...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
They made Tut white again
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by tropicals redacted: [QB] So what's with the white/Caucasian King Tut reconstructions? Anton concluded that Tut's cranial morphology "spoke fairly strongly of his African origins" and also, despite her gaff with the nose, said "I personally don't find that term [caucasoid] all that useful and so I don't use it." The Science Museum reconstruction is based on a cast of his skull. Regardless of whether the face is an accurate portrayal, those involved with assigning the skull, it would seem, identified an individual that had sub-Saharan affinities- as apparent in the virtual reconstruction: http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/antenna/tutankhamun/118.asp You've also pointed out that "They [Royal Mummies]would be...the "elongated" African morph which Hierneux described, perhaps with some Saharan differences (see Krantz)." What I don't get, is, if Susan Anton, the people behind the Science Museum reconstruction and you recognise that Tut was cranially/phenotypically sub-Saharan/Horner African, why does the latest reconstruction, which I think is scheduled to be shown on the BBC tonight, still show a Caucasian-looking individual. What do you think impedes their understanding of African diversity, something which is based on scientific research, and which laypeople and autodidacts here on ES have assimilated? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3