They are saying that this guy's head had been banded when he was a baby. From what I have read banding cannot add bone mass. It only moves around the bone that is already there. It is hard to see from the pictures but what I can see does not look like a skull that had been banded. It looks evenly distributed. I may be mistaken about all of this though to be honest.
Banding usually leaves a flat side and an obvious band across the skull. Hard to say for sure from what can be seen, there isn't a hint of banding.
Many archeologists have been guilty for decades claiming banding in all cases of elongated skulls.
That's what I thought. It's hard to tell from the picture here but I don't think that head was ever banded.
idk i believe the binding narrative. like the softspots on a babies skull. you shouldn't but they did
Yeah, like I said, I can't see this skull well enough to tell. I wish I still had the article. There was a post a few years ago, it could have even been on old voat, but it was about elongated skulls. When you see a skull that had underwent banding compared to one that was "naturally" elongated you can really tell the difference. They said in the article that a banding would not add size to the brain cavity area, it would just push the skull around it a different shape. They had found some skeletons that looked different. The area where the brain had been was actually larger than a normal person. That's probably not the case here though.
(post is archived)