Elongated Skulls

Oct 17, 2021
In various places around the globe (Human?) skeletons have been un-earthed that have outrageously elongated skulls. The standard explanation for this is that the individuals have undergone some kind of head mutilation ritual. Is this a likely or indeed possible cause of these Extra terrestrial looking finds ? It is worth noting that a documentary by Joanna Lumley told of ancient folk-lore insisting that these skulls were from a race of beings known to be ultra intelligent.
Jan 27, 2020
JNS Journal of Neurosurgery

by Samuel Romero-Vargas M.D.1, José Luis Ruiz-Sandoval M.D.2, Arturo Sotomayor-González M.D.1, Rogelio Revuelta-Gutiérrez M.D.1, Miguel Angel Celis-López M.D.1, Juan Luis Gómez-Amador M.D.1, Ulises García-González M.D.1, Raul López-Serna M.D.1, Victor García-Navarro M.D.1, Diego Mendez-Rosito M.D.1, Victor Correa-Correa M.D.1, and Sergio Gómez-Llata M.D.1

Online Publication Date: Dec 2010

Induced deformation of the cranial vault is one form of permanent alteration of the body that has been performed by human beings from the beginning of history as a way of differentiating from others. These procedures have been observed in different cultures, but were particularly widespread and noticeable in Mesoamerica.

The historical and anthropological literature of intentional deformation practices were reviewed and examined in Mayan culture. The Mayans performed different types of cranial deformations and used different techniques and instruments to deform children's heads. The most remarkable morphological alteration is seen in the flattening of the frontal bone. Some archeological investigations link deformation types with specific periods. This article provides a glance at the cultural environment of the Mayans and demonstrates the heterogeneity of this interesting cultural phenomenon, which has changed over time.

Permanent alterations of the body (such as dental modifications, scarification, mutilation, tattooing, body piercing, and other types of body art and ornaments) have been part of human culture from the beginning of history and have served as a way of differentiating oneself and one's tribe or clan from others. Lip piercing was practiced among African and American tribes and was a sign of social status. Vikings employed dental modification in order to look fearless and for aesthetic purposes. Induced deformation of the neonatal cranial vault is another example of these types of practices.

Artificial (also known as intentional) cranial deformation results from manual manipulation of the skull and/or from the application of a deforming apparatus. It is manifested in morphological changes to the cranial vault.1 Artificial deformation can take many forms; Gerszten and Gerszten7 discuss as many as 14 unique cranial shapes resulting from different methods of deformation. The practice of artificial cranial deformation has been documented on nearly every continent and may have begun as many as 30,000 years ago.19 The practice of deforming newborn heads was present in the whole of the American continent4 from North America to Patagonia, but cranial molding in neonates was most widely practiced in Mesoamerica. The Maya was the main Mesoamerican civilization, noted for its development of written language, architecture, calendars and mathematical systems.2

The Mayans are among the most studied ethnic groups in the world. In many collections of Mayan skulls recovered by archaeologists, artificial cranial deformation is a common feature, and some collections show a diversity of deformation styles.3 When Columbus saw some of the natives in the New World, he wrote that they had “foreheads and heads much broader than any people.”6

The historical precedents, mechanisms, different types, and role of cranial vault modification were analyzed among the Mayans.

To gain perspective on this issue, we examined the historical and anthropological literature on intentional deformation practices in Mayan culture in the collections of the National Institute of Anthropology and History in México and the National Autonomous University of México. Evidence of different types of artificially deformed skulls was sought from archaeological collections and previous anthropological investigations.

In the 16th century, Spanish chroniclers provided numerous detailed descriptions of cranial deformation, methods, and materials popular among the Mayan people. Some fascinating fragments of these records are translated and shared with the neurosurgical community in this article.

The Mayans lived in what is now the southeastern part of Mexico and northern parts of Central America.18 Pre-Hispanic Mayan culture is divided into 4 main periods: the Early Preclassic, Late Preclassic, Classic, and Postclassic. The Early Preclassic Maya is considered to date from 1400 to 1000 BC, the Late Preclassic period from 500 to 300 BC, the Classic period from AD 300 to 900 (when the Mayan cities reached their highest development), and the Postclassic period from AD 900 to 1540. We do not know at present precisely how the Mayan civilization originated. It almost appears as if it suddenly sprang into being, flourished, and then decayed just as suddenly. The practice of skull deformation seems to have been known from the earliest times.8 Among Mayans, the meaning of deformation was not only aesthetic but also religious and social.18

Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo,11 a Spanish chronicler, reports an interesting conversation about deformation between one Mayan and an early Spanish missionary, who questioned the Mayan about the meaning of the custom. The native was asked why the heads of his countrymen were not like those of the Christians. He replied that when the children were born, their skulls were plastic and so they could easily be molded into shape, thus producing a boss on each side and a great depression in the middle of the head extending from one side to the other. “This is done because our ancestors were told by the gods that if our heads were thus formed we should appear noble and handsome and better able to bear burdens.”

According to Dembo and Imbelloni,4 the Mayans used hard implements in their deformation techniques. Several techniques existed, but the shaping of the head in neonates was carried out mainly in 2 ways: by compression of the head with pads and adjusted bindings and by restraining the child on specially designed cradles.10

The Spanish Franciscan Diego de Landa described how the Mayans deformed the heads of their children in 1572. He describes the women as bringing up their children with the greatest roughness and says that as a rule the children went naked. Scarcely 4 or 5 days after birth the child was stretched out upon a sort of little bed made of reeds or strips of other material, and then the head was placed between two boards, one at the back and one at the front. These were then pressed together and fastened. For days at a time the child was thus left in suffering; Landa adds that sometimes so much pain was caused that the children died, and that he himself saw one who had openings behind the ears, a condition that, it was reported, was not uncommon.5

mayan skull 1.jpeg
Photograph of Mayan skull exhibiting a typical erect deformation with its characteristic lambdoidal flattening. Reproduced with permission from V. Tiesler Blos.

Oblique deformation (Fig. 3) was attained without affecting the mobility of the child. Instead, paddles were applied directly to the head. This type of deformation had several variants. The pseudoanular, bilobulated, and trilobulated variants were all obtained when a frontal board was employed together with a system of bandaging.17

mayan skull 2.jpeg
Photograph of Mayan skull exhibiting a typical oblique deformation with the frontal bone sloped backward in a continuing oblique line with the nasal bones. Reproduced with permission from V. Tiesler Blos.

Some archeological investigations link deformation types with specific periods. Oblique deformation began during the Preclassic period (500–300 BC). During the Classic period, both the oblique form (with its pseudoanular variant) and the erect form are present. In the Postclassic period, the erect form was dominant, and it seems that the technique was widespread within the Mayan territory and had few variants.

During the Classic period, evidence shows that skull deformation was characterized by a distinct social pattern (Fig. 4). The general population could only perform erect deformations. However, if children were destined to become governors, priests, or warriors or attain another high-status position, they were given oblique deformations. High-ranking Mayan families of the Classic period differentiated themselves from the lower classes with their head shape. This social hierarchy can be seen in pottery, figurines, drawings, monuments, and architecture, where characters with oblique deformation are dominant.10 After the Classic period, this pattern was less pronounced, probably because of the influence of neighboring cultures.12,17 According to some authors and based on the analysis of artistic representations, oblique deformation was meant to shape a child's head to resemble the head of a jaguar, a sacred animal and symbol of power for the Mayans.13 Another hypothesis, based on analysis of paintings, is that the Mayans were trying to shape heads to resemble the head of the maize god, who was the symbol of fertility.16 Vera Tiesler performed one of the largest studies of Mayan skulls. She examined 175 deformed pre-Columbian Mayan skulls and was able to determine gender in 140 (69 female and 71 male). She found that 127 of these had the erect deformation and confirmed that the oblique shape was linked to elevated social standing. The obliquely deformed skulls were frequently accompanied by a postcoronal sulcus caused by bandages used to constrict the paddle against the forehead.17

The most remarkable morphological alteration is seen in the flattening of the frontal bone. The Mayas were naturally a brachycephalic people, and the custom of anteroposterior compression would promote this racial characteristic, causing the skull deformation to be displayed throughout life. The flattened skull is higher than nondeformed skulls of comparable age at death. Based on the figurines, paintings, and skulls that have been discovered, it seems that the greatest pressure seems to have been exerted upon the forehead. In many cases, the frontal bone sloped backward to an amazing extent, causing the nose to be in line with the retreating forehead, modifying the appearance of the entire face.

In the more isolated modern Mayan settlements, this custom is still practiced, though not to the same extent.

Cranial deformation practices are common in many areas of the world and are practiced for many reasons. The practice has mainly been documented in Egypt, Japan, South America, Mesoamerica, and some places in Europe.1

Anthropologists and other scientists have extensive knowledge of cranial deformation practices among ancient cultures. Some of the available information has been known for centuries. Although it is impossible to know the precise cultural environment, social organization, and religious conceptions that have led to this practice, it is clear that the practice is culturally influenced.1

Because of the plastic characteristic of the skull in newborns, skull modification was initiated during the first days of life and lasted for 2 or 3 years. This is done around the world to achieve specific adult head shapes.3

The first descriptions of cranial deformation among the Mayans were made by Spanish chroniclers in the 16th century. These descriptions (some of which are translated above) are historically invaluable,5,11 but most are superficial, highlighting the “primitive” parts of the custom, and are indeed interpretations. There is a lack of primary information directly from the Mayan culture.

The cranial deformation practice was forgotten in the literature from the 16th century to 1843, when John L. Stephens published Incidents of Travel in Yucatán.14 Stephens describes an artificially deformed skull that he found during an excavation. Based on skull collections and writings about the Mayan practice of cranial deformation, it is clear that the custom was at one time widespread.

The deformations were not uniform, probably because of the physiological responses of the children, the duration of the compression, and the particular characteristics of the deforming device. Despite the variety of forms found in the osteological evidence, Romano12says that only the oblique deformation is represented in the paintings of the classical Mayan period. This confirms that the cranial deformations were a permanently visible symbol of social affiliation.

Neurosurgeons have recently focused on the neurological effects of the deformations, but there is no scientific evidence of their having caused any neurological disability.9

From the point of view of the present, cranial deformation could seem to be a primitive practice. It may not be easy to understand why this custom was performed, but its practitioners found it socially and religiously appropriate. Doubtless, to the Mayans, the skull was a fundamental part of an individual's identity, and cranial deformation was elevated to the level of art.

With this paper, the authors are only providing a glance at the Mayan culture and are trying to present this valuable information to the neurosurgical community. Artificial cranial deformation constitutes a biocultural process. Our investigation describes the main deforming techniques and the resulting morphological expressions. This article demonstrates the heterogeneity of this interesting cultural phenomenon, which has changed through time. In the past century, interest in this ancient custom has surged, and neurosurgeons should not be excluded from this fascinating discussion.

See: https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.9.FOCUS10200

See: https://thejns.org/focus/view/journals/neurosurg-focus/29/6/2010.9.focus10200.xml

See: 1Anton SC: Intentional cranial vault deformation and induced changes of the cranial base and face. Am J Phys Anthropol79:253–267, 1989

  • 2
    Coe MD: The classic period. Mexico: From the Olmecs to the Aztecsed 4 London, Thames and Hudson, 2002. 89–128
  • 3
    Comas J: Manual de Antropología FísicaMexico, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1957. 698
  • 4
    Dembo A, & Imbelloni J: Deformaciones intencionales del cuerpo humano de carácter étnicoBuenos Aires, Humanior, 1938. 329–337
  • 5
    Dingwall EJ: Artificial cranial deformation in Mexico, Central America and the West Indies. Artificial Cranial Deformation: A Contribution to the Study of Ethnic MutilationsLondon, John Bales, Sons & Danielson Ltd, 1931. 151–160
  • 6
    Dingwall EJ: Artificial cranial deformation in South America. Artificial Cranial Deformation: A Contribution to the Study of Ethnic MutilationsLondon, John Bales, Sons & Danielson Ltd, 1931. 192–225
  • 7
    Gerszten PC, & Gerszten E: Intentional cranial deformation: a disappearing form of self-mutilation. Neurosurgery37:374–382, 1995
  • 8
    Joyce RA: Performing the body in pre-Hispanic Central America. Res: Anthropology and Aesthetics33:147–165, 1998
  • 9
    Lekovic GP, , Baker B, , Lekovic JM, & Preul MC: New World cranial deformation practices: historical implications for pathophysiology of cognitive impairment in deformational plagiocephaly. Neurosurgery60:1137–1147, 2007
  • 10
    Márquez L: Playa del Carmen—una población de la costa oriental en el posclásico. Colección científica 119México, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e História, 1982
  • 11
    Oviedo GF, Cap III. Oviedo GF: Historia Lib. XLIITernaux-Compans, 1959. Vol. IV:71, [unverified]
  • 12
    Romano A: Iconografía cefálica Maya. Memorias del Primer Coloquio Internacional de MayistasMéxico, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas, Centro de Estudios Mayas, 1987. 25–41
  • 13
    Sotelo LE, & Valverde MC: Los senores de Yaxchilán: un ejemplo de felinización de los gobernantes mayas. Estudios de Cultura Maya19:187–214, 1992
  • 14
    Stephens JL: Incidents of Travel in YucatánNew York, Dover Publications, 1963. 1:161–171
  • 15
    Steward TD: Notas sobre esqueletos humanos prehistóricos hallados en Guatemala. Antropología e Historia de Guatemala1:23–34, 1949
  • 16
    Taube KA: The Major Gods of Ancient YucatánWashington, DC, Dumbarton Oaks, 1992
  • 17
    Tiesler V: La costumbre de la deformación cefálica entre los antiguos mayas; aspectos morfológicos y culturalesMexico, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 1998. 42
  • 18
    Tiesler V: La deformación cefálica intencional entre los mayas prehispánicos; aspectos morfológicos y culturales. Tesis de Maestría en ArqueologíaMexico, Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia, 1994
  • 19
    Weidenreich F: On the earliest representatives of modern mankind recovered on the soil of East Asia. Bulletin of the Natural History Society of Peking 13:161–174, 1939

    Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
The above article covers the Maya and their predilection for skull shaping, especially those belonging to the governor, priest, or warrior classes or were slated to attain another high-status position.

However, my studies on Nazi Germany have shown that Konrad Lorenz’s* works were important in developing the Nazi program designed to eradicate the ‘parasitic growth’ of inferior races and contained efforts to measure skulls, after death.

The government’s programs to insure the ‘German Volk’ maintained their superiority made racism almost unassailable. Although James C. King (in his 'The Biology of Race') claimed that ‘the holocaust … pretended to have a scientific genetic basis’, the position of the government and university elite of the time was so entrenched that few contemporary scientists seriously questioned it. The anti-Semitic attitudes of the German people were only partly to blame in causing the holocaust—only when scientific Darwinism was added to the preexisting attitudes did a lethal combination result in the T-4 Projects, Einsatzgruppen and the extermination camps - die Vernichtungslager, like Auschwitz, Treblinka and Chelmno.

Likewise, it was equally, important from the Nazi viewpoint, to prove the racial negative.

Two anthropologists, Bruno Beger and Hans Fleischhacker, arranged in June 1943 to perform anthropological measurements and studies on prisoners in the concentration camp Auschwitz. The sponsor of their project was the SS scientific organization Ahnenerbe, or “Ancestral Heritage,” a pet project of Himmler's.

This research foundation had been reporting directly to the SS leader Heinrich Himmler since it was founded in 1935. It promoted archeological, anthropological and historical research and participated in systematic theft of art, as well as experiments on human beings. Among others, the Munich and Strasbourg universities were enmeshed in the tentacles of Ahnenerbe and the SS.

Professor August Hirt worked for Ahnenerbe performing research considered to be of military importance, including human experiments in the concentration camp Natzweiler-Struthof. Hirt had in mind to take the skull collection, which had been kept at the Strasbourger University since the 19th Century, and to update and expand it “in accordance with contemporary points of view,” as he explained in a later letter. At that time, “contemporary points of view” included, as part of the Nazi ideology, asserting the existence of a separate, distinct Jewish race. Therefore, the skull collection was to be expanded through the collection of skulls. From the very beginning, Hirt had planned to do this using criminal methods. Under the influence of Ahnenerbe, he came to a modification of the original project he had conceptualized early in 1942. Instead, he was to collect entire skeletons of concentration camp inmates for study. The victims for his studies would no longer be found in Russian POW camps, as Hirt had originally planned, but rather from among the prisoners in Auschwitz.


At Auschwitz, “These studies were comprised of head and facial measurements, ...with the help of definition charts and the measurement of countless morphological characteristics such as the shape of the head, forehead, back of the head, nose, mouth, ear, etc.”

See: https://www.die-namen-der-nummern.de/index.php/en/scientific-murders

We again see particular attention paid to the victim's skulls.

The great differences between the Mayas and the Nazis, when it came to skulls are these: the Maya pre-shaped the skulls of infants to prepare them for future parts in their civilization, while the Nazis eliminated prisoners to examine their skulls to further buttress the ideological bases of their racial dogma and Führer cult.

While it appears to the neurosurgeons that the skull shaping had no harmful effects on those subjected to it, for those who had their skulls defleshed by the SS Ahnenerbe it was fatal before the end process began.

* Konrad Lorenz, who expressed amazement that anyone could doubt evolutionary theory. He argued that evolutionary theory is the best antidote for belief in human equality and thus buttressed Nazi racial thought. Lorenz also argued that the Christian command to love your neighbor as yourself is an evolutionary imperative, too: “Since for us the race and Volk are everything and the individual person as good as nothing, this command is for us a completely obvious demand.” Lorenz clearly believed that evolutionary theory reinforced Nazi racial doctrines, including racial inequality and racial solidarity (collectivism). In 1939 the journal carried a chart showing the areas of research undertaken by the SS Reich League for Biology. The first category listed was phylogeny, and anthropology was included as a specialty under this category. Thus evolution, including human evolution, was front and center in their research program.

See: https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/History/Faculty/Weikart/Darwinism-in-Nazi-Racial-Thought.pdf

** Ahnenerbe or the Reich Ancestral Heritage Office: Unlike other states in which Occultists are accorded little respect, Nazi Germany made certain occult operations a part of the state, while repressing others with strict brutality. The S.S. itself had a network of Thule Society ritual which replaces Christian religion for S.S. Officers. Based in Old Prussian Paganism, with Nordic colorings, the S.S. has its own rites, festivals, rituals and burial customs. The “spiritual center” of the S.S. – dedicated entirely to the development of these and other public rituals, is the Ancestral Heritage Office.






See: https://occult-world.com/ahnenerbe/
Last edited:
Oct 17, 2021
I have read a lot of articles on elongated skulls and understand there are opinions (evidence) supporting the bone manipulations techniques that can produce significant changes to the appearance of the human skull over time . But can these pictures (attached) really be attributed to such practices - and could a human brain survive such alterations ?
skul 2.jpg


Jan 27, 2020
Greywolfe -

The manipulations take place in infancy before the skull bones harden and when they are the most pliable.

The first article was written by neurosurgeons, and it is their opinion that there was no major neurological damage arising from the process or processes involved.

I believe, looking at the images of the skulls we have both provided, that those individuals possessing such skulls lived to adulthood and to some age post 21, bolstering the opinion of the neurosurgeons who drafted the article.

Since, in the case of the Mayans, the process of skull deformation has been found as early as 1400-1000 BC, or BCE, perhaps there was an earlier undocumented learning curve.

However, this practice existed in all the continents and during various historical
periods. The earliest evidence of intentional cranial deformation dates back to
45,000 BC, based upon Neanderthal remains recovered from Shanidar Cave in
Iraq (Trinkaus 1982, 198). For Homo sapiens, this practice becomes widespread
through Asia with the movement of Scythians in the 8th and 7th century BC (Schi-
jman 2005, 945), while in the Americas, excavations of the Chinchorro culture
show evidence of the practice that existed 8,000 years ago (Allison et al. 1984,
156). The earliest written record of intentional cranial deformation was from
around 400 BC when Hippocrates described a group of people called the Macro-
cephales, due to their custom of head deforming (Von Winning 1968, 53). The
Hun population came into contact with Alan–Turkish peoples, who were in the
habit of performing cranial deformation in the area of present–day Tajikistan, and
it appeared in the Sarmatian, Alan, Gothic, Gepidic, and Hun populations
equally (Molnar et al. 2014).

In this part of Europe, the occurrence of ACD is connected to one of the most
interesting and highly enigmatic periods – The Migration period, or die große Völkerwanderung,
that brought new tribes, cultures and customs together and eventually led to the final end
of the Roman Empire.

See: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331674454_A_CASE_OF_ARTIFICIAL_CRANIAL_DEFORMATION_FROM_KIKINDA_MIGRATION_PERIOD

(Kikinda is an administrative area in Serbia.)

This practice is one of those quasi-religious/beauty/administrative major body adornments which will give the recipient a very noticeable and permanent body change, which marks the end user forever.