Tutankhamun, eerily in the process of being brought back to life!

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
a reply to: PandaPrincess

Everyone's seen the crappy reconstruction of Tutankhamen, ugly and crippled.

I hope this guy does a better job.

Well, hes going to be ugly and crippled. He was the result of a little too much inbreeding. Kinda like a Hapsburg.. poster family against inbreeding of royals. Tuts father was all kinds of disfigured and strange looking even in tomb reliefs and statuary.

Bah, people make excuses for the deliberate sabotage of history. He was depicted on his own throne with his wife. He looked nothing like the "reconstruction".

a reply to: PandaPrincess


Hmm... Looks like Tut could have used a Good Orthodontist back in the Day ..........

originally posted by: Creep Thumper

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
a reply to: PandaPrincess

Everyone's seen the crappy reconstruction of Tutankhamen, ugly and crippled.

I hope this guy does a better job.

Well, hes going to be ugly and crippled. He was the result of a little too much inbreeding. Kinda like a Hapsburg.. poster family against inbreeding of royals. Tuts father was all kinds of disfigured and strange looking even in tomb reliefs and statuary.

Bah, people make excuses for the deliberate sabotage of history. He was depicted on his own throne with his wife. He looked nothing like the "reconstruction".

Well there were different syles of art at different times.. there were realistic ones, stylized ones, etc etc. Bones dont lie. Art sometimes does.

Oh! Oh! Oh! I know this one!

They used nine Tanna leaves to make him rise!

I'm I right?

I am right! I KNEW IT! Wooo Whooo!

a reply to: Advantage

Please don't tell him that art often "lies" to expose a deeper truth. It will kill him.

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
a reply to: PandaPrincess

Everyone's seen the crappy reconstruction of Tutankhamen, ugly and crippled.

I hope this guy does a better job.

Well, hes going to be ugly and crippled. He was the result of a little too much inbreeding. Kinda like a Hapsburg.. poster family against inbreeding of royals. Tuts father was all kinds of disfigured and strange looking even in tomb reliefs and statuary.

Bah, people make excuses for the deliberate sabotage of history. He was depicted on his own throne with his wife. He looked nothing like the "reconstruction".

Well there were different syles of art at different times.. there were realistic ones, stylized ones, etc etc. Bones dont lie. Art sometimes does.

There was nothing stylized about it. It was likely used to hold a hairpiece and/or jewelry.

He was a perfectly normal-looking young man.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: PandaPrincess


Hmm... Looks like Tut could have used a Good Orthodontist back in the Day ..........

That made me laugh

originally posted by: PandaPrincess

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: PandaPrincess


Hmm... Looks like Tut could have used a Good Orthodontist back in the Day ..........

That made me laugh

Yes that reminds me that the very oldest of HSS skeletons show teeth that are in disorder - it would seem the legendary lost civilizations didn't deal with messed up teeth!

boneclones.com...

100,000 year old Skhul 5 (copy)

Now some were in pretty good shape like the 300,000 year old skull below

www.theverge.com...

originally posted by: Creep Thumper

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper

originally posted by: Advantage

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
a reply to: PandaPrincess

Everyone's seen the crappy reconstruction of Tutankhamen, ugly and crippled.

I hope this guy does a better job.

Well, hes going to be ugly and crippled. He was the result of a little too much inbreeding. Kinda like a Hapsburg.. poster family against inbreeding of royals. Tuts father was all kinds of disfigured and strange looking even in tomb reliefs and statuary.

Bah, people make excuses for the deliberate sabotage of history. He was depicted on his own throne with his wife. He looked nothing like the "reconstruction".

Well there were different syles of art at different times.. there were realistic ones, stylized ones, etc etc. Bones dont lie. Art sometimes does.

There was nothing stylized about it. It was likely used to hold a hairpiece and/or jewelry.

He was a perfectly normal-looking young man.

Nope, youre simply wrong. Art of ancient Egypt was stylized ... plus VERY symbolic. Hieroglyphics were a visual and symbolic language and the art of ancient Egypt was the same so it could be read and understood. Artists did NOT make highly realistic images rather.... but followed a system called the Canon of Proportions to show a perfected version of reality.
Tuts dad, Akhenaten, rejected the pantheon and was monotheistic.. he also changed the former art style that he was depicted in. That is why he is shown with the buck teeth, conehead, flabby belly, spindly legs, etc. After his reign, the art style reverted back to the classical form and that is employing the Canon of Proportions. That is how Tut was depicted... using the traditional Canon of Proportions.

this made me laugh
how henry 8th would look if he lived today

a reply to: beyondknowledge

Oh, I think I remember that GI Joe episode, yeah.