Sculptural reconstructions by M. Gerasimov: mistakes of a famous anthropologist

M. Gerasimov at work on the reconstruction of Ivan the Terrible's appearance

Everyone probably remembers from school the photographs of famous sculptural reconstructions created by the famous anthropologist Mikhail Gerasimov. He tried to recreate the appearance of such famous people as Yaroslav the Wise, Andrei Bogolyubsky, Ivan the Terrible, Fyodor Ushakov, Timur (Tamerlane). For a long time, the reconstructions of the respected doctor of sciences and his students were treated uncritically, considering them almost as "portraits from life". However, many historians noticed the shortcomings of reconstructions using Gerasimov's method almost immediately, they were simply striking. For example, here is what Sophia Paleologue looks like in the reconstruction made using this method by S. Nikitin in 1994:

We see a pretty, thin woman whose appearance fully corresponds to modern canons of beauty. But here is how the Italian poet Luigi Pulci, who was present at the ceremony of the absentee marriage with Ivan III, describes her:

We entered a room where a painted doll sat in a chair on a high platform... a double chin, thick cheeks, the whole face glistened with fat, eyes wide open like bowls, and around the eyes such ridges of fat and meat as high dams on the Po. The legs were also far from thin, and so were all the other parts of the body... the dress was of rich silk and cut from at least six pieces of material, so that they could have covered the dome of Santa Maria Rotonda.

Gerasimov's reconstructions of Timur and his descendants raise big questions among experts. Tamerlane is depicted as a 100% Mongol:

Meanwhile, many medieval authors describe this conqueror as a man with white skin, blue eyes and a thick red beard. Here, for example, is the testimony of Thomas of Metsop:

Lame Timur... red-bearded, tall and unusually strong.

Ibn Arabshah writes:

Timur was well built, tall, had an open forehead, a large head, a strong voice, and his strength was not inferior to his courage; a bright blush enlivened the whiteness of his face.

And Gerasimov himself, according to the recollections of his colleagues, claimed that the first version of his reconstruction of Timur's appearance was not approved by the management, since he unexpectedly turned out to look like... a typical Caucasian! This categorically contradicted the scientific ideas of those years, and therefore the management strictly ordered Gerasimov "not to distort history».

Tamerlane's son Shahrukh and the conqueror's grandson Ulugbek also had obvious European features. The same Gerasimov writes:

Ulugbek's skull is well preserved and, if we do not count the loss of almost all the teeth (while he was still alive) and the severed corners of the lower jaw (at the time of the murder), it should be considered complete... at its core, the skull undoubtedly has more elements of the European Pamir-Fergana round-headed type, inherited from his father, Shahrukh.

And here is how Gerasimov described the skull of another son of Timur – Miranshah:

Narrow face, thin, strongly protruding nose, with a very specific profile pattern - deep dog pits, high rounded orbits, etc.

It is unclear on what basis Gerasimov suddenly declared Miranshah a Mongoloid: experts note with surprise that everything listed above, except for high orbits, is precisely a sign of Europeanness.

Sculptural reconstruction of the appearance of Andrei Bogolyubsky by Gerasimov

So, we have sorted out the "editing" of the appearance of Timur and his descendants: they were done under pressure from the leadership, which wanted to see them as Mongoloids - in full accordance with the scientific ideas of those years. And now let's talk about the most scandalous sculptural reconstruction by Gerasimov, in which the Russian prince Andrei Bogolyubsky looks like a typical Mongol. Mikhail Mikhailovich even depicted him with the notorious epicanthus - a fold at the inner corner of the eye above the lacrimal tubercle, between the upper and lower eyelids. Epicanthus is also called the third eyelid, double eyelid and Mongolian fold.

Andrey Bogolyubsky at the reconstruction of M. Gerasimov

Gerasimov himself wrote:

The facial skeleton, especially in the upper part (orbits, nose, cheekbones), has undoubted elements of Mongoloidity... This Mongoloid character of the face is emphasized by some overhang of the upper eyelid, associated with a weak brow and the presence of a small epicanthus.

But, let us note a very important circumstance: in Gerasimov's time, there was no reliable method for determining race by the skull. It was patented only in 2017 by a group of Russian forensic experts - Zvyagin Viktor Nikolaevich, Kovalev Andrey Valentinovich, Galitskaya Olga Ivanovna, Narina Nina Vladimirovna, Usacheva Lyudmila Lvovna, Fomina Elena Evgenievna (but was already used in the early 2000s). Currently, this method is recognized throughout the world and is widely used by forensic experts. Such an authoritative specialist as the aforementioned V. Zvyagin wrote about the works of Gerasimov, his followers and students:

Research of skeletal remains was carried out by our classics in the 30-40s of the last century. There were no mathematically sound methods for diagnosing race, racial type, or age at that time., and traceology was making its first steps, so decisions were often subjective. The current time is another matter: there are methods, computer programs, methods for checking reconstructions, methods of microscopic, radiological and spectral analysis. This list can be continued further.

V. N. Zvyagin – Honored Doctor of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Laboratory of Forensic Osteological Research of the Russian Center for Forensic Medical Examination of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Head of the Department of Forensic Medical Identification of the Person

So why did M. Gerasimov give Mongoloid features to the appearance of the Russian prince Andrei Bogolyubsky? The reason is probably the same as in the case of Tamerlane and the Timurids - the prevailing ideas of the time about the Mongoloid appearance of the Polovtsians and the indication that the mother of Andrei Bogolyubsky (the son of Yuri Dolgoruky) was the daughter of the Polovtsian Khan Aepa.

Andrey's mother was a Polovtsian, and the Polovtsians are characterized by a Mongoloid racial type.

(Ginzburg and Gerasimov, 1945).

But here is what the Polovtsian from the burial near the village of Kvashnikovo looks like in the reconstruction by G. V. Lebedinskaya, created in 1989:

But Galina Viktorovna Lebedinskaya, who headed the Laboratory of Plastic Reconstruction of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences (Institute of Anthropology and Ethnology of the Russian Academy of Sciences), was a student of M. Gerasimov! But her Polovtsian is a 100% European.

Let us return to the study of the skull of Andrei Bogolyubsky.

The remains of this prince were examined and briefly described in 1919. In 1934 they were studied by D. G. Rokhlin, who worked in the X-ray anthropology laboratory of the Leningrad State X-ray Institute. In 1939, the skull of Andrei Bogolyubsky was sent to the Moscow Laboratory of Plastic Reconstruction, where in 1941 it was examined by M. Gerasimov, in 1945 – by Gerasimov and Ginzburg. And Gerasimov himself wrote in 1945:

The racial type of the skull (Andrei Bogolyubsky) as a whole can be characterized as northern, close to the Kurgan Slavic ones.

And then he adds, frightened:

However, it (the prince’s skull) has features that indicate an undoubted Mongoloid influence.

In the 1949 year:

The general impression of the skull is that it is European with a certain tendency towards North Slavic or even Nordic forms..

And, again, there follows an unnecessary addition:

The facial skeleton, especially in the upper part (orbits, nose, cheekbones), has undoubted elements of Mongoloidity.

However, the appearance of the Polovtsians did not surprise the Russians, Hungarians or Byzantines. This is how dryly the chronicle reports the first contact between the Russians and the Polovtsians in 1055:

Come Blush with the Polovtsians and make peace, Vsevolod (son of the deceased Yaroslav the Wise)... and you (the Polovtsians) will return home.

But the appearance of the Mongols on the borders of the Russian principalities, and then Europe, became a real cultural shock for the local residents: it was precisely because of their unusual and unfamiliar appearance that the new nomads (unlike the Polovtsians) began to be perceived by everyone as people from Tartarus - "Gogs" and "Magogs".

At present, the generally accepted opinion is that the Polovtsians had a European appearance. S. A. Pletneva, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Head of the Medieval Archaeology Group of the Eurasian Steppes at the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, wrote about this:

The anthropological data on the basis of which conclusions were made about the Mongoloid nature of the populations of the Great Steppe require a total revision.

The Polovtsians came to the Northern Black Sea region from the steppes of modern Kazakhstan and Central Asia, where they were known as Kipchaks. In Rus' they began to be called Polovtsians. The version according to which they were called so because of their characteristic straw-yellow hair color (from the word "polova" - straw) is considered quite reliable.

Fair-haired Polovtsians in a miniature from the Radziwill Chronicle

This version is supported by the fact that the Byzantine Romans also called the Kipchaks Cumans, and this word is derived from an adjective meaning pale yellow. In Hungary, a word with the same root was used - Kuns. It was to the territory of Hungary that the Polovtsians went under the blows of the Mongols, their descendants make up a significant part of the population of this country - and no signs of Mongoloidity are noted among the Hungarians. The Polovtsians also took part in the ethnogenesis of the Moldavian Gagauz, who are also by no means Mongoloids.

A strictly scientific reconstruction of the appearance of Andrei Bogolyubsky

In 2007-2008, the remains of this Russian prince were examined by specialists from the Russian Center for Forensic Medical Examination of the Russian Ministry of Health, headed by the above-mentioned V. Zvyagin (the tomb was opened on July 25, 2007). The studies were conducted in strict accordance with the official programs of forensic medical identification of individuals, approved by this institution.

Then, in 2010, a craniological, osteological and odontological examination was carried out at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and at the Department of Anthropology of the Biological Faculty of Moscow State University; the prince’s skull was studied by D. V. Pezhemsky.

The experts' conclusions were quite expected.

V. N. Zvyagin wrote in 2010:

The suggestion that Prince Andrei may have had Mongoloid features, similar to those recorded among the indigenous European population of the Volga region (Tatars, Chuvashes, Bashkirs) and Central Asia (Uzbeks, Tajiks, Turkmens) is completely excluded (probability Pl ≥ 9 x 10-25).

The same in 2011:

The reason for the transformation of the European skull, gravitating towards "Nordic forms", into a "Mongoloid facial character" in the sculptural reconstruction by Andrei Bogolyubsky is not entirely clear. Perhaps, when working on the bust of the prince, M. M. Gerasimov took into account his Russian-Polovtsian origin. In those years, it was mistakenly believed that the Mongoloid racial type was dominant among the Polovtsians.

Here is an excerpt from the official conclusion of the anthropological commission headed by V.N. Zvyagin:

The opinion of prof. M. M. Gerasimov (1949) about the presence of Mongoloid features in the appearance of Andrei Bogolyubsky, based on a visual analysis of craniological data, is subjective and is not confirmed by the results of the present study. The skull under study reliably belonged to a man of the Caucasian race with an appearance characteristic of representatives of the Central European anthropological type.

Graphic reconstruction of the appearance of Andrei Bogolyubsky (left) and verification of the correspondence of the graphic image to the skull (V. Zvyagin)

Let us continue quoting V. Zvyagin:

The reason for the transformation of the European skull, which gravitates towards Nordic forms, into a Mongoloid face in the sculptural reconstruction by Andrei Bogolyubsky is not entirely clear.

Here V. Zvyagin is extremely diplomatic, but some other authors use the terms “falsification” and “forgery”.

The head of the anthropology department at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, V. Vasiliev, wrote in 2012:

Modern research has not found any traces of Mongoloid admixture in the structure of the skull and teeth, as diagnosed at the time by V. V. Ginzburg and M. M. Gerasimov.

He:

Based on the prince's calendar age (63 years), M. M. Gerasimov sculpted the overhang of the upper eyelid fold, creating the illusion of a Mongoloid eye shape. It is possible that both V. V. Ginzburg and M. M. Gerasimov involuntarily were captivated by the then ideas about the Mongoloid nature of the Polovtsians.

D. Pezhemsky states in 2013:

We fully share the final conclusion of the famous forensic doctor (Zvyagin) about the absence of Mongoloid features in the structure of Andrei Bogolyubsky’s skull.

He:

The signs which, according to V. V. Ginzburg and M. M. Gerasimov, allow us to speak of Mongoloid features on the skull of Prince Andrei, are currently not considered as such... the craniological signs identified on the skull of Andrei Bogolyubsky by V. V. Ginzburg and M. M. Gerasimov as “Mongoloid”, from the point of view of modern anthropology, in no way indicate a Mongoloid admixture.

Taking all the circumstances into account, it can be assumed that other reconstructions by M. Gerasimov can hardly be considered relevant today. Look, for example, at the reconstruction of Ivan the Terrible's appearance, carried out using modern methods by the Brazilian anthropologist Cicero Moroes:

Ivan IV on the reconstruction of Moroes

And compare with what we see in Gerasimov’s reconstruction:

Two completely different people, aren't they? Gerasimov presents this tsar as a deeply vicious man - a degenerate with obvious signs of degeneration on his face. In the Brazilian scholar's portrait we see a rather nice man with a high forehead and intelligent eyes, which is quite consistent with the data on the high education and erudition of the tsar, who even composed music, and his "Canon to the Terrible Angel, the Voivode" - a very complex vocal work (signed Parfeniy the Urodivy) - has survived to this day.

"Canon to the Terrible Angel, the Commander-in-Chief", an Old Believer manuscript from the second half of the 19th century.

And therefore, Gerasimov’s reconstructions should still be recognized as original works of art, whose place is in a museum, but not on the pages of textbooks.

Comments

[Dutchman Michel]

Quote: Ryzhov V. A

The Polovtsians also took part in the ethnogenesis of the Moldavian Gagauz people.

Pechenegs!

[VLR]

According to the most popular Turkic hypothesis, the ancestors of the Gagauz are the Oguzes, Pechenegs and Polovtsians (who took turns leaving their 'genetic trace'). But there are also the Seljuk, Bulgarian and Turkic-Bulgarian hypotheses.

[Uncle lee]

that's why the boss strictly ordered Gerasimov "does not distort history."

So much for historical accuracy.

[VLR]

They should also remove Repin's false painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" from the Tretyakov Gallery. Or hang a plaque with reliable information. Even if there was a quarrel between Ivan IV and his son, there was no murder: the prince died not from a wound, but later during a pilgrimage from some illness.

[Olgovich]

Quote: VlR

They should also remove Repin's false painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" from the Tretyakov Gallery.

And ban the "liars" - Russian historians Karamzin, Klyuchevsky, Shcherbatov, etc., on whose research Repin relied?

Quote: VlR

Even if there was a quarrel between Ivan IV and his son, there was no murder: the prince did not die from a wound, but later during a pilgrimage from some illness.

Karamzin:

Ivan, in a fit of anger, shouted: "Rebel! You and the Boyars want to overthrow me from the throne!" and raised his hand. Boris Godunov wanted to hold it back: the Tsar gave him several wounds with his sharp staff and hit the Tsarevich hard on the head. The unfortunate man fell, covered in blood. Here Ivan's rage disappeared. Pale with horror, trembling, in a frenzy, he exclaimed: "I have killed my son!" and rushed to embrace and kiss him; held back the blood flowing from a deep wound; cried, sobbed, called for doctors; prayed to God for mercy, to his son for forgiveness.

[VLR]

I'm afraid to disappoint you, but Karamzin's work currently has only historical significance, and referring to it has long been bad form. It is pretentious and extremely subjective. It is more of a literary work than the work of a real historian (which Karamzin was not).
Moreover, the works of pre-revolutionary classics, including Klyuchevsky, are largely outdated, since they did not have at their disposal many historical documents that became available in the 20th century. This must be taken into account when reading their books.

[Olgovich]

Quote: VlR

I'm afraid to disappoint you, but Karamzin's work currently has only historical significance, and referring to it has long been bad form. It is pretentious and extremely subjective. It is more of a literary work than the work of a real historian (which Karamzin was not).

Historian Tarle admitted Karamzin's huge role in the formation of Russian historical science and in popularizing history among the general population, considering that the "History of the Russian State" is an important source for understanding Russian history and culture, despite the shortcomings.

So bad form is, rather, denigrating the works great Russian historians Karamzin, Klyuchevsky, Solovyov, Shcherbatov, etc.

Quote: VlR

Moreover, the works of pre-revolutionary classics are largely outdated.

Soviet historians too did not deny the fact of the death of the prince from a wound received from his father-Tarle, Makhrova, Veselovsky, etc., what don’t suit you?

Quote: VlR

They did not have access to the many historical documents that became available in the 20th century.

Has a "reliable" new 16th century chronicle been found?

[VLR]

Karamzin's influence was there - because it was the first attempt to write a systematic work on Russian history. An amateurish attempt and extremely subjective: Karamzin took the facts he liked and ignored those he didn't like. And he made categorical conclusions. But he influenced future historians. And it is only because of this influence that his work is valuable now. The version of the Tsarevich's murder is more than doubtful, since it comes from Moscow's enemies - Possevino, and from opposition Pskov. All other sources, and there are many of them, including the testimonies of foreigners, deny this version. Karamzin, as a writer and novelist, really liked this melodramatic version, and that is what he presented. Since no one knew the history then, it became the main one, although there is no reason for this. And Repin reinforced it with his painting. Stereotypes are hard to break.
In the 20th and already in the 21st centuries, many documents have been introduced into scientific circulation, including those from foreign sources that were unknown to historians of the 19th century. And many discoveries have been made. This cannot be denied.

[Olgovich]

Quote: VlR

Amateurish attempt

You have been given the opinion of the non-dilettante Tarle about the "dilettante" Karamzin. Or is he also....an amateur?

A.S. Pushkin about Karamzin:

There is not a single era, not a single important event, which was not satisfactorily developed by Karamzin.Where his story is unsatisfactory, there he lacked sources: he did not replace them with arbitrary guesses. His moral reflections, with their monastic simplicity, give his narrative all the inexplicable charm of an ancient chronicle.

..

Quote: VlR

from Moscow's enemies - Possevino, and from opposition Pskov. All other sources, and there are many of them, including testimonies from foreigners, who deny this version

There are practically no other sources. And these foreign friends of Moscow?

Quote: VlR

In the 20th and already in the 21st centuries, many documents were introduced into scientific circulation, including

What's up this episode introduced in the 20,21th, XNUMXst centuries? Soviet historians, let me remind you once again-did not deny the fact of the death of the prince from a wound received from his father

[zampolite]

Remind me who A.S. Pushkin was? A brilliant poet.
Not a historian.

[Good Evil]

Quote: VlR

An amateurish attempt and extremely subjective: Karamzin took the facts he liked and ignored those he didn't like. And made categorical conclusions.

Quote: VlR

An amateurish attempt and extremely subjective: Karamzin took the facts he liked and ignored those he didn't like. And made categorical conclusions.

As at all times, so do historians from power act now.
"History is written by the victors" or by historians commissioned by them.

[Amateur]

Just think about some Karamzin and Tarle! The whole Ryzhov doesn't agree! No boss can tell him what to do, because he's not Gerasimov. He only tells the truth like that.

[Glory1974]

The works of pre-revolutionary classics, including Klyuchevsky, are also largely outdated, since they did not have at their disposal many historical documents that became available in the 20th century.

You said it very beautifully that the further from the event, the more interpretations. And history as a science does not exist, there are various interpretations to suit politics.

[gsev]

Quote: glory1974

But history as a science does not exist; there are various interpretations to suit politics.

It is as difficult to correctly and unambiguously interpret a historical fact as it is to unambiguously create an optimal technical design, at least to choose a cable that is completely reliable but of minimal cost so that its serial machine is guaranteed to disconnect when overloaded and so that there are no false disconnections. History simply gives a person methods to distinguish truth from lies. Who should you vote for, Putin or Yavlinsky, who will gradually be able to correct the situation in Russia, plunged into ruin by Gorbachev and Yeltsin, and who will finally ruin it?

[Panin (midshipman)]

Quote: glory1974

the further from the event, the more interpretations

For example, Roman historians could describe the same event in different ways.
And the Roman commanders, including Caesar, did not hesitate to defeat hundred-thousand-strong hordes of barbarians.

[nov_tech.vrn]

Karamzin is definitely a storyteller and relied on highly controversial, or rather unreliable works, of those authors who, according to modern terminology, are considered representatives of unfriendly countries, or, to put it simply, liars.

[Olgovich]

A.S. Pushkin about Karamzin:

There is not a single era, not a single important event, that was not satisfactorily developed by Karamzin. Where his story was unsatisfactory, he lacked sources: he did not replace them with arbitrary guesses. His moral reflections, with their monastic simplicity, give his narrative all the inexplicable charm of an ancient chronicle.

[know]

Pushkin about Karamzin. The poet about the literary sentimentalist who approached the writing of a historical work accordingly - according to the laws of fiction. I like this - we emphasize and strengthen it, I don't like this - we ignore and hush it up.

[Olgovich]

Quote: vet

A poet about a literary sentimentalist,

Even Pushkin doesn't satisfy me anymore.

HISTORIAN Solovyov about Karamzin:

 great talent, extraordinary conscientiousness and careful, comprehensive preparation

HISTORIAN Klyuchevsky considered Karamzin "the first Russian historian", noting his role in the creation of a coherent system of Russian history.

Etc..

[balabol]

"They should also remove Repin's false painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" from the Tretyakov Gallery."
Well then, let's remove paintings on ancient subjects, biblical ones, etc. In some painting "Susanna and the Elders" the historical truth is also distorted.
It is not clear who perceives Repin's work as a "historical" fact. Certainly not by his contemporaries.
Alexander Benois (1870–1960) emphasized that Repin did not strive for historical reconstruction, but created a symbol of the tragedy of power and fatherhood. He wrote that the painting is “a living experience, not a museum exhibit.”
According to Benoit, the film has an impact precisely through emotional tension, forcing the viewer to think about human nature and the price of power.
Repin himself wrote: “I wanted to show not so much a historical event, but the mental state of a person torn apart by contradictions - suffering, horror, the bitterness of remorse... This is not a chronicle, but a tragedy of the soul.”
This is not about following historical truth. It is like all great works of art about life, death and love.

[VLR]

Here is a classic: Repin wanted to do one thing (the best way) - but it turned out to be another. He finally hammered into the consciousness of the Russian people a fake fact that disgraces our country. A similar situation with Pushkin, who ruined the reputation of Boris Godunov, although there was no point in killing Tsarevich Dmitry. Dmitry was actually illegitimate (the church did not recognize his mother's marriage to the Tsar), and was officially excluded from the list of heirs to the throne - he became only an appanage prince. And Dmitry died too early - 7 years before the death of Tsar Feodor, after his death, Tsarina Irina, Godunov's sister, became pregnant several times and once even gave birth to a daughter, who, however, soon died. A boy could have been born and survived, to whom Dmitry was not a rival and did not pose any danger. Moreover, Boris was the "Lord Protector" (as the English called him), and until the three years of the Great Famine he was very popular among the people. The state prospered. But Pushkin said: I need Boris Godunov to be guilty, and I don't give a damn about historical accuracy. A.K. Tolstoy followed the same path in his dramatic trilogy, and he finished the job. And everyone is still sure that Boris Godunov killed Tsarevich Dmitry.

[balabol]

And A.S. Pushkin slandered the unfortunate Salieri.
This is already a claim to the education system and the level of culture of citizens, as well as the popularization of science.
Yes, I have met characters who navigated the history of the country based on fantasy.

[Konnick]

Quote: VlR

Moreover, Boris was the "Lord Protector" (as the English called him), and until the three years of the Great Famine he was very popular among the people. The state prospered.

Remind me of the proverb - Here's your grandma and St. George's Day? It flourished...this proverb arose precisely under Godunov

[Aviator_]

Well, Pushkin also slandered the innocent Salieri, succumbing to the malicious slander against the brilliant teacher-musician. By the way, Beethoven studied with him. Salieri had no reason to hate Mozart - on the contrary, there were reasons.

[Andy_nsk]

They should also remove Repin's false painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" from the Tretyakov Gallery.

Has it been exhibited yet? The painting was not on display during my last visit to M-va, and a museum employee told me that they were still making a super-protected frame with bulletproof glass for the painting (some foreign company).

[Ulembeck]

They should also remove Repin's false painting "Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan on November 16, 1581" from the Tretyakov Gallery. Or hang a plaque with reliable information.

Pushkin's "Mozart and Salieri" should also be banned.

[Songwolf]

Well, yes! And hang a copy of the newspaper "Pravda" in its place! A very reliable source! Maybe we should also remove Vereshchagin's paintings? Because they're not reliable! Or Vasnetsov's?
You're talking nonsense, others are happily upvoting it!
This painting is a work of art by a great artist! Whether it was or not doesn't matter!

[Vend]

Quote: Uncle Lee

that's why the boss strictly ordered Gerasimov "does not distort history."

So much for historical accuracy.

Well, these are studies. History is a science and it is also developing, unfortunately, not all dogmas can be eliminated, many still exist. And in any science there are erroneous theories and conclusions. For example, the mistakes of academician Likhachev in the translations of ancient Russian texts, the already hackneyed outfit in translation, as an order. Today, for example, genealogy of the DNG is paving the way in historical science. The main thing in historical science is to learn to overcome dogmatism.

[VLR]

By the way, Ivan IV's "Terrible Angel Voivode" is Archangel Michael.

[Richard]

skull and remains of Ivan the Terrible

[Luminman]

It reminds me of the pictures of the drunkard Yeltsin. In the democratic newspapers loyal to Yeltsin, he was depicted as a kind of father of the people, wise, with gray hair from state concerns, thinking day and night about the well-being of the country. In the newspapers, where this drunkard was always criticized, everything is the opposite - in the photographs he is all sort of crumpled, with unkempt hair sticking out in all directions, with a tie slanted to one side and an imbecile face. Why am I saying this? Well, because in all these reconstructions there is a significant share of personal perceptionScience is science, of course, but every sculptor sees everything in his own way...

[VLR]

You probably mean the reconstruction of Ivan IV's appearance. The Brazilian anthropologist has no reason to either embellish or denigrate this tsar. For him, he is an abstract historical character, like Vespasian or Henry the Fowler for us. But before starting his work, Gerasimov clearly read Karamzin with his "theater of horrors", "insatiability in murders and lust". And his hand dropped in indignation. After reading such stuff, one can only sculpt maniacs.

[voyaka uh]

Ivan the Terrible, from the point of view of modern psychiatry, is a classic sadomasochist. Uncontrollable outbursts of anger, followed by periods of normal rational thinking, periods of depression, remorse - a typical full cycle. At the same time, his brain worked perfectly.
He was not the only such ruler in history - there were many of his "copies" in Europe.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Thanks to Valery for the article, I agree with some things, but I question some.
The Author's work inspired something else:
I am writing from memory. German scientists of the 30s identified the missing "ancient man of Hyperborea" in the chain of their Aryan worldviews by "tooth"... Laurels, ovations...
Today it is believed that this is the tooth of a giant guinea pig…

[VLR]

Good morning. In this case, there is nothing controversial. A super-objective, balanced article with numerous references to recognized experts. At least, at the moment, this is the latest data based on a method patented only 8 years ago.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Dear Valery, I have my own view on the forensic methodology that was used by Gerasimov and his followers.
Sometimes, the conclusions may be the same, but the methods of proving them are different a priori.
Seriously, for the sake of a scientific experiment, several years ago they tried to implement the method you described into practical forensics. Alas, it did not fit in. There are many subjective factors in the perception of conditions, even with a software modeling method.
If on the fingers of 10 “portraits”, the conditional similarity with photographs during life was achieved in 4 cases (at the level of a photofit), of which only in two cases was the similarity of a higher quality at the level of “recognition by machine method”.
For historians, this is a great result; for criminologists, it is a failure.

[Nikname2025]

I am writing from memory.

Your memory has failed you. This is nothing more than a joke. And a very ignorant one at that. Have you seen a guinea pig's teeth?

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

No, it's not a joke.
Fossilized giant guinea pig. A relative of sirens and sea cows, alas, thanks to man, now also a fossil.
I first read about this in A. Burevoy. Professor, archaeologist, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Then I came across it in a number of other books, including foreign ones.

[Nikname2025]

Some unknown professor. I wanted to look at his biography, but I couldn't find it. Maybe Burovsky? He's a storyteller.

Fossilized giant guinea pig.

With human teeth?

Then I came across it in a number of other books, including foreign ones.

Could you share the names? I have never come across anything like this in Godwin, Goodrick-Clarke, or Strube.

[Richard]

Have you seen a guinea pig's teeth?

"Josephoartigasia monesi". An archaic guinea pig, a rodent that lived, according to scientists, 4 million years ago. It weighed from 450 kg to 2,5 tons, and was about one and a half meters long. (Fig. 1)
A rodent, Vlad!! And it is impossible to confuse a rodent's tooth, even a giant one, with a primate's tooth. VikNik is right here - you are mistaken.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Dima, Victor - good evening!
There is only one solution, I will be in the village and will look through the source. Perhaps I mixed something up.

[severok1979]

By the way, Yeltsinyuga also had a claw and was missing a couple of fingers.
Here is a photo from Paris. 1990.

[balabol]

There was a film called "Seven Steps Beyond the Horizon" - a popular science film shot in 1968 at the Kievnauchfilm studio by director Felix Sobolev. Sensational for its time. There was an episode with two groups of people. They showed one photograph, but preceded the showing with information that it was a criminal or a humanist scientist. Both groups agreed with the statement, noting that this bad (good) is especially visible in the eyes.
The effect of subconscious programming of reaction and conformity.

[Konnick]

But Galina Viktorovna Lebedinskaya, who headed the Laboratory of Plastic Reconstruction of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences (Institute of Anthropology and Ethnology of the Russian Academy of Sciences), was a student of M. Gerasimov! But her Polovtsian is a 100% European.

The author has his own view of Europeans, in my opinion this Polovtsian is 200% Kalmyk. And epicanthus....the same Tatyana Dogileva had epicanthus, which she got rid of. Among my acquaintances there are two with epicanthus, and pure Europoids.

[know]

You have some strange idea about Kalmyks. Take Ilyumzhinov, he is a Kalmyk, won't you argue? - look. The Polovtsian in the reconstruction has a long, narrow face, Ilyumzhinov's is wide and round. Ilyumzhinov's nose is wide, the Polovtsian's is narrow. The Polovtsian looks down, but his eyes are wider than Ilyumzhinov's, who looks straight ahead.

[Was mammoth]

Quote: vet

You have some strange ideas about Kalmyks.

I came across a pre-revolutionary volume. I don't remember the author, about 50 years have passed. With "parchment" sheets between the pages. Thick and heavy! But I remembered it. It had a section where the structure of the skull of different races was examined. As a conclusion, the conclusion was made - the most correct skull is that of the Kalmyks.

[Glory1974]

Take Ilyumzhinov, he is a Kalmyk, you won't argue? - take a look.

Ilyumzhinov was abducted by aliens, as he himself reported, so there are several options.

[sifgame]

I understand you haven’t seen young Ilyumzhinov.

[DVostok-2]

Well, the degree of fatness (forgive me, Lord) of Sophia Paleolog is completely out of place here - you can't determine it by her skull in any case. Here, even if you eat only lard, the bones won't get thicker.

[VLR]

But it was possible to try to find by no means secret data about her physique, wasn't it? And to sculpt if not fat, then at least not thin and almost emaciated with sunken cheeks.

[DVostok-2]

Well, the devil knows. Maybe Ivan the Third was an insatiable prankster, and that's why Sophia lost weight. What period of her life did Gerasimov have in mind? My uncle jumped from one hundred thirty to eighty and back all his life. But in general, I'm not strong in the Palaeologs, except for her and Maurice I can't even name anyone off the top of my head.

[know]

I don't know a single lady who has lost weight dramatically from intimate exercises in bed.
As a doctor I can say with authority: to lose weight, there is only one reliable recommendation - do not eat! Physical activity - has a secondary auxiliary significance. You will not lose weight from it alone. Bath - weight loss due to water, instantly replenished. Massage - a masseuse will lose weight.

[Adrey]

Quote: vet

Massage - the masseuse will lose weight.

[Carmela]

Quote: VlR

But it was possible to try to find by no means secret data about her physique, wasn't it? And to sculpt if not fat, then at least not thin and almost emaciated with sunken cheeks.

By the time of her death she could have become emaciated from illness. Her cheeks become hollow from the absence of teeth. In old age we all change, not for the better. By the way, she gave birth to five sons.

[know]

Do you think Nikitin sculpted a dying Sophia? Rather, the opposite - in the prime of life, at the time of her arrival in Russia, or - at the height of power.

[Carmela]

Quote: vet

Do you think Nikitin sculpted a dying Sophia? Rather, the opposite - in the prime of life, at the time of her arrival in Russia, or - at the height of power.

The skull belonged to a woman who had already died. If I sculpted it scientifically, then the face should be that of an old person. The absence of teeth, again. And the skull changes somehow during life.

[know]

The skull does not change fundamentally.

[severok1979]

Strange reasoning. It seems that nothing could be simpler - take the skulls of three people who have good lifetime photographs, assemble two teams (the "Gerasimovites" and the "Zvyagintsevites"), give them the skulls to work with (naturally, without photographs), and then compare the results with the photographs. Why wasn't this done?

[know]

It seems that there is no need for this and there are no more supporters of Gerasimov among specialists. Indeed, you can't argue with new technologies, and working with advanced computer programs already gives plus 100 points. And have you read who the same Zvyagin is? What level of specialist?

Head of the Laboratory of Forensic Osteological Research of the Russian Center for Forensic Medical Examination of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Head of the Department of Forensic Medical Identification of Persons

These are official positions; this is not an armchair theoretical scientist, but a very serious and responsible practitioner.

[Konnick]

Quote: severok1979

and then compare the results with the photo. Why didn't they do that?

Gerasimov made several such reconstructions incognito as confirmation and they were then compared and almost complete similarity was established. I am hearing about Zvyagin for the first time, but for some reason Nikitin, who works according to Gerasimov's method, was not mentioned here, and he is the chief specialist of the Moscow Forensic Medical Examination Bureau.

[know]

For some reason, Nikitin, who works according to Gerasimov's method, was not mentioned here

At the very beginning, his reconstruction of the face of Sophia Paleologue is mentioned.

Gerasimov made several such reconstructions incognito as a confirmation, and they were then compared and an almost complete similarity was established.

Well, yes, that's what it says:

Gerasimov himself, according to colleagues' recollections, claimed that the first version of his reconstruction of Timur's appearance was not approved by the management, because he unexpectedly turned out to look like... a typical European! This categorically contradicted the scientific ideas of those years, and therefore the management strictly ordered Gerasimov "not to distort history."

He wavered, did not show strength of character, took the easy path towards the situation and, as it is also written:

V. Zvyagin is extremely diplomatic, but some other authors use the terms “falsification” and “forgery”.

[Konnick]

Quote: vet

At the very beginning, his reconstruction of the face of Sophia Paleologue is mentioned.

Sorry, missed it. Moreover, Sofia Paleologue's appearance was described not only by an Italian, and the birth of 9 children is proof of Sofia's attractiveness

[Senior seaman]

The point is that Gerasimov reconstructed the appearance of people based on their skulls, who were later identified by relatives and friends. In general, at that time his methodology was quite up to par. But as I understand it, the respected author reproaches Gerasimov not for the methodology as such, but precisely for the fact that he deviated from it due to the political situation.

[VLR]

Yes, mainly for this. The sculptural portrait of Timur and his descendants was changed at the request of the leadership, but Andrei Bogolyubsky - it seems he corrected it himself, since he believed that the Polovtsians were Mongoloids. And it cannot be ruled out that the other sculptural portraits were also edited in accordance with his views or the instructions of the authorities.

[Adrey]

Quote: severok1979

It seems that nothing could be simpler - take the skulls of three people with good lifetime photographs

Now it is possible even during life . Take a CT scan of a living person and you will have a complete 3D model of the skull "here and now".

[deddem]

By the way, why is the "yellowness" of the Polovtsians/Cumans attributed to their hair, and not to the color of their skin?

[VLR]

And where did you see "yellow-skinned" Hungarians or Gagauz - some of whom are descendants of the Polovtsians? And where are the references to such an exotic appearance in Russian, Hungarian, Byzantine documents? The appearance of the Polovtsians did not surprise anyone. But the appearance of the Mongols - yes, everyone was surprised. And this was reflected in the documents of all European countries - the Gogs and Magogs were sent by God as punishment for their sins.

[Richard]

Hungarians or Gagauzians - some of whom are descendants of the Polovtsians?

Polovtsians? Or Pechenegs and Oghuzes by any chance? Valery, during my service I had the chance to serve in Turkmenistan and in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug. And here's what's interesting: both the Khanty and the Turkmen, as well as the Gagauz, consider themselves descendants of the Oghuzes. And I believe that there is every reason for this. The Khanty communicate well with the Hungarians without an interpreter, their eyes are correctly cut and their skulls are often narrow and long, of the European type, than, for example, their Mansi neighbors. (photos 1-3).
Anthropologists generally classify Turkmens as Europeans - European eye shape, curly hair. I remember how I was amazed in the Ashgabat Museum of Local History in front of a painting depicting Oguz Khan Turkmen with warriors. No one has anything Asian - if you rewrite the name, for example - prophetic Oleg with warriors, you can buy it - and weapons, helmets, chain mail, and appearance - one to one. By the way, the same Svyatoslav had allied relations with the Oguzes. Together in 965 they defeated their neighbors - the Khazars and in 985 the Volga Bulgars. In the 10th century, the Oguz state was not the last player in the region. (see map)

[Richard]

Oghuz state in the 10th century.

[VLR]

Good day, Dmitry. I already wrote at the very beginning that according to the most popular Turkic hypothesis of the ethnogenesis of the Gagauz, the genetic trace was left in turn by the Oguzes, Pechenegs and Polovtsians. And there are three more hypotheses - Seljuk, Bulgarian and Turkic-Bulgarian.

[Richard]

Good afternoon, Valery.

According to the most popular Turkic hypothesis of the ethnogenesis of the Gagauz, the genetic trace was left in turn by the Oguzes, Pechenegs and Polovtsians.

Personally, I am more inclined to trust not the "popular Turkic hypothesis", but the Arab chronicler Ibn Jabar Al-Balazuri, who in 892 reported on the defeat and expulsion of the Polovtsians from Desht-i-Kipchak (the so-called "Kipchak steppe") by the Oghuz Khan Usman. Incidentally, their first appearance at the Russian borders dates back to the second half of the XNUMXth century.

[Richard]

In 965, the Kyiv prince Svyatoslav and the Oghuz Yabgu entered into an alliance against the Khazars and the Volga Bulgars

The union promised to be very promising and could radically change history. But alas, it was short-lived due to religious conflicts. Already in 988, on the initiative of Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich, Rus' adopted Christianity, and the Oghuz, having captured Khorezm, were the first among the Turks to accept Islam, after which the Arab chroniclers began to call them "Turk Imans" - Turks of Iman (faith). Subsequently, the self-designation "Oghuz" disappeared, giving way to the ethnonym "Turkoman-Turkmen".

[Richard]

And the choice of faith itself in both states, in my opinion, was chosen according to the principle of the best control over their most important trade routes. For Rus' - the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks". For the Oghuz - "the great silk road".

[deddem]

Quote: VlR

And where did you see "yellow-skinned" Hungarians or Gagauz - some of whom are descendants of the Polovtsians? And where are the references to such an exotic appearance in Russian, Hungarian, Byzantine documents? The appearance of the Polovtsians did not surprise anyone. But the appearance of the Mongols - yes, everyone was surprised. And this was reflected in the documents of all European countries - the Gogs and Magogs were sent by God as punishment for their sins.

Well, there are some established terms like “black”, “yellow”, “white”, and for some reason this mainly concerns the shade of skin color, not hair.
Apparently because there are white-skinned burning brunettes, red-haired "blacks" and - horror of horrors - fair-haired yellow ones, and also narrow-eyed ones.

By the way, even before the Mongols, chroniclers were amazed by the appearance of the Kutrigurs, although it would seem that they were the same Turks...

[Richard]

By the way, why is the "yellowness" of the Polovtsians/Cumans attributed to their hair, and not to the color of their skin?

Not all historians attribute it. According to E. Ch. Skrzhinskaya, the ethnonym comes from the Old Slavic "plovitsy". The inhabitants of the right bank of the Dnieper, where Kyiv was located, called the nomads from the left bank this way, from "that side" - "of that plov"

[VLR]

There is such a version. But the question arises: if the Byzantines and Hungarians used the word "light yellow" to name the Polovtsians, why couldn't the Russians use it? A clear indication of some feature of appearance. But certainly not skin - that's very unusual, it was definitely noted somewhere. And light hair is normal, it attracts attention, but doesn't cause surprise.

[Richard]

Valery, why did you decide that the Byzantines and Hungarians used the word "light yellow" to refer to the Polovtsians? The Byzantines called them Cumans (Greek: kομάνοι). Anna Komnene Komnene - a Byzantine princess, the eldest daughter of Emperor Alexios I Komnenos and Irene Doukini, one of the first female historians calls them exactly that. The Hungarians called them Cunomades - "nomadic". This is how Anonymus himself (Hungarian and Latin: Anonymus) called them - a Hungarian chronicler of the 12th - early 13th centuries, the author of the historical work Gesta Hungarorum.
Arab chroniclers call them Sarat-Turgesh
By the way, neither Anna, nor Anonymous, nor the Arabs have anything to say about the "light yellow" color of their hair.
This people is known as Polovtsians exclusively in Russian chronicles.

[balabol]

There is such a science - aso-studies - a section of anthropology that studies human races.
Based on data from morphology and physiology, genetics and molecular biology, racial studies examines the problems of classifying races, their origin, distribution across the globe, development and interaction in connection with the specific history of human populations.
Within the framework of this science (in principle, this is a special case of more general laws) there is a maxim:
"inter-racial differences may be smaller than intra-racial differences," reflecting the understanding that, in a biological and genetic sense, variations within a "race" (or population) may be greater than variations between different "races."
The statement "inter-racial differences may be smaller than intra-racial differences" reflects the understanding that, in a biological and genetic sense, variations within a "race" (or population) may be greater than variations between different "races."

What does this mean in more detail:

Race is a conditional category
The term "race" in human biology does not have strictly defined boundaries. Modern science increasingly views human populations as parts of a single species variability, where the boundaries between groups ("races") are blurred and often culturally determined.
Genetic diversity within groups
Within a single population or "race" there may be considerable genetic diversity. For example, within a single ethnic or geographic group, people may differ in many genetic traits more than different groups differ from each other.
Less differences between groups
Comparison of different "races" shows that the overall volume of genetic differences between them is small. A person, regardless of "race", has more than 99,9% identical genetic material.
Conclusion from genetic research
Numerous studies, from the work of Juven and Cavalli-Sforza to modern genomic projects, show that approximately 85-90% of all human genetic diversity is concentrated within populations, while the proportion of differences between races is about 10-15%.

Why it matters:
This refutes racist notions of significant biologically based differences between "races."
Shows that any social or cultural differences do not necessarily reflect significant biological differences.
Emphasizes the need to avoid stereotypes and discrimination based on biological parameters.
The claim that genetic diversity within human "races" or populations often exceeds the differences between them is supported by a number of classic and modern studies in population genetics. Here are some key studies and results:

1. Research by Richard Lewontin, 1972
In one of his most famous works, The Apportionment of Human Diversity (1972), Levon analyzed genetic variations in different human populations.
The main conclusion is that about 85% (sometimes quoted as 85-90%) of genetic differences are due to variations within populations, while only about 10-15% is explained by differences between populations and "races".
This result indicates that within a single "race" (or population), people may differ much more than the average differences between members of different "races."
2. Studies using microsatellites and SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphism)
Projects such as the Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP) and the International HapMap Project have studied hundreds of thousands of genetic markers in people from different ethnic groups around the world.
The results of these large-scale genomic projects confirm Levon's findings: genetic diversity is primarily intra-population in nature.
For example, Rosenberg et al. (2002) "Genetic Structure of Human Populations" showed that there is clustering of populations by geographic location, but the differences between clusters are still significantly smaller than the variations within each cluster.
3. Study by Cavalli-Sforza et al.
Population geneticist Giuseppe Cavalli-Sforza and colleagues have studied genetic data from around the world and concluded that racial categories do not clearly define genetic diversity.
In The History and Geography of Human Genes (1994), they showed that human diversity is better described as continuous geographic variation rather than discrete groups.
4. Modern population genomic studies
Modern research, including whole genome sequencing (WGS) analyses of various ethnic groups, continues to confirm:
Most genetic variability is concentrated within populations.
In fact, 99,9% of the human genome is the same in all people, regardless of ethnicity.
For example, the article “Genetic variation and population structure in ethnically diverse populations” (Wang et al., 2017) illustrates that racial categories have limited relevance to true genetic structure and variation.

Bottom line:

Genetic studies show that "race" refers more to social and cultural categories than to strictly biologically defined groups.
Variations within a single "race" can significantly exceed variations between "races".

[deddem]

Quote: vet

You have some strange idea about Kalmyks. Take Ilyumzhinov, he is a Kalmyk, won't you argue? - look. The Polovtsian in the reconstruction has a long, narrow face, Ilyumzhinov's is wide and round. Ilyumzhinov's nose is wide, the Polovtsian's is narrow. The Polovtsian looks down, but his eyes are wider than Ilyumzhinov's, who looks straight ahead.

Okay, here's another Kalmyk, quite typical.
Looks like?

[know]

Everyone knows Ilyumzhinov, and it is known that he is a pure-blooded Kalmyk. But who is this character? And, considering the numerous mixed marriages, to what extent is he, excuse me, a pure-blooded Kalmyk?

[Andobor]

The Kalmyks have four tribes: Torguts, Dervyuts, Khoshuts and Buzavs, and they still distinguish them from each other by appearance and character.

[Konnick]

Two completely different people, aren't they? Gerasimov presents this Tsar as a deeply vicious man - a degenerate with obvious signs of degeneration on his face.

Is this the opinion of the author or more competent researchers?

[VLR]

Yes, take another look at the reconstructions of Gerasimov and Moroes. And, hand on heart, tell me which of these two Ivan IVs you would prefer to deal with - both at work, as a boss, and as a neighbor on the landing.

[Konnick]

Quote: VlR

Yes, take another look at the reconstructions of Gerasimov and Moroes. And, hand on heart, tell me which of these two Ivan IVs you would prefer to deal with - both at work, as a boss, and as a neighbor on the landing.

I don't see much difference between them, they are practically the same face.

[know]

practically the same person

??? !!!
Where?! The narrow-browed face of Ivan Gerasimov and the broad-browed face of Ivan Moroes - are they the same? The protruding ears of Ivan Gerasimov and the ears pressed to the head of Ivan Moroes - are they identical? After the European-looking Polovtsian seemed to you similar to the Mongoloid Kalmyk? What's wrong with your visual perception?

[Konnick]

Quote: vet

Where?! Is Ivan's narrow-browed face from Gerasimov and Ivan's broad-browed face from Moroes the same?

Well, I would have determined by the skull where the skull is narrow-browed and where it is wide-browed. Gerasimov had the real skull of Ivan the Terrible, and I don't know about Moroes, maybe he had nothing but a computer... especially since Moroes is just a 3D computer designer and is not a scientist.

[Senior seaman]

Quote: Konnick

Moroes is just a 3D computer designer and is not a scientist.

But his opinion fits well into the framework)))

[Senior seaman]

Quote: Konnick

practically the same person

just at different ages)

[Illanatol]

Don't judge a book by its cover. A man should be judged not by the shape of his skull, but by his actions. Real ones, not those invented by his enemies and slanderers.

Some historical sources claim that the Emperor Caligula had an almost angelic or divine appearance. But this ancient madman did such things that you can neither describe with a pen nor type on a keyboard.

[VLR]

Some say that the Emperor Caligula was slandered by his assassins - on the principle of the German proverb, according to which "a killed dog must always be mangy". The usual debauchery of a young healthy male was greatly exaggerated, the achievements that were (cancelled all the already started trials for treason, amnestied the exiled, abolished some taxes, completed many buildings, returned democratic elections, made the grain supply from Egypt more stable, as well as the fact that he enjoyed the support of ordinary citizens of Rome - were hushed up.

[Illanatol]

Quote: VlR

Some say that the Emperor Caligula was slandered by his assassins - on the principle of the German proverb that "a killed dog must always be mangy."

Well, yes, "it's different."
Like, double standards again?
Caligula was slandered, but Tsar Ivan, a foreign, very shady type, was not slandered. Everything about him is the pure truth. He was a lecher and a tyrant and killed his son-heir with a stick.
In short, a vile bastard. Well, and the "achievements that Ivan had" - in brackets, you can ignore them. Well, so what, he carried out reforms, increased the territory of his state considerably, invented some Streltsy, removed the threat from the East completely... he's bad, he's bad and has no face, a spitting image of a bandit-criminal, in short.

So there was no place for him on the famous monument, among his crowned colleagues. Such is the "figure of silence".

[VLR]

And Gerasimov, alas, with his reconstruction of Ivan IV’s face, strengthened these anti-Russian stereotypes of Russia’s external enemies, the Jesuits and the traitor Kurbsky – he depicted him as a man with a clearly unhealthy psyche.

[cpls22]

Quote: VlR

Yes, take another look at the reconstructions of Gerasimov and Moroes.

To do this, they need to be brought into a uniform appearance. In the photos provided, there are not only signs of facial expression, but also different materials. If Gerasimov's bust were made of silicone, with normal hair color, it would be a typical pensioner of an unhealthy appearance, and not a dark villain. He was seriously ill, and illnesses do not paint a face. The same applies to Moroes's work - it is worth removing the babyish complexion and Lenin's squint with dilated pupils, and now it will be far from a kind person who writes music.
Thank you for the article, I learned a lot of new things, but I find it difficult to agree with your assessment of new and old reconstructions

[tralflot1832]

The very first (and last) reconstruction of M. Gerasimov, which I saw live (1970-72) is in the Murmansk Regional Museum in the archaeological department. In 1947, archaeologists found a burial of a lady on the Kola Peninsula, on Oleniy Island. The age of the burial is 2500 years BC. Then the sturgeon was cut down by the Australians to 1520 years BC. What was there 3600 years ago I do not remember. Maybe the Sumerians dug the sea, the Jews lived in Egypt? There were definitely no dinosaurs anymore. The remains of the ancient "Murmansk woman" are very well preserved, height 1,52 m. Beautifully lying next to the house with the reconstruction of M. Gerasimov under glass. With the development of science, there are more questions than answers. If anyone is interested, I give a link, go for it. On the left is the work of Gerasimov, on the right is a modern animation by anthropologist I.G. Shirobokov. By the way, the ancient inhabitants of Oleniy Island did not have caries, they did not know what caries was.

[tralflot1832]

Here is some information from Alice on this matter.

[shikin]

Here's an interesting thing: both the Finns and the Ugrians appeared in history no earlier than 2 thousand years after these finds. In addition, the only thing that modern Finns and Hungarians have in common is the language base, despite their very different genetics. Over these 2 thousand years, there were also various contacts and mixing of genes (and this happens with every mating).
This is about the validity of such classification of the found remains into modern linguistic (not even genetic!) groups.

[tralflot1832]

I apologize, the ancient inhabitants of Oleniy did not know what caries was, because they did not know what sugar was. Or there were simply no dentists then.

[Engineer]

The distinctive feature of a person is development. We all learn and revise our views in light of new information. This author does not want to learn and revise his views

For the twentieth time, the reader is fed with what is essentially a marginal version about the origin of the exoethnonym "Polovtsy" from the straw-yellow hair color of the members of this tribal union. The notorious Gumilev was not the author, but an active popularizer of this idea.

To date, of the several versions of the semantics of the term “Polovtsy”, only one has been recognized by specialists: “Polovtsy” (from the Old Russian “polova” – straw) in terms of color meaning is a tracing of the Turkic “sary” (yellow), which became the self-designation of the Polovtsy [5, p. 137; 7, p. 41].
Indeed, in the Laurentian Chronicle under 1096 the endoethnonym of the Polovtsians is called “rekshe: sarini esmi”

https://www.terrahumana.ru/arhiv/11_02/11_02_25.pdf

The anthropology of the Polovtsians is, naturally, much more complex than simple statements about Mongoloid or Caucasoid origins.
Initially, the Polovtsians are considered to have come from the Kimak (Pletnev) or Turgesh (Evstigneev) Khaganate. In any case, they go back to the Eastern Turkic Khaganate, where the Mongoloid element undoubtedly predominated.
As they moved westward and especially as they came into proximity to Russia, the share of the European element grew continuously. However, the process was not one-sided. New waves of newcomers from Siberia with pronounced Mongoloid features were recorded.

The situation is complicated by the vast spaces in which the ethnogenesis of the Polovtsians took place, so the ratio of Mongoloid and Caucasoid elements is naturally uneven.

However, the appearance of the Polovtsians did not surprise the Russians, Hungarians, or Byzantines:

The Mongoloid element could not surprise anyone in Europe. It has been recorded there since the era of the Great Patriotic War: Huns, Avars, Bulgars, with reservations Ugrians (these are more Uralians, but they also had Mongoloid features). The Mongoloid element was in the Guzes, with whom Rus' became acquainted earlier than with the Polovtsians.


One can only draw a few cautious conclusions:
The Polovtsians are characterized by a mixed anthropological type.
The Polovtsian population is heterogeneous in space and time
The Polovtsian nobility was the first to enter into high-status marriages with the local European elite and was the first to become "Europeanized". At the same time, it is the nobility that is represented in the burial mounds and it is impossible to judge the anthropology of the entire tribe based on them.

[Illanatol]

Strictly speaking, chaff is not straw, but grain husk.
And there was a version that the Polovtsians were so called because they loved to eat porridge made from unrefined grain (with chaff).

[Illanatol]

Quote: Olgovich

And ban the "liars" - Russian historians Karamzin, Klyuchevsky, Shcherbatov, etc., on whose research Repin relied?

It may not be necessary to prohibit it, but it is certainly necessary to be critical of it.
By the way, where did these authorities get their information? From the ravings of the papal envoy Possevino, who was clearly biased?
Well, Karamzin had ancestors who were "innocently repressed" by Ivan the Fourth. What kind of objectivity and impartiality can there be here?
There is simply no evidence of murder that could be presented in court.
It is a common thing - servants, lackeys of the representatives of the next dynasty pour anal chocolate on the representatives of the previous dynasty, so that the new monarchs look more respectable against their background.

And yes... does this picture look like evidence of Tsar Ivan's murder of his son? A premeditated murder, I emphasize.
Do we see a triumphant villain trampling the chest of his victim?
Or a grief-stricken father cradling the body of his son?
On the faces of both father and son there is no trace of expression of hatred or anger, only despair and regret.

[Maks1995]

Well, it's bullshit, IMHO?
I once saw a video, a popular science video, comparing M. Gerasimov’s reconstructions with more modern ones, including those using computers.
There are differences, but they are similar.
You just have to remember that he started recreating - almost 100 years ago, and died 55 years ago. And new data and methods have accumulated immeasurably over 100 years.

So, IMHO, there are 100% mistakes. But you need to take this calmly.
and remember! - this is not the main chatterbox from the telegram channel

[John_Doe]

Two completely different people, aren't they?

- Not true.))
A purely speculative article with a specific purpose: to attack Gerasimov.
P.S. And yes: Bogolyubsky also came out with a characteristic "squint" in the graphic reconstruction. He could easily pass for a Tatar.))

[VLR]

Why attack him if absolutely all experts (ours, not foreign ill-wishers) currently consider his works, to put it mildly, unreliable, and some even use the words "falsification" and "forgery"? The verdict has already been made. The fact that the general public does not know about him only speaks of the unwillingness of this public to know the real history. I have given enough quotes from these experts indicating their positions, academic titles, places of work. Everything is easily verified. However, new facts require understanding, cause mental discomfort - it is easier to live with stereotypes.

[Dmitriy22]

Listen, has this method been tested in modern conditions? Well, that is, they take the skull of a person who has a lot of photos (an executed person, for example, or a volunteer.... it doesn't matter) and make a reconstruction (do not show the photos to the reconstructor). The result is on the face...

[Konnick]

Quote: Dmitriy22

reconstruction is being done (do not show the photos to the reconstructor). The result is on the face..

You see, Zvyagin patented it, and Gerasimov proved his method exactly as you suggested. Nowadays, anything can be patented, you just have to pay.

[know]

The point, as I understand it, is not that Gerasimov's method is no good, but that he himself, sometimes - under pressure from his superiors - "corrected" his works - as in the case of Tamerlane, because he "must be a Mongol" and there is no point in "distorting history". And modern reconstruction methods using modern technology have exposed this "unscrupulousness".

[Illanatol]

Well, yes, it's completely different now. The management doesn't put any pressure on you, and for the humanities, there's complete freedom and independence in their professional activities.
Or maybe not quite?

[know]

Judging by how much rottenness there was among all sorts of laureates and holders of state awards, prizes and titles, how many anti-Soviet films and plays they shot and staged with state money, there was probably more independence in professional activity (at least before the SVO). But for some reason, nothing outstanding was shot or staged after the collapse of the USSR.

[Illanatol]

Why bring in SVO? What does that have to do with it?
Well, it's silly to argue that our filmmakers have made a lot of crap films. But it started a long time ago, even before the collapse of the USSR. And after the collapse, it just exploded.
There has never been independence. Where will it come from? He who dines a girl, dances with her. If you want state money, do what the authorities like. Or have fun, all independent...

[ArchiPhil]

Why bring up SVO?

Because the SVO is a kind of success of modern Russia. By the way, it is also a kind of indicator of what the RF authorities *can do*.

[know]

The point is that before the start of the SVO, state money was actively and in huge quantities allocated for anti-Soviet and anti-Russian projects. And here there are two options. The first: there was no control over the allocated funds. The second is quite sad: the enemies of Russia were in power in the country.

[Illanatol]

Both options are partially valid. Yes, there is no complete control yet. Including because in the state apparatus, and not only, there are still enemies of Russia. The authorities, the elite in our country are far from monolithic, that is true. But thanks to the SVO it becomes clear "who is who...". Which is undoubtedly a good thing.

[ArchiPhil]

But thanks to the SVO it becomes clear "who is who...".

So maybe it was necessary to do this before the operation? Or as usual: *we were deceived!* And the money would have been safe, starting the SVO, was it really not clear that sanctions would follow??? *What is allowed to Jupiter....*

[Illanatol]

Desires and possibilities do not always coincide.
Let us not forget that some quite outspoken enemies were represented in this very elite before the start of the SVO, some were quite popular with part of society, had influence and real opportunities.
I'm not only talking about businessmen and politicians, but also about our "celebrities". And their opinions were listened to, they had millions of fans.
But the moment of truth came and it became clear who was really "Leo Tolstoy" and who was just "plain shit".
That sanctions will follow - well, sanctions against us began to be introduced back in 2008. But some (including in the Kremlin) see benefit in them and directly state this.

“Sometimes a kick gives us wings.” Jerzy Lec.

If any of our billionaires in the West were slightly subjected to food taxation, then this too, as it were, is useful from a certain point of view.
And the money... is this about those same "300 billion dollars"? Well, that money wasn't working for us anyway, the Russian people really didn't lose anything from freezing it. And there is an opinion that those billions are like a fat worm on a sharp hook. That's why the West really wants to confiscate them for its own benefit, but its determination is only enough to steal interest from that amount. Apparently, they understand what consequences such "technical appropriation" can have.

[Illanatol]

And this is an undoubted success. The Russian Federation is quite successfully conducting a campaign against a neighboring state, which is supported by the collective West.
Everything is known through comparison, as we know.
Let's compare the course of the SVO with the "first Chechen", taking into account the real balance of forces.
Or the recent campaigns waged by the "exceptional nation", such as in Afghanistan.
So the quotation marks were in vain. The current Russian authorities act quite skillfully.

[ArchiPhil]

The current Russian authorities are acting quite skillfully.

I disagree with you. If they had acted really skillfully, the military actions would have already been completed. And even after their completion, just imagine the level of hatred towards us? After the end of the Great War, the first friendly match between the USSR and FRG teams took place in 1955. What is your prediction on whether a similar match between today's opponents will take place at all?

[VLR]

not that Gerasimov's methodology is no good, but that he sometimes "corrected" his work himself, sometimes under pressure from his superiors

Absolutely right. It was the controversial reconstructions of the appearance of famous historical figures that immediately raised doubts. And, unfortunately, the sculptural portraits of Timur and Andrei Bogolyubsky created by Gerasimov do not correspond to their true appearance at all. The same can be said about the portraits of the Timurids. This casts doubt on the "portrait" of all other historical sculptures by Gerasimov. The portrait of Ivan the Terrible also raises great doubts - it is very "characteristic": it was clearly created under the influence of historical works in the spirit of Karamzin, whose authors declared this tsar a half-mad sadist and tyrant.

[ArchiPhil]

in the spirit of Karamzin

Valery, thanks for the article! It's clear that I'm not an expert, but? I read it with bated breath and pleasure! Well done!

[Illanatol]

I wonder where the information about the true appearance of these historical figures comes from?
Almost any source is subjective and biased. These individuals are of too high caliber to be treated impartially and indifferently. So the sources are either enemies or allies (and possibly hangers-on).
As if portraits would show the true face, yeah. I suspect the living prototype of Mona Lisa didn't look so impressive either.

[VLR]

Now we can definitely talk about the absence of Mongoloid features in Timur and his descendants and in Andrei Bogolyubsky. Which, alas, are present in Gerasimov's reconstructions - and they are still actively used as illustrations. This practice must be stopped. As simple sculptures - please, "the author sees it that way." But on the pages of textbooks - no need.

[Illanatol]

Quote: VlR

Now we can say with absolute certainty that there were no Mongoloid features in Timur and his descendants and in Andrei Bogolyubsky.

Well, Andrei Bogolyubsky - okay, although our "non-brothers" are unlikely to be pleased with this.
After all, this prince is the standard of a "Russian orc", he also smashed Kyiv. So he should look like a Mongolian Mongol and a Tatar Tatar... in short, an orc and all that.

But Timur... such news would please the "alternatives". Since Timur is not a Mongol, maybe he is one of "ours"? So to speak, one of our own...
Timur Yaroslavich, yeah

[VLR]

Let me remind you that in the first version Timur turned out to be a European even in Gerasimov's work, who was forced to correct the portrait on the orders of the dissatisfied leadership, who ordered "not to distort history." Timur's Europeanness was confirmed by modern researchers mentioned in the article - the leading forensic expert Zvyagin, and the Head of the Department of Anthropology of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. Vasiliev, and others - who are by no means alternativeists. Plus the evidence about Timur's appearance from medieval authors, who write about light skin, blue eyes and red hair. The information about red hair is also confirmed by the report of the commission that conducted the famous exhumation in Samarkand on the eve of the war.

[Mikhail Krivopalov]

1) The Groznys are similar to each other, except that their lips are slightly different in shape, so where did the author see different people, especially one of them endowed with degenerative features?
2) author, the fact that Gerasimov made Sophia Paleologue look thin does not mean that he did it wrong, since it is not clear from the skull whether a person was fat or thin, and even more so whether his skin was oily and where the folds were

[Dzungar]

My Mongolian opinion. I believe that between the Mongoloid nomads and the Caucasoid nomads about 2000 years ago there was quite a border of their areas, let's say. This is a mountain range between today's Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia with China. Everything that was south and southeast of these mountains were Mongoloids, and north and northwest - Caucasoids. But after the emergence of all sorts of khaganates, a mixture of these types began, and then in the eastern part of what is now the Kazakh steppes. The western and central parts were Caucasoids, and so they remained. Their changes began with the arrival of the Mongols in the 13th century, and even then a little. Again, the Seljuk Turks, who came to the territory of Asia Minor from Altai as a result of another great migration about a thousand years ago, and then the Ottoman Turks - nomadic Turks who left approximately the same lands under pressure from the Mongols - are typical Europeans. The Crimean Tatars, descendants of the Polovtsians, are Europeans. But the eastern Kazakhs and Kirghiz, Turkic descendants of nomads, are mostly Mongoloids. Sometimes I can't even tell them apart from us.

[deddem]

Quote: vet

Everyone knows Ilyumzhinov, and it is known that he is a pure-blooded Kalmyk. But who is this character? And, considering the numerous mixed marriages, to what extent is he, excuse me, a pure-blooded Kalmyk?

Thus, pure-blooded nations initially exist only in the fantasies of the national utopians of the 19th-20th centuries.
Because isolated groups without an influx of fresh blood from outside can only exist stably with modern medicine.

[Fangaro]

The names that are discussed, they remained in history and in memory.
And how good or bad this person is, who has trampled so much that he has not been forgotten to this day, depends on today.
The chief Duma clerk will say today that there is only one President on the planet, and it will begin...

[Viktor Sergeev]

History is pseudoscience. They invented the Mongol-Tatars and started to fit everything into this. It is enough to take a DNA test, it should remain from Tamerlane and determine who he was there. The invasion was a showdown between Russians and Russians.

[know]

A people without history disappears very quickly, assimilating with other peoples who remember their history - even if it is mythologized.

[Illanatol]

Quote: Mikhail Krivopalov

The Groznys are similar to each other, except that their lips are slightly different in shape, so where did the author see different people, especially one of them endowed with degenerative features?

"Degenerative traits"... it seems the author is a big fan of Lombroso.
Yes, there are some similar traits in clinical idiots, morones and other similar types. But such types rarely have access to power and do not stay at the helm for long. And even more so, they are not capable of more or less noticeable achievements in public administration and political activity.

[Roman Efremov]

Scientists always try to please the prevailing political situation (or they are burned at the stake). Cro-Magnons have been depicted as light-skinned for a hundred years - and how could they be otherwise, since they have a typically European skull! Recently they have been depicted as dark-skinned - so that blacks would not be offended.

[Illanatol]

And the representatives of the "Denisov culture" died out without exception, meeting the wishes of Western scientists.
It is not politically correct for such advanced homos to exist on the territory of today's Russia, and even leave offspring. These Russians may even start to think highly of themselves (like, we are the heirs of the Denisovans), which will not be to the taste of Europeans.

[Illanatol]

Quote: deddem

Because isolated groups without an influx of fresh blood from outside can only exist stably with modern medicine.

This is not entirely true. If a population is large enough, it can survive for quite a long time without the introduction of genes from outside.
An example is the Australian Aborigines, who existed in complete isolation for many thousands of years.

[Konnick]

Quote: Illanatol

This is not entirely true. If a population is large enough, it can survive for quite a long time without the introduction of genes from outside.

The most genetically "pure" nation is the Icelanders, so genetic scientists use Iceland as a laboratory for studying genetic mutations and other things.

[Illanatol]

Quote: Konnick

The most genetically "pure" nation is the Icelanders, so genetic scientists use Iceland as a laboratory for studying genetic mutations and other things.

Possibly. Although how many millennia has the Icelandic nation existed? Probably less than the indigenous Australians.
I suspect that it is also a matter of the availability of the source of genetic material. It is easier to work with Icelanders than with Australians. There are practically no purebreds left, they have been crossbred with Europeans, and the "last of the Mohicans" still need to be found and caught.

[VLR]

After World War II, Norwegians officially declared children born to German soldiers and officers to be inferior, and the mother of a "dark-skinned" girl from the "Abba" group fled to Sweden to save her daughter. And then liberals came to power there, who decided that the nation was degenerating due to the lack of an influx of "fresh blood" and that more migrants should be brought in, not from South America or Eastern Europe, but from Asia, and not Christians, but Muslims. And they chose Pakistan as a priority "donor country." And now Norwegians in large cities are gradually becoming a national minority.

[Illanatol]

Opposites attract and it's sad. From zoological chauvinism to multiculturalism and in the shortest time. And the result will be sad.
And should we follow these examples, as others advise? No, really.

[Illanatol]

Quote: ArchiPhil

I don't agree with you. If they had acted really skillfully, the military actions would have already been completed. And even after their completion, just imagine the level of hatred towards us?

To be honest, I'm already tired of repeating it.
Skillful actions - in conducting the BD in such a way that after their end there will be simply no one to feel hatred towards us! The conflict must be conducted "to the last Ukrainian!" LITERALLY.
This is a war of total annihilation. Any other result is a half-measure and a basis for renewal. SVO 2.0, SVO 3. etc.
The citizens of the so-called Ukraine should really have three options.
1. Come to their senses and admit that they are not Ukrainians at all, but the same Russians, but with a brain fucked up by the West.
2. Run anywhere from the territory of Ukraine and forget about it, that it ever existed.
3. Die and become fertilizer for the Russian land.

Only when this is implemented will the conflict truly end. And it is clear that a quick victory is not in sight. The issue with Ukraine will be resolved as long as it takes. So be patient, a lot of it will be needed.

[933454818]

Well, what do you want? Not everyone is ready to push their chests against machine guns. They will think about their family, their wife, their children. And they will go and do as their elders say.

[Illanatol]

Quote: VlR

Let me remind you that in the first version, Timur turned out to be a European even for Gerasimov, who was forced to correct the portrait on the orders of the dissatisfied leadership, who ordered "not to distort history."

Yes, I remember and I didn’t think of denying this fact.
Well, was there such a “correction” the only one in our historiography and how many more were there - this is a great mystery.
This is where the “alternative” people have their fill, because due to their servility, the official “specialists” have lost a lot of trust.

[Amateur]

Who Gerasimov and his methods are known and recognized all over the world. But who is Ryzhov V.A., who decided to make his contribution to anthropology, no one knows.

"Money has no smell" (Latin: Pecunia non olet)
(Vespasian, Emperor)

[know]

And who is Zvyagin, to whom Ryzhov refers? Just

Honored Doctor of the Russian Federation, Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Laboratory of Forensic Osteological Research of the Russian Center for Forensic Medical Examination of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Head of the Department of Forensic Medical Identification of Persons

And who is Vasiliev, to whom Ryzhov refers? Just

Head of the Department of Anthropology, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences

And who is Lebedinskaya, in whose reconstruction the Polovtsian turned out to be a European? Just

Head of the Laboratory of Plastic Reconstruction of the Institute of Ethnography of the USSR Academy of Sciences (Institute of Anthropology and Ethnology of the Russian Academy of Sciences)

Who is Pletneva, who declared the need for a total revision of the ideas about the Mongoloidity of the Polovtsians? Just

Doctor of Historical Sciences, Head of the Group of Medieval Archaeology of the Eurasian Steppes, Institute of Archaeology, Russian Academy of Sciences

And who is this boorish "label-hanging" Victor? A complete AMATEUR!
It would be funny if it were not so sad.

[Des]

From Vladimir, the museum's portraits of princes aren't perfect)) and here's another one: