Appendix 15:
The Tutankhamen Reconstruction: The Obsession With Artificially adding non-White Features continues In May 2005, Zahi Hawass, the Secretary-General of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, announced with great fanfare to the world the results of a tri-partite commission he had set up to reconstruct the face of pharaoh Tutankhamen. 
The most important factor: that of determining the pharaoh’s race, was dealt with in the following manner: “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.
“The French and American models, seen in photos released by the council, are similar -- with the Americans' plaster model sharing the more realistic, French silicone version's receding chin and prominent upper lip. The Egyptian reconstruction has a more prominent nose and a stronger jaw and chin.” - Forensic reconstruction of King Tut shows for the first time what boy pharaoh looked like, Associated Press, May 10, 2005, http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/05/11/special_reports/science_technology/11_16_275_10_05.txt “Jean-Noel Vignal, a French forensic anthropologist who creates models of crime victims for the police, determined the mummy's sex, age, racial profile and the basic facial measurements.
“Elisabeth Daynes, a leading anthropological sculptor, made a silicone cast from a clay model, and, after checking archaeological records, added glass eyes, hair, and colour to the skin and lips. The results of the three teams are very similar in the size, basic shape of the face, setting of the eyes, and proportions of the skull.” - The boy behind the mask: how scientists built the face of Tutankhamun, The Telegraph, 11/05/2005, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/11/ntut11.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/05/11/ixhome.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.
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 teams essentially agreed on the proportions of the skull, the basic shape of the face and the size and setting of the eyes. They differed on the shape of the nose and ears, which have not held up well. The American and French versions showed a weak chin, while the Egyptians gave Tut a stronger one. Dr. Hawass said the Egyptian team's version ‘looks the most Egyptian.’” - Tut Was Not Such a Handsome Golden Youth, After All, New York Times, May 11, 2005, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/11/science/11tut.html Hawass said that “The noses of all three are different, although the French and the American versions are more similar to each other than the Egyptian.” – The many faces of King Tut, The Times Online, May 11, 2005, HTTP://WWW.TIMESONLINE.CO.UK/ARTICLE/0,,3-1607041,00.HTML “Sculptor Elisabeth Daynès used glass eyes and implanted hair for this reconstruction of Tutankhamun. Skin tone, which could have varied from very dark to very light, was based on an average shade of modern Egyptians” - King Tut's New Face: Behind the Forensic Reconstruction, National Geographic News May 11, 2005
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/05/photogalleries/tut_mummy/photo6.html |
From the above, the following can be concluded: 1. The three different teams came up with differing shapes of noses, ears and, when the American version is compared to the French version, even slightly differently shaped skulls; 2. The assignment of the skin color was arbitrary, and no supporting evidence other than what Hawass suggested (“that he looks the most Egyptian”) appears to have been used. In this regard, it is highly significant that the US team declined to assign a color to reconstruction, and left their version plaster white:
Above: The US team's reconstruction. Note the lack of skin color assigned, as compared to the "official" version (at the top of this page) The final version was however assigned the darker skin color, for no discernible reason. 3. The skull shape was determined as ‘Caucasoid North African.’ As there is no proper “Caucasoid” race, and given that North Africa consists of a mixture of at least three races (Semitic, European, Sub-Saharan African) this statement is also meaningless and merely reveals the complete lack of understanding of racial concepts by the teams involved. 4. Finally, it is of interest to note that nowhere is the actual skull of Tutankhamen shown for readers of the reconstruction claim, to compare. Below Left: A side image of Tutankhamen’s actual skull, compared to a side view of the ‘reconstruction’ (right) – readers can determine for themselves just how accurate – or rather inaccurate and arbitrary (with respect to skin color) this latest reconstruction is. Note in particular the rear skull configuration: the "reconstruction" is actually ape like!  
See also: The Nefertiti Reconstruction
Appendices Main Contents Page All material (c) copyright Ostara Publications, 1999. Re-use for commercial purposes strictly forbidden. |