Nicolette Parr

 

Cranial deformation can be defined as the product of “dynamic distortion of the normal vectors of the infantile neurocranial growth through the agency of externally applied forces (Moss, 1958; p 275).  It has been found in every continent and is not limited to humans (Shapiro, 1927; Trinkaus, 1982; Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995; Tubbs, Salter, and Oaks, 2006). 

 

The earliest recorded evidence of artificial cranial modification dates to 45,000 BC in Neandertal skulls from the Shanidar Cave in Iraq (see Fig. 2.1, Trinkaus, 1982). 

 

The earliest written record of cranial deformation dates to 400 BC in Hippocrates’ description of the Macrocepahes people who were named for their practice of cranial modification (Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995).

 

Deformation can either be intentional or unintentional, however this is difficult to determine from the skeletal record.  Intentional deformation is the result of attaching boards, pads, bandages, or stones to an infant skull (see Figs. 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4).

Fig. 2.1. Artificially deformed Neandertal skulls (Trinkaus, 1982).

Fig. 2.2. Chinook  mother using boards for deformation (reprinted in Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995).

Manual molding or massaging of the skull after birth is another type of intentional deformation (Anton, 1989; Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995). 

 

Deformation usually begins just after birth for the next couple of years until the desired shape has been reached or the child rejects the apparatus (Dingwall, 1931, Trinkaus, 1982; Anton and Weinstein, 1999). 

 

Unintentional deformation may be due to nutritional, hormonal, or genetic factors.  Preferred sleeping posture may also result in unintentional modification (Dingwall, 1931; Rhode and Arriaza, 2006).  Some individuals hypothesize that deformation first occurred as an unintentional result of the cradleboard and then became a method for intentional modification (Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995).

Fig. 2.3. Different apparatuses used to deform the cranium of the Tiwanaku peoples of Peru (Howshower et al., 1995)

Fig. 2.4. Princess of the House of Este(reprinted in Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995)

Fig. 2.5. Types of cranial deformation in the Eastern US (Neumann, 1995).

             No set classification system has been established for the different types of cranial deformations.  Many scientists have developed their own classification systems, however no individuals have agreed on a single classification for the variety of forms that are seen (Hoshower et al., 1995). 

 

             Neumann (1942) classifies the Native Americans from the Eastern United States into seven different categories (see Fig 2.5 and 2.6).

 

 

Fig. 2.6. Example of parallo-fronto-occipital modification.

http://www.geradts.com/anil/ij/

vol_002_no_001/br002_001/page002.html

Anton SA. 1989. Intentional cranial vault deformation and induced changes of the cranial base and face. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 79: 253-267.

 

Anton SA, Weinstein KJ. Artifical cranial deformation and fossil Australians revisited. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 36: 195-209.

 

Gerszten PC, Gerszten E. 1995. Intentional cranial deformation: A disappearing form of self-             mutilation. Neurosurgery. 37: 374-382.

 

Dingwall EJ. 1931. Artificial Cranial Deformation: A Contribution to the Study of Ethnic Mutilations. London: John Bale, Sons and Danielsson, Ltd.

 

Hoshower LM, Buikstra JE, Goldstein PS, Webster AD. 1995. Artificial cranial deformation at the Omo M10 site: A Tiwanaku complex from the Moquegua Valley, Peru. Latin American Antiquity. 6: 145-164.

 

Moss M. 1958. The pathogenesis of artificial cranial deformation. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 16: 269-286.

 

Shapiro HL. 1927. Note on a correction formula for artificially deformed crania. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 13:  632-635.

 

Trinkaus E. 1982. Artificial cranial deformation in the Shanidar 1 and 5 Neandertals. Current Anthropology. 23: 198-199.

 

Tubbs RS, Salter EG, and Oakes WJ. 2006. Artificial deformation of the human skull: A review. Clinical Anatomy. 19: 372-377.

 

Rhode MP, Arriaza BT. 2006. Influence of cranial deformation on facial morphology among prehistoric South Central Andean populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 130: 462-470.

 

             The reasons for cranial deformation are as varied as the types.  One of the most prominent hypotheses states that deformation was performed in order to signify group affiliation (Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995; Hoshower et al., 1995; Tubbs, Salter, and Oaks, 2006).

 

 

             Cranial deformation may have also occurred to demonstrate elite status.  This may have played a key role in Egyptian society.  Queen Nefertiti is often depicted with what may be an elongated skull, as is King Tutankhamen (Gerszten and Gerszten, 1995) (see Figs. 2.7 and 2.8).

Fig. 2.7. King Tutankhamen with obvious cranial deformation.

http://imagesource.allposters.com/images/pic/

BRGPOD/149406~Head-of-the-Child-King-

Tutankhamun-circa-1370-52-BC-Emerging-

from-a-Lotus-Flower-Posters.jpg