Do not take me for a fool.
I have also seen many Native Americans from North America, Central America and South America. There are many similarities but also some differences.
But since people have lived much longer time in Africa one would of course expect more diversity there. I have not claimed that all Africans are the same. I have met enough many Africans to know that, even without DNA tests.
But now we are off topic again. Would be nice if we could continue posting facial reconstructions of ancient people and maybe discuss them.
-------------------- Once an archaeologist, always an archaeologist Posts: 2834 | From: Sweden | Registered: Mar 2020
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some ancient faces from Israel, made for a TV series after actual skulls.
quote: The lifelike faces, fashioned from clay by a Canadian forensic artist, are based on the skulls of four people whose remains were unearthed in Israel. They include a male, perhaps a hunter, who lived 6,000 years ago and was buried in a Judean Desert cave; a baby interred inside a vase underneath a Jordan Valley house in the same period; a woman thought to be a Philistine who lived on the coast near Ashkelon 3,000 years ago; and a Galilean male who lived around the time of Jesus.
quote: Lost Faces of the Bible, a four-part series on the National Geographic channel, follows forensic and facial reconstruction experts as they analyze four ancient skulls from the Land of Israel and create a face to match them based on information they gather from the find, such as its gender, age and health defects. Professor Israel Hershkovitz from the Department of Anatomy and Anthropology at Tel Aviv University’s Sackler Medical School conducts a CAT scan on the skull in each episode, after which Victoria Lywood, a forensic artist based in Montreal, creates an extremely realistic looking face, including the hair, skin and even wrinkles. Simultaneously, another expert creates a three-dimensional printing of a replica of the skull to compare to Lywood’s.
posted
Most of these reconstructions, even though based on some form of forensics, still are very subjective because many aspects of the facial tissue and phenotype cannot be reconstructed solely using modern populations. This is especially true in regions with diversity in phenotype.
Obviously there is no real mystery here as generally there is more than enough artwork that survives to give a general impression of the overall populations in ancient times.
It isn't like we haven't discussed this to death on this forum.
Posts: 8909 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This well known image of a man from Jesus time is not based on one particular skull but three different skulls.
We do not know exactly how Jesus looked like since we do not have his skull or any contemporary picture, so those who made this reconstruction made a sort of generalized image of how a Semitic man from Jesus time could look like, based on three skulls and images of people from the same time.
quote: With three well-preserved specimens from the time of Jesus in hand, Neave used computerized tomography to create X-ray "slices" of the skulls, thus revealing minute details about each one's structure. Special computer programs then evaluated reams of information about known measurements of the thickness of soft tissue at key areas on human faces. This made it possible to re-create the muscles and skin overlying a representative Semite skull.
The entire process was accomplished using software that verified the results with anthropological data. From this data, the researchers built a digital 3D reconstruction of the face. Next, they created a cast of the skull. Layers of clay matching the thickness of facial tissues specified by the computer program were then applied, along with simulated skin. The nose, lips and eyelids were then modeled to follow the shape determined by the underlying muscles.
Two key factors could not be determined from the skull—Jesus's hair and coloration. To fill in these parts of the picture, Neave's team turned to drawings found at various archeological sites, dated to the first century. Drawn before the Bible was compiled, they held crucial clues that enabled the researchers to determine that Jesus had dark rather than light-colored eyes. They also pointed out that in keeping with Jewish tradition, he was bearded as well.
It was the Bible, however, that resolved the question of the length of Jesus's hair. While most religious artists have put long hair on Christ, most biblical scholars believe that it was probably short with tight curls. This assumption, however, contradicted what many believe to be the most authentic depiction: the face seen in the image on the famous—some say infamous—Shroud of Turin.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic