I'm not sure I follow. Royalty that comes from the ground is obviously the few that have been risen to society's top. If you don't rely on those couple of skeletons and mummies, what will you rely on for the supposition of royalty? The subjective artwork of people that resulted from mass consumption of the royalty? There was none. There were no magazines of the period people were generally supposed to shy away from royalty and kow tow. You don't make sense Hansaram.
The reconstruction of a face is as close as one can get. Granted the person reconstructing the face could make the face somewhat more pleasing than would be necessary under the most strict guidelines of reconstruction but the basic skeleton is what one works off of. Making someone look more robust and fat when they were skinny and bones in life and making someone look thin and gracile when they were fat to the extreme. These are what come to my mind but I can't see them to be hoaxes. A hoax would be if you were to pull up a peasant skeleton and use that as a stand in and refuse to tell the public you were using a stand in.
Sorry if I'm not making sense. I'll try harder to make sense to you, but you're going to tell me why I'm not making sense. I don't get why its so hard for you to understand what I'm saying. Am I making grammar errors? Is my logic the problem? Communication? Lack of knowledge? Do you think I am making up nonsense? Is it my reading comprehension?
What don't you understand about a hoax distorting conclusions?
Honestly, I think your jealousy against me is going too far.
Edited by Hansaram, 24 April 2013 - 07:02 PM.