Jump to content

the skull of mystery!!


Recommended Posts

hello everyone,

 

a few days ago surfing the internet I came across a site of fossils from asia. scrolling through the various offers I noticed this skull, the description reported only that it belonged to an unspecified myocene carnivore. All in all the price was quite low for what seems to be the quality of the piece. To a more careful investigation it would seem a hyaenidae even if the present matrix makes identification quite difficult, however still there is something that does not convince me. the matrix seems intentionally put to cover part of the skull.

What do you think about it?

Even if the price is cheap it's still to high for my poor pockets, so noway I would ever buy it. However it intrigued me alot.

Cattura.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ludwigia Roger, I agree that it is likely a composite but I don't agree that this fact makes it unworthy of ownership.

 

It is a common practice to composite specimens in museums, as long as there are records indicating this. If bones are missing, replicas get fabricated or other specimens that have the missing bones get combined (for research and display purposes). This provides information that the missing pieces would leave out. As long as the composited specimen does not create an outright forgery or add details that did not exist in the actual living specimen and it is not portrayed as an actual single specimen, there shouldn't be any issues with the composite. This would effectively be the same as a restoration or carving the matrix to fill in missing bits.

 

The best practice for this specimen would have been to note the composite and only fabricate the matrix in areas where it is needed to hold the two pieces together. Or, better yet, build a mount that holds the pieces separately.

 

*Edit* The combination of different animals or pieces that are the wrong size (as noted below) would put this skull into the "outright forgery" category.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ParkerPaleo yeah now that you makes me notice, it is a a badger :blink: but the mandible it's too big for that skull! all the proportions between the mandible and the skull are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a plant guy and even I can tell there's something not right with that one.

 

 

Mark.

 

Fossil hunting is easy -- they don't run away when you shoot at them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Mark Kmiecik said:

I'm a plant guy and even I can tell there's something not right with that one.

 

That's funny.

 

A composite skull is not necessarily a bad thing if the parts are in decent shape especially if the jaws are of uncommon animals and there's something of a skull in there somewhere.  It does appear to have two zygomatic arches on one side (or is that just a random piece of bone?) - rare indeed and also funny.

 

Jess

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Composites have their place. Many here have them. Someone even got a golden drool bucket for a composite :thumbsu:

  • I found this Informative 2

"Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe" - Saint Augustine

"Those who can not see past their own nose deserve our pity more than anything else."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...