posted
Actually many Black Africans are not prognathous. So to say that the Sphinx features are typical would be to stereotype Blacks. A prognathous mouth is primarily a dietary adaption.
What really bothers me is the replica of the Sphinx done by National Geographic magazine. Millions of people rely on NaGeo to provide them facts without bias. They see NaGeo as the authority.
But why when NaGeo did a computer replica of the Sphinx the prognathous features and fleshy lips were gone? Yet we can clearly see those features!
Hear listen to Charlton Heston talk about the Black African Sphinx....
Now compare Frank Domingo's sketch of Chephren to the actual profile of Chephren (Khafra) in the Sphinx is Khafra video. These are supposed to match because these two pictures one from each of the videos is supposed to be Khafra, I'm not even talking about the Sphinx ones yet.
Right off the bat you will notice that in Frank Domingo's sketch the nose he drew is not as pointy and doesn't have the subtle bend in the middle. You can see that he doesn't have even the resemblance down, despite his F.B.I. background. You'll also notice that in the statue of Khafra his mouth and teeth area protrude slightly. In the sketch there is no slight protrusion. Also look at the jaw line under the ear in the sketch. Now look at the actual sculpture. Another item that doesn't match.
Why didn't he do what you or I could have done- print out a profile photo of Khafra and simply trace the profile. You will find that that is more accurate than what he has drawn. The clincher in this is the angle. All you need to do is (unlike in Domingo's sketch) is have the Statue of Khafra's profile tilted, his head tilted back slightly upward, no distortion, and there you have a pretty good match for what Domingo was trying to say didn't match. If you look at the B) video it becomes clear that it is a strong possibility that it is Khafra. The video demonstrates this with the overlay over and over again.
Whatever the case may be it's all speculation that nose is completely broken off.
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
But why when NaGeo did a computer replica of the Sphinx the prognathous features and fleshy lips were gone? Yet we can clearly see those features!
NatGeo is just one of the many 'western' media concerns that ignore the trait in their visual aids or artistic renditions. If you go to Vegas, the structure emulating the Sphinx also noticeably ignores this feature, and forget about the professed skin tone for the supposed Sphinx imitator.
While many Africans are not prognathous, the trait--particularly maxillary kind [and the kind that the Sphinx seems to display]--likely features more prominently on the continent then say northern west Eurasia. Know that by "maxillary prognathism", I am not necessarily referring to one wherein there is a maxillary over-bite, but even those wherein the front teeth of the maxilla match those of the mandibular bone.
It is not just the "prognathism" that gives the Sphinx its "African" look. A mere look at it [particularly an anterior view], unless one is in total denial, bespeaks this look.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
But why when NaGeo did a computer replica of the Sphinx the prognathous features and fleshy lips were gone? Yet we can clearly see those features!
NatGeo is just one of the many 'western' media concerns that ignore the trait in their visual aids or artistic renditions. If you go to Vegas, the structure emulating the Sphinx also noticeably ignores this feature, and forget about the professed skin tone for the supposed Sphinx imitator.
While many Africans are not prognathous, the trait--particularly maxillary kind [and the kind that the Sphinx seems to display]--likely features more prominently on the continent then say northern west Eurasia. Know that by "maxillary prognathism", I am not necessarily referring to one wherein their is an maxillary over-bite, but even those wherein the front teeth of the maxilla match those of the mandibular bone.
It is not just the "prognathism" that gives the Sphinx its "African" look. A mere look at it [particularly an anterior view], unless one is in total denial, bespeaks this look.
That's presumptuous the Sphinx's face is severely damaged. Here's a question. Let's say that the Sphinx is not supposed to be Khafra.
So just looking at Khafra only to what percentage does this statue of him have what you are calling an "African look" in your opinion?
That's presumptuous the Sphinx's face is severely damaged.
Much of the profile of the Sphinx is still intact, unless the observer is severely visually-impaired. The only major elements of the face itself that are missing, are the nose and the goatee.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
That's presumptuous the Sphinx's face is severely damaged.
Much of the profile of the Sphinx is still intact, unless the observer is severely visually-impaired. The only major elements of the face itself that are missing, are the nose and the goatee.
So just looking at Khafra only to what percentage does this statue of him have what you are calling an "African look" in your opinion?
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The entire combination or ensemble: the shape of the face, in combination with its lips, prognathism, cheek structures, along with the nasal index. Hope that answers your query.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
It is not just the "prognathism" that gives the Sphinx its "African" look. A mere look at it [particularly an anterior view], unless one is in total denial, bespeaks this look. [/QB]
question: Most modern Egyptologists credit Khafra with building of the Sphinx at Giza. This may or may not be true, regardless, you said that the Sphinx has an "African look" and you say to to say otherwise one would have to be in "total denial"
What about the sculpture above of Khafra would you say that Khafra has an undeniable "African look" ?
Posts: 42937 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
For a change, you answer a question instead of simply asking them, because I take it that Africa is foreign to you...
Forget about his skin tone, face scarifications, clothing, hair texture and color of eyes. Does this fellow look "African" to you? If yes, why? And if no, why not?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Come to think of it, after closely inspecting the two photos, I've come to the realization that it may very well be the same statue, with the images taken at different angles and under different lighting exposures. Be that as it may, the answer to your question is yes, the statue has an undeniable "African" look to it imo, for the same reasons I already stated about those of the Sphinx. Do you disagree; why?
And of course, this question still stands...
quote: For a change, you answer a question instead of simply asking them, because I take it that Africa is foreign to you...
Forget about his skin tone, face scarifications, clothing, hair texture and color of eyes. Does this fellow look "African" to you? If yes, why? And if no, why not?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Statue of Khafre,side view Egyptian Museum, Cairo
Statue of Khafre,front view Egyptian Museum, Cairo
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer:
You have two sculptures there...Come to think of it, after closely inspecting the two photos, I've come to the realization that it may very well be the same statue, with the images taken at different angles and under different lighting exposures. Be that as it may, the answer to your question is yes, the statue has an undeniable "African" look to it imo, for the same reasons I already stated about those of the Sphinx. Do you disagree; why?
How can I disagree "there are no such thing as features that are not African"
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Dare to Compare
posted
^ I have already criticized myself for saying - typical African facial features.
Nevertheless, the Sphinx has facial features that are unambigous in terms of being of an African individual.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Pay close attn to nose and ears. Now, stop jerking off under the bedsheets to Afro-romantacism.
This thread is about the Sphinx. Not sure why you are interjecting an OT here.
Simple question - do you not see a very African looking profile in the Sphinx. If you were an Afro-loon hell bent on thinking that most of the art in AE has been altered you would conclude that the Sphinx offers the best argument. The sphinx is too large to be altered and could only be damaged. Cheops simply could have been altered by a European sculpture.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Now compare Frank Domingo's sketch of Chephren to the actual profile of Chephren (Khafra) in the Sphinx is Khafra video. These are supposed to match because these two pictures one from each of the videos is supposed to be Khafra, I'm not even talking about the Sphinx ones yet.
Right off the bat you will notice that in Frank Domingo's sketch the nose he drew is not as pointy and doesn't have the subtle bend in the middle. You can see that he doesn't have even the resemblance down, despite his F.B.I. background. You'll also notice that in the statue of Khafra his mouth and teeth area protrude slightly. In the sketch there is no slight protrusion. Also look at the jaw line under the ear in the sketch. Now look at the actual sculpture. Another item that doesn't match.
Why didn't he do what you or I could have done- print out a profile photo of Khafra and simply trace the profile. You will find that that is more accurate than what he has drawn. The clincher in this is the angle. All you need to do is (unlike in Domingo's sketch) is have the Statue of Khafra's profile tilted, his head tilted back slightly upward, no distortion, and there you have a pretty good match for what Domingo was trying to say didn't match. If you look at the B) video it becomes clear that it is a strong possibility that it is Khafra. The video demonstrates this with the overlay over and over again.
Whatever the case may be it's all speculation that nose is completely broken off.
That overlay is done by an amature and not by a forensic scientist. Do you really buy that stupid overlay? Its pure FRAUD!
And how is the profile of the Sphinx damaged? If the Sphinx still had lips it would only look more African.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
How can I disagree "there are no such thing as features that are not African"
Of course there is such a thing as features that are not African, granted that African diversity encompasses much of that found outside of the continent. The Pinocchio-like tip of the nose that is frequently found in northern west Eurasians is generally rare, if not absent, in autochthonous African populations. The level of loss of epidermal pigmentation in northern Europe is essentially not African, as a natural selection feature as opposed to a genetic mishap. Likewise, certain hair textures found in Europe are rare to absent in Africa. The orbital ridges that are prominent in Australian populations, once a frequent trait in Africa, is no longer prominent on the continent. These are merely a few examples that immediately pop into mind.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
How can I disagree "there are no such thing as features that are not African"
Of course there is such a thing as features that are not African, granted that African diversity encompasses much of that found outside of the continent. The Pinocchio-like tip of the nose that is frequently found in northern west Eurasians is generally rare, if not absent, in autochthonous African populations. The level of loss of epidermal pigmentation in northern Europe is essentially not African, as a natural selection feature as opposed to a genetic mishap. Likewise, certain hair textures found in Europe are rare to absent in Africa. The orbital ridges that are prominent in Australian populations, once a frequent trait in Africa, is no longer prominent on the continent. These are merely a few examples that immediately pop into mind.
please post a photo of real person with the type of "Pinocchio-like tip" nose, an average looking version of this, I'm not sure what you mean.
People might actually take you seriously if I hadn't administered so many scholarly beatdowns to you. You're a first class clown whose blog's comment section is as empty as your skull.
It appears that there was an attempt to "Europeanize" Tut's nose, but it came out in a peculiar way instead. Tut's contemporaneous sculptures don't feature such nose tips on his busts.
^This last one perhaps does a good job of showing the contrasts. The female's nose is by no means flat, but next to the male's, the tip of her nose points out relatively lesser than the "white" male counterpart. Note the differences in nostrils too. The male's is longer and the opening of the nostrils are relatively narrower than that of the female, while the latter's nostril [its outlines] appear relatively more flared or emphasized. So by "Pinocchio"-like nose tip, I'm referring to these type of side-profile outward projections of the nose, and the relatively "sharper" or "pointier" tip (often slanting downwards), usually in accompaniment by narrower (in tandem with understated nostril lines) long nostril openings, which appear as though someone is pressing on the nostrils.
Ps: Observe the tips of the nose and the nostrils...
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic