I also started a new model, a male African aurochs, based on osteological material and what Egyptian artworks suggest what its colour was like. I promise you that it will be quite surprising.
Thursday, 22 February 2024
What the aurochs really looked like (new reconstruction)
Last week, I finished my latest aurochs model. Just like the previous one, its postcranial morphology is based on the Store-damme skeleton, the head on the Sassenberg bull and the London skull; the horns on the Vig bull this time. This is the result: 
I think this time I accomplished it to provide a plausible, life-like picture of what a living aurochs bull most likely looked like. I am very happy with the result. It is 33 cm at the withers tall, therefore 1:6 scale for a 200 cm aurochs.
Beautiful reconstruction, Daniel. A more naturalistic impression this time, successfully de-shrink-wrapped. The only point my gaze gets stuck on are the "fencing goggles". More so, when I enlarge the picture. The orbitals look disproportionate to me, and - more than that - somehow tacked on. As if they were not really part of the same bones making up the rest of the skull. I base that on pure intuition an my complete lack of anatomical qualification. XD Other than that I can very well imagine this model as a living, breathing animal. Maybe your best work yet. You still have to introduce us to your take on an older bull yet, rigth? Cheers,
ReplyDeleteYannick
Hi, I know what you mean concerning the eyes, but the skull I used as a reference was the London skull, which has huge orbital bosses, comparable to that of bison. What the eyes of a bison would look like without the mane can be seen in the mummy "blue babe": https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/08/24/blue-babe-face-close-up_custom-67a41d7cf4a5950a9bbab7e2e8c2b7a8b95aacfb-s1100-c50.jpg
DeleteI know that these bulgy eyes may look unusual, but since the aurochs did not have a mane like a bison, they probably were about as prominent as in "blue babe".
Yes, I have yet to make a model of a really heavy, old bull. My plan is to do this based on the Berlin skull, and in winter coat. But for now, my next model will be the Wadi sarrat cranium, an African aurochs.
Thats a really good point. In fact, I actually do know Blue Babe and certainly at one point or another must have thought "Well, this looks a bit odd" and then I never actually connected the two. Same goes for the Yukagir Bison, although a bit less noticeable. But I think I have a better idea of what irks me now: In the London skull as well as in Blue Babe, the sockets are clearly tilted anteriorly and if that is the case in your model, the lateral shot seems to obscure that. In Blue Babe there is a gentle curve from the actual tear duct to the lacrimal bone/facial tuberosity and it might have looked similar, maybe less gentle, in the London skull. I don't feel qualified to judge that. In your lateral shot it gives the goggle-impression because the rim seems about equidistant from the skull all the way around. In fact, the fold or groove coming from the lateral corner of the eye makes it seem, as though this might be the shallowest point of the orbital rim when it should be close to being the deepest. There does not seem to be such a fold in Blue Babe and I do not see why it would be present in the London skull. That might be a me-problem though. Would love to see a semi-frontal shot of the model's head from a comparable angle to the Blue Babe foto, you've linked. Cheers!
ReplyDeleteVery beautiful but the color needs some improvment liké pale ears innerside
ReplyDeleteWhite muzzel Brown forehaed