Q: Who is this model made for? A: This skeleton is ideal for advanced study of the human skeleton anatomy, because it gives users unrestricted access to all anatomical details. Many university students use this skull in high-level anatomy and physiology courses, and it is a favorite among teachers of all levels.
Many forensics experts love this skeleton because of the incredible detail and quality, as well as the challenge it can pose to students who need to learn how to positively identify human remains in any condition. Q: Are the bones life size? A: Yes, the bones for this model are life size. If you were to lay all of the bones out and put them in their correct location, in reference to the human body, the skeleton would be life size. Q: I have lost the skull that came with this bone set.
Where can I get a replacement? You can find the skull by searching for the SKU number, A or simply contact us for assistance. Q: Does this model come with a case? A: While the model is not shipped with a case, the bones are shipped in separate bags, within a large box.
A: Yes, with the exception of the hyoid bone, sternum, and the soft intervertebral disks, all of the bones in this set can be purchased individually. Most of them can be found in our Skeletal Models category, which you can access by clicking here. Virtually unique among anatomical model manufacturers, Axis Scientific does not require you to send back your model for inspection before a replacement or refund is issued. You also will not pay to return a defective product or incur unnecessary additional shipping charges before you get a replacement.
Axis Scientific guarantees you will get a replacement under the standard Three Year Warranty. Click here to learn more about the Axis Scientific Warranty and to Register your product for coverage under warranty. This set of bones was very helpful while learning about the skeleton during my chiropractic training.
The bones are solid and seem like good quality, there are a few marks on them where they weren't completely smooth, but it doesn't hurt the study. Basically I just put all of the bones in the box and pulled them out one by one to identify. This was a great addition to our forensics lab. To be able to take interns or trainees out into the field and have them discover the bones is a lot of fun for them, but fun for us as well. Putting it together can be a challenge for some, but it really helps you build a deeper understanding for the entire human skeleton.
Rating Required Select Rating 1 star worst 2 stars 3 stars average 4 stars 5 stars best. Name Required. Email Required. Review Subject Required. Comments Required. Normal Price. Bone is simply stuff : inert dead matter which depends of the work of living, thinking humans to give it meaning. This, it could be argued, has been the dominant assumption with socio-cultural anthropology, which implicitly or explicitly has held that the matter of bones is immaterial to our understandings of the various ways and means by which human remains become animated by the concerns of the living, whether these concerns be understood as psychological, cultural, political or some complex combination of all these factors.
One of these is Don Ihde. Ihde argues for an expansion of hermeneutics, the techniques by which we reach understandings of others or the other through the work of interpretation, to material processes more generally and the material processes associated with scientific enquiry more specifically. There were, of course, many questions about the body : Who is or was he?
When and how did he die? How long ago did he live and die? For example, thanks to an analysis of isotopes via mass spectroscopy, we discovered that Otzi lived in two different areas at two different times in his life, and through carbon 14 dating we learned that he lived and died roughly BP. As Tim Ingold argues : , no entity, human or nonhuman, can possess agency as quality or attribute of their own being ; rather agency is always an attribute of an unfolding relational process and cannot be abstracted from this process.
Although Ihde seems to bestow a peculiar status to these peculiarly technoscientific processes, we would suggest that one need not confine this approach to the work of those in laboratories. It is quite possible that the same analytic can be extended to other processes such as divination, funerary rites and arts-based interventions, including that one to be discussed below, by which we draw human remains into new associations and constitute new assemblages They speak of the past life and the circumstances of death of the individual whose bodily remains we have discovered.
Assuming that these remains were deposited with thought, care and some evidence of intention, they also speak to the ways in which a people may have thought of life and the afterlife and how to mediate between the two by best arranging the disposal of mortal remains. As described above, our specific engagement with disarticulated bones began with a skull that was found in the storerooms of the Edinburgh College of Art. It came with no label and no record of where it came from or how it had been procured.
The best we knew, or could surmise, is that it had been with the College for many decades, likely over a hundred years. It was wholly disarticulated both from the rest of the bones that once made up the scaffolding of a living body and from any kind of association which may have indicated the identity of the person whose skull this once was or still is.
The skull was also disarticulated from any intentional and ongoing project. It was, effectively, doing nothing except waiting and keeping strange company with other things that may have once been enrolled in the work of making art, but were now hanging around, haphazardly kept with a view to the future possibility that someone may for some reason or another do something with them.
Its cap has been neatly sawn off and removed and is now lost, but a metal hook on one side indicates that once the cap had been attached. It is a pale creamy white in colour, which, according to Linda Fibiger, suggests that it was prepared post-mortem as an anatomical specimen by having the flesh boiled from the bones, rather than having been exhumed from the earth. There are smears of paint — red, blue and black — across the forehead and blob of pale wax in one of the eye-sockets which attest to it having been actively caught-up in artistic work of some kind or another.
This assumes a material hermeneutic of course, the capacity for invocation being realised only in the embodied and affective encounter, but compared to the elaborate technological interventions considered by Ihde, this is a simple hermeneutic of recognition realised in the act of coming face-to-face and seeing that this thing is reminiscence of the form of our own heads and, in this sense has a face even as the face itself as the animate face of flesh no longer exists.
We may possibly, out of some empathy with the faceless face of the skull, touch our own faces, pushing hard at those places where the bone lies close to the skin, along the ridges of our brow or the tops of cheek bones, to find the shape of the skull beneath.
So before and after the realisation that it was once articulated and articulate within the projects of artists and anatomists, there is the more primordial and uncanny feeling that this skull was enfolded into the being of another person and so retains something of their lively being even as this lively being has been withdrawn from the possibility of encounter, as evidenced by the very fact that skull has appeared as object existing beyond the fleshed body.
This was, in other words, an experiment designed to discover what bones can say but also, in this, what they do not or cannot say and how, in speaking, these evocative things may suggest the opaque trances of human life, yet resist our efforts to render them intelligible and, therefore, how they may speak to a presence that is withheld even as it is made manifest.
In particular we laid two processes of reassembling side by side. We did not assume that either of the processes had a prior or privileged claim to understanding the skull ; rather we wanted to be attentive to the work of understanding as being indivisible from material processes of gathering and attachment. One was a work of oesteological analysis, similar to that described by Ihde although admittedly much less lavishly funded.
Led by Linda Fibiger and Elena Kranioti, this processes deployed thin section CV scans, human touch and 3D imagining technology to try and discover something more about the person whose skull this once was and perhaps still is. These were read as evidence of some nutritional, pathological or psychological stress experienced during the childhood of a nameless man who died fairly young and whose skull was found in a storeroom of the Edinburgh College of Art.
Fibiger Beyond this, and pending further investigations and the construction of more elaborate assemblages, we know little else. This is all the bones have to say about the person.
The idea was simple. On a wooden table with a scarred black surface, there was the skull, sitting alone on a plinth of grey-painted wood. On another similar table there were an array of objects chosen with little thought other than they may be, in one way or another, interesting and perhaps evocative. What if, any, were the results of this experiment if indeed one can consider such a process in so positivistic terms?
It is in turning the skull so that the black holes of the eye sockets, the nasal cavity and the gap between its teeth may be seen and come together in association with one another, that it becomes a face and in becoming a face territorialises process of subjectification and signification and so gains a voice see image 2. In some cases this face was seen in profile. In other cases the skull faced us, the camera, and so we came, as it were, face-to-face.
In some of the tableaus the skull appears as a sign which became intelligible in reference to other objects see image 3. In some instances, the tableaus did not just memorialise the passing of life in general, but the life of specific person known to the creator of the installation. One installation was composed of the skull at the centre surrounded by the photograph of the young woman, the red roses, the plastic brain removed from the anatomical model of the head, a folded scarf of brown material and gold thread, the battered map of Ireland, the set of keys and other stuff besides see image 8.
The text provided by the creator of the assemblage reads :. Things gather around the face as so many signs which become reterritorialised in the work of assemblage, even as the skull becomes a face and begins to speak of life once lived through its association with those things which are themselves rendered articulate in that act of speaking. In this case, as is all other cases where it came to be the site of subjectivity which evoked the presence of a living person even as that presence is withheld, the skull is positioned so as to face the camera, to look upon us or to return our gaze.
By turning the skull to face and so drawing it into association with other things, ideas and voices emerged and the bones come to speak. Yet even at that, even as Bennett suggests, such processes also reveal a remainder which exceeds and is insufficient to our work of re-assemblage and revaluation. For what has been assembled is transient and becomes disassembled. The book in is worn leather binding lies on my desk. The grey box on which the skull was placed is on top of an adjacent cupboard.
They keys, photographs and the other things that people gathered around the skull, have now been scattered, returning to other associations and functions, or just lying in boxes and desk drawers forgotten and unnoticed. This before and after of disarticulation haunts the coming together of things and the territorialisation enabled by the turning to face, so even as the thing comes to speak it speaks of that which cannot be articulated. Bennett, J. Bissell, D. Routledge : Deleuze, G.
Consists of 30 pieces. Comes in a sturdy partitioned cardboard storage box. You are sent a comment success. The administrator will review and approve your comment. Thank you! Be the first to write your review!
0コメント