I have featured on this blog several times in the past the curious case of elongated skulls, also described as deformed skulls, found in some Marinduque caves in the 1860's to 1880's. It was then believed that such deformation could be explained in terms of head binding or artificial cranial deformation. Now, this artificial cranial deformation hypothesis is being challenged with evidence of the existence of fetuses with elongated skulls - evidence that has been known to the academic community for 163 years! If so, who were they, our ancestors, our ancient origins then? The mystery deepens. |
"Like the skulls found in the island of Los Tres Reyes, (Marinduque), those of the cave of Pamin-Taan (also in Marinduque), were deformed... "(Marche, 1881) Prior to the French naturalist and explorer Marche, it was the German-Russian naturalist Fedor Jagor who aroused public attention in the West in the 1860s with his discovery in Marinduque caves of deformed skulls. Up to that time nothing was known of such skulls in the oriental island world. The practice of compressing the head of a newborn child between two boards were purportedly done so that instead of looking round it would be lengthened out with the forehead also flattened, considered an ancient “special mark of beauty” Similar deformed skulls were found by Marche in the caves of Los Tres Reyes, Pamintaan and Macayan (places in Marinduque). It is astonishing now to learn that the same goal of modifying the shape of the skull turning it into a cone-shaped one was also practiced in the ancient world, the world of the Egyptians, Incas and Mayans. As one who grew up in Marinduque, I've also heard about very large elongated craniums ("mahahaba ang bungo"), old people have supposedly seen in some of our caves (although I have not seen one myself). Does a common ancestry exist among some such lost civilizations? From Egypt to South America, and other places on earth such as Siberia, we find more astonishing new revelations that may lead to new conclusions. Intriguing quotes from a Russian archaeologist and scholars: “The most likely explanation was that ancient communities deliberately deformed the skulls of infants, possibly with the intention of increasing mental abilities..” "However, some uncertainty remains around the fact that the exact same deformation was practiced in different areas of the world, that at that time had no contact with each other..." Read more Elongated Skulls in utero: A Farewell to the Artificial Cranial Deformation Paradigm? |
Elongated Skull from Crimea and other parts of the worlds, Baer 1860 |
Rivero and Tschudi in Peruvian Antiquities (1851 Spanish, 1853 English) argue that the protagonists of the artificial cranial deformation hypothesis are mistaken, since they had only considered the skulls of adults. In other words, the hypothesis fails to take into account the skulls of infants and, most importantly, foetuses which had similar elongated skull shape.
It is worth quoting Rivero and Tschudi:
“We ourselves have observed the same fact [of the absence of signs of artificial pressure – IG] in many mummies of children of tender age, who, although they had cloths about them, were yet without any vestige or appearance of pressure of the cranium. More still: the same formation of the head presents itself in children yet unborn; and of this truth we have had convincing proof in the sight of a foetus, enclosed in the womb of a mummy of a pregnant woman, which we found in a cave of Huichay, two leagues from Tarma, and which is, at this moment, in our collection [my emphasis – IG].
Lithograph by D. Leopoldo Mueller from the Spanish 1851 Edition of Peruvian Antiquities |
The same proof is to be found in another mummy which exists in the museum of Lima, under the direction of Don M. E. de Rivero.
Mark Laplume’s reconstruction of the Rivero and Tschudi’s foetus |
Elongated skulls of infants were available to European researchers as early as 1838. The skulls of “Ancient Peruvians” were also in Samuel Morton’s collection in Philadelphia.
The evidence of elongated skulls present in fetuses and children had lead Rivero and Tschudi, Bellamy, Graves and others to a hypothesis that these skulls belonged to an extinct race of people, who left their legacy on the populations who succeeded them as a practice of artificial cranial deformation. I discuss this hypothesis in more detail in The Looming Collapse Of The Artificial Cranial Deformation Paradigm. Part 1. Un/Born With Elongated Head and Part 2. Naturally Elongated.
The question now is how it happened that the cranial deformation paradigm became so prevalent?
The answer to a large extent consists in the authority of Morton’s expert opinion and his extensive collection of skulls, which is now located in the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. His influence was significant enough at the time to close the debate on elongated skulls for the next century and a half; until independent researchers, and I would like to mention Robert Connolly (who popularized elongated skulls in mid 1990s) and Brien Foerster, in particular, started to raise questions about the validity of the cranial deformation hypothesis by locating and showing elongated skulls to the public interested in finding out the true story of human origins.
Lithographs by John Collins, 1839 from Samuel Morton's 'Crania Americana' |
In Crania Americana Morton offered a description of peculiar elongated skulls which differed from the elongated skulls produced by various artificial means. He suggested that the territory of Peru and Bolivia was previously inhabited by the race of “Ancient Peruvians”.
Although Ancient Peruvians had naturally elongated skulls, Morton concluded that they further tried to articulate this feature by head binding. This is an interesting observation in itself, since it raises a question why a race with naturally elongated skulls would aspire to further elongate them. Perhaps they were also preceded by a race whose skulls were even more elongated?
Accordingly, it is necessary to revisit Morton’s original encounter with elongated skulls. This is how he originally described cranial features of Ancient Peruvians:
“[The head] is small, greatly elongated, narrow its whole length, with a very retreating forehead, and possessing more symmetry than is usual in skulls of the American race. The face projec ts, the upper jaw is thrust forward , and the teeth are inclined outward . The orbits of the eyes are large and rounded, the nasal bones salient, the zygomatic arches expanded; and there is a remarkable simplicity in the sutures that connect the bones of the cranium.”
Morton Collection, Skull #1681, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, the Open Research Scan Archive at Penn, and Janet Monge and P. Thomas Schoenemann |
Featured image: Morton Collection, “Ancient Peruvian” skull #496, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, the Open Research Scan Archive at Penn, and Janet Monge and P. Thomas Schoenemann
References:
Von Baer, Karl Ernst. Makrokephalen im Boden der Krim und Österreichs. St. Petersburg. 1860.
Bellamy, P. F. A brief Account of two Peruvian Mummies in the Museum of the Devon and Cornwall Natural History Society. in ‘Annals and Magazine of Natural History’. Vol. X. October 1842.
Graves, Robert J. Remarkable Skulls Found in Peru. No.15 of the Dublin Journal of Medical and Chemical Sciences. 1835.
Meigs, J. Aitken. Catalogue of Human Crania in the Collection of the Academie of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia: Based Upon the Third Edition of Dr. Morton's " Catalogue of Skulls". Philadelphia. 1857.
Morton, Samuel George. Crania Americana; or, A Comparative View of the Skulls of Various Aboriginal Nations of North and South America. To which is Prefixed an Essay on the Varieties of the Human Species. London. 1839.
Rivero, M.E., Tschudi, J.D. Antigüedades peruanas. Vienna, 1851 (Spanish). Rivero, M.E., von Tschudi, J.J. Peruvian antiquities. New York, 1853 (English).