It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kojiro
Whatever the explanation, I have often wondered why head-binding was such a widespread practice compared to some of the other more radical body modifications that have been mentioned, such as elongation of the neck or foot binding. It seems extraordinary that so many cultures, many of them quite disparate, would be fixated on the shape of the skull. To echo an earlier poster, is there a way to track such a practice?
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Why did some Chinese women engage in foot-binding, which led to permanently damaged feet?
Foot Binding
Why do people today mutilate their earlobes with large gauges (some people even gauge their cheeks now)?
Why do people wear extensive and bodily-invasive piercings (tongues, nipples, genitalia)?
Why do people get full-body tattoos?
Homo capensis: In the early 1910s, two farmers stumbled across hominid fossils, including bits of a skull, near Boskop, South Africa. The bones were passed around to many anatomists—including Raymond Dart, who later discovered the first Australopithecus fossil—before ending up in the hands of paleontologist Robert Broom. Broom estimated the brain size of the skull (PDF): a whopping 1,980 cubic centimeters (the typical modern person’s brain is around 1,400 cubic centimeters). Broom determined that the skull should be called H. capensis, also known as Boskop Man. Other specimens from South Africa were added to the species, and some scientists became convinced southern Africa was once home to a race of big-brained, small-faced people. But by the 1950s, scientists were questioning the legitimacy of H. capensis. One problem was that the thickness of the original skull made it difficult to estimate the true brain size. And even if it were 1,980 cubic centimeters, that’s still within the normal range of variation for modern people’s brains, anthropologist and blogger John Hawks explained in 2008. Another problem, Hawks pointed out, was that scientists were preferentially choosing larger skulls to include in H. capensis while ignoring smaller skulls that were found in association with the bigger specimens. Today, fossils once classified as H. capensis are considered members of H. sapiens.
originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Maybe skull binding makes the brain work differently. We know that much of our brain is unused, maybe squashing it together unlocks neural pathways that we don't usually use.
Okay, that's my out of the box thought of the day.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Maybe skull binding makes the brain work differently. We know that much of our brain is unused, maybe squashing it together unlocks neural pathways that we don't usually use.
Okay, that's my out of the box thought of the day.
OotB thinking is great...but then that theory begs for the answer to this question: How would they know that, in so many different cultures, in so many different locations around the globe?
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Box of Rain
Do we know of any scientific evidence that reshaping our skulls has any dramatic effect on the function of our brain? I understand that some ancient cultures knew things that we are only now rediscovering, but I've never seen anything that remotely points to a scientific reason for binding skulls in order to improve and change brain function.
We can say the same thing for breast implants. They don't make you see any better but they make getting jobs a lot easier.
This didn't make people see any better, but it was still an important way for people to call attention to their eyes.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Harte
No, it's not. The point in my responses was more that all of those things are done to their own bodies at ages where they understand what they're doing. With infant head binding, the bound individual doesn't know what's going on.
I'll concede that "because they like it" is a valid answer as to the "why," but not the whole question of "why did the practice start, and why does it span so many cultures around the world?"
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
But my biggest question that I don't think will ever be answered is this--why? Why have ancient cultures, all over the world, done such a seemingly pointless thing to their children's skulls?
Why did some Chinese women engage in foot-binding, which led to permanently damaged feet?
Foot Binding
Why do people today mutilate their earlobes with large gauges (some people even gauge their cheeks now)?
Why do people wear extensive and bodily-invasive piercings (tongues, nipples, genitalia)?
Why do people get full-body tattoos?
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Frocharocha
I wonder if they've looked at the skull's plate sutures to see if they're all there...I know in some of the elongated skulls that are claimed to be of alien origin (or a different species of hominid), there are less plates to the skull.
But my biggest question that I don't think will ever be answered is this--why? Why have ancient cultures, all over the world, done such a seemingly pointless thing to their children's skulls? It makes no sense to me, unless it really is to emulate a different race of being that they revered and wanted to emulate.
Does anyone have a good answer to the "why" question?
originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Maybe skull binding makes the brain work differently. We know that much of our brain is unused, maybe squashing it together unlocks neural pathways that we don't usually use.
Okay, that's my out of the box thought of the day.
originally posted by: dr1234
originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Maybe skull binding makes the brain work differently. We know that much of our brain is unused, maybe squashing it together unlocks neural pathways that we don't usually use.
Okay, that's my out of the box thought of the day.
The idea that "most of our brain is unused" is a complete and utter myth.