This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David Kasanof
Stamford, Conn

JAMA. 1980;244(24):2730.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The fascinating and scholarly article by Bernadine Z. Paulshock, MD (1980;244:160), on the gynecoid features of Akhnaton, in which she argues that the artisans who created such representations were representing reality, not taking artistic liberties or following formal conventions, accords with an experience my wife and I had several years ago while viewing the ancient Egyptian artifacts of Akhnaton's period.

My wife is an ex-marine biologist and ranger-naturalist with the National Park Service and knows a good deal about mammals and birds. Viewing many of these artifacts, she could identify, right down to the species, many of the waterfowl and mammals depicted. Where a species of bird was supposed to have four flight feathers, it had four flight feathers—that kind of accuracy was the rule. I am a veteran sailor and ex-boating magazine writer, and I could recognize, on certain bas reliefs, the masthead knot, bowline, clove . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?