Artificial cranial modification (ACM),
also known as artificial cranial deformation, is the manipulation of the
cranial vault through the use of externally applied forces in order to change
the natural form of the skull. Two
primary types have been identified: intentional and unintentional
modification. Intentional modification
is the purposeful act of modifying the cranium, whereas unintentional
modification is the accidental reshaping of the skull.
ACM was practiced by many groups of
varying social complexity. ACM is found
among groups on each habitable continent, although the distribution of ACM
varied geographically. ACM practices
varied around the world, although the only common element among all the
practicing groups is that ACM began shortly after birth, when the skull was
most plastic and malleable. At this
time, the cranium was wrapped, bound, and/or affixed to the preferred
deformation device, including but not limited to stones, boards, leaves, reeds,
textiles, caps, ropes, cradles, and hands.
ACM devices were subsequently removed at variable times, all dependent
on cultural preferences. The total time
frame ranged from one year to five years.
There are reports of ACM devices being left on until an individual
reached adolescence among some European groups.
The produced ACM styles are believed to have been strictly controlled by
the group, although overlap in ACM styles exists across the globe.
The motivations for practicing ACM
varied widely. A comprehensive review of
the motivations was covered in a previous post.
In part due to the nature of ACM styles being a marker of identity and
the natural experiment to the body posed by ACM, ACM has been widely studied by
scholars for a variety of reasons, principally in understanding the meanings
and biological changes attached to ACM.
As new methods are discovered, scholars are gaining a better
understanding of the growth changes induced by ACM, as well as the biological
consequences related to morbidity and mortality. Despite over a century’s worth of study, the
investigations of ACM continue and lead to additional understandings of this
complex and popular practice.
References:
Weiss P. 1961. OsteologÃa Cultural, Prácticas Cefálicas: 2da Parte, TipologÃa de alas Deformaciones Cefálicas -- Estudio Cultural de los Tipos Cefálicos y de Algunas Enfermedades Oseas. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos: Peru.
References:
Blackwood B, Danby PM.
1955. A study of artificial
cranial deformation in New Britain. Journal
of the Royal Anthropological Institute
of Great Britain and Ireland 85: 173-191.
Brain R. 1979. The Decorated Body. Hutchinson: London.
Dingwall EJ.
1931. Artificial Cranial Deformation: A
Contribution to the Study of Ethnic
Mutilation. John Bale and Sons and
Danielsson, Ltd.: London.
Weiss P. 1961. OsteologÃa Cultural, Prácticas Cefálicas: 2da Parte, TipologÃa de alas Deformaciones Cefálicas -- Estudio Cultural de los Tipos Cefálicos y de Algunas Enfermedades Oseas. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos: Peru.
23 comments:
I find ACM to be highly interesting. I first learned about it on an episode of Ancient Aliens, and was incredibly disappointed when the host declared ACM as an act in efforts to resemble a culture's celestial ancestors. However, I am now interested in learning more about ACM. Why did they choose cranial modification? It seems to me that tattoos and piercings would be somewhat easier and possibly less painful. Is there a particular reason they chose cranial modification, even without the knowledge we have today about the significance of the brain?
-Teisha
Well, you have two options: read my dissertation or read the following cliff notes version: I think they chose ACM because of its permancy. Tattoos are permanent but are best applied when someone is done growing as the tattoo would otherwise grow with the person. Plus, tattoos are often associated with rights if passage, identifying accomplishments or age. Piercings are less permanent and easily hidden or removed. ACM, particularly as it must be done so early in life, cannot be altered or hidden. It truly is a permanent marker of identity.
As for potential deleterious effects on the brain, studies have continually demonstrated that was not the case. The brain is incredibly plastic and adaptable, which is good as we utilize our brains for the proper functioning of our bodies (e.g breathing, heart beats, etc.). This plasticity allows the brain to condo to changes in form that ultimately do not affect function. As for other negative effects, I couldn't find any in my research, which makes sense. If it was truly bad and responsible for killing large numbers of people it would not have continued as there would have been no one to continue the practice.
That is really quite strange to think about. I find it hard to believe that no known bad effects have been noted......
-Tabatha Pringle
Several of us have searched but have found none. That doesn't mean that there weren't exceptions to that, but in general, no ill effects were found amongst the majority of individuals. As one scholars (Gerszten) pointed out, if it was harming large segments of the population, the practice would have quickly been discontinued.
Teisha, could you please contact me privately via email? Thanks!
I find the concept of any form of body modification extremely interesting. Although the practice of ACM may seem strange to us today in western culture, I can only imagine how popular trends today such as tattoos, ear-stretching and microdermal implants will be viewed by future generations.
-Hayden Lloyd
I don't know about future generations but I know that several of those aforementioned body mods that you speak of are viewed unfavorably by some today.
I wonder if the different shape of the skull created brain damage or impacted the persons behavior or abilities?
Several studies have been conducted on this topic and none have demonstrated any negative cognitive issues. So the simple answer: nope.
ACM deals with skulls and i think its cool how one can naturally form a skull by wrapping it also but of course deending on what cultural.
briana banuelos
anthro 102 1001
I still think ACM severely damaged nerve and the brain in this process and I am curious to know what the outcome of such bizarre practice was for besides resembling ancestors.
Zachary Forrester
anthro 101 3001 summer
In Japan they used to bind women's feet to keep them small and some parts of Africa place rings around their necks to stretch them. I won't even pierce my ears because it hurts too much.
I find it very difficult to not think about ACM in a negative light. I understand it was a widely accepted custom at the time, but the idea of putting stones on a baby's head to shape it makes me cringe. The only part that actually bothers me about the practice at all, is that it's done to babies. I'm curious how this was started. Who came up with the original thought to do this? A parent that wanted a unique child? I'm all for body modification. I have tattoos, piercings, brands, stretched ears, and have researched eye piercings, which is pretty fascinating in itself, but I also did these things to myself out of curiosity of what they felt like, and then I enjoyed it.
The only way to accomplish this extreme of a modification is to complete it during childhood. We cannot even successfully do it now to this extreme without detrimentally harming or even killing a patient as it affects the brain too negatively.
I can not understand the act of modifying the cranial skull. Was it for beauty or status? And have there been studies on how this modification affects intelligence or if it affects the life span of the person who it is performed on?
Those questions are addressed in the post that is linked in this post. :)
As I was reading this, I though back to the "baby in the box" exercise. As much as I wanted to say that this is completely barbaric, I stood back, took a breath and tried to place myself in that culture, to better understand why they do this. Just as The United States is completely intrigued by tattooing, these cultures could see their act of ACM just as the same taboo type. Different cultures have different meanings for things, but in this case I think it is fair to say, with the scientific and biological studies done on effects of human skull deformation, that it is most likely not a positive experience in the beginning of the child's life, as well as their educational and physical upbringing.
Intentional ACM done in infancy is likely the least painful method, as the skull is still firming and easily manipulated. It also is probably the least likely option to result in brain damage.
The motivations for practicing ACM varied widely. What ways due some cultures or people look at this situation in a Intentional modification and unintentional modification. Is Unintentional mostly based around surgeries? Im a little confused.
Unintended cranial modification is just that. It occurs without willfully producing or intending to change the natural form of the skull. For example not rotating a newborn baby's head may lead to a flattening on one side of the head, which would be unintentional cranial modification.
Jovie Black
Do this cause bodily dysfunctions? Modifying the head might be a look into for me. I have a big head ( :
Just kidding, I'm real curious on knowing how do these modifications work.
I wonder if unintentional AMC came first. I have always assumed that it did not, but that might not be the case. There is also the reasoning behind it. It could be beauty, religion, etc. It is just interesting to think about.
This is very interesting, before reading this blog post I did not know the skull was so versatile and capable of reshaping. I have always had the understanding that the skull was hard.
Post a Comment