ICAS EMME 4 HUMAN OSTEOARCHAEOLOGY IN THE EMME

There is a branch of archeology, named physical anthropology, that concerns the study of bones: this kind of studies regards the analysis of human remains for the reconstruction of the biological profile of single individuals, and consequently life conditions and - in large scale – ancient landscapes. In this perspective, human remains could be considered as part of Material Culture and Heritage. However, in times of economic recession, there is less and less possibility to carry on complete anthropological analysis lead by osteoarcheologists: a lot of skeletal remains are dug, but not studied. This work aims at proposing a new kind of on-field schedule, that could record the main information related to a preliminary osteological analysis of individuals (obviously in the cases in which this could be possible). Actually there are a lot of on-field schedules, but all concern the material inventory and the taphonomic changes occurred to the body. We will here introduce a simple schedule that could be buttress by mobile support, as iPad, tablet, or smartphone: the utility of this kind of immediate support is clear: but it is also important the line of reasoning that lie behind this work. This new schedule aims at recording all the principal features of osteological remains before they would be stored, in order to understand the main traits of ancient populations. This schedule was tested in San Cerbone in Baratti (LI) excavation, carried on by L’Aquila University, Chair of Medieval Archeology.

"This paper is an exploration of what osteoarchaeology is: what happens in the laboratory of an osteoarchaeologists, when and how. It is an account of the way the dead human body is enacted as part of the osteoarchaeological analysis of human bones. It is an analysis of the way in which (current, western) osteoarchaeologists define, manipulate and talk about the human body. In other words, I intend to explore the way the dead human body is brought into view in the practice of osteoarchaeology, as its object of study. It is not a paper about the knowledge osteoarchaeologists claim to have about the human body. Rather, I propose a reflective approach that follows step by step scientists in their work to obtain that knowledge and I will critically deconstruct their actions. In the laboratory, scientists describe, measure, quantify the human bones, in the end turning them into data that become the topic of anthropological reports or articles. Through this process, the dead human body looses the link with the former living individual, by taking on the identity of a specimen that can be displayed, manipulated, and reconfigured according to the adopted scientific paradigm." Dissertation supervised by Prof John C Barrett MSc Human Osteology and Funerary Archaeology Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield

Journal of Archaeological Research, 2003

The publication of The Osteological Paradox (Wood et al., 1992, Current Anthropology, 33:343-370) a decade ago sparked debate about the methods and conclusions drawn from bioarchaeological research. Wood et al. (1992, Current Anthropology, 33:343-370) highlighted the problematic issues of selective mortality and hidden heterogeneity in frailty (susceptibility to illness), and argued that the interpretation of population health status from skeletal remains is not straightforward. Progress in bioarchaeology over the last few years has led to the development of tools that will help us grapple with the issues of this "osteological paradox." This paper provides a review of recent literature on age and sex estimation, paleodemography, biodistance, growth disruption, paleopathology, and paleodiet. We consider how these advances may help us address the implications of hidden heterogeneity in frailty and selective mortality for studies of health and adaptation in past societies.

Academia Letters, 2021

The constant curiosity of humanity, whether to understand religious and cultural themes of its past or even for academic purposes (Gaston 2018), has highlighted the importance of Archaeology and the archaeological research itself. What the meticulous and constant archaeological research of past life has revealed, is that all discoveries matter. Objects of major or minor importance have their value, as well as human osteological remains. Especially skeletal remains constitute a substantial tool to perceive past human activity in all its various forms. From a basic inventory, where researchers determine the number of individuals and the presence of their bones, to various microscopic studies, ancient human remains can provide answers to a multitude of questions. Therefore, acquiring new scientific methods and designingauxiliarytools has become paramount for the research of osteological remains (Ubelaker 1989), as their study is steadily growing (Buikstra and Beck 2017). With the integration of Osteoarchaeology, researchers could create a more concise picture of the past populations and their daily life. Data about their sex, age, stature, and pathological conditions are requisite about the palaeodemographic study of a population, the circumstances surrounding their death (White and Folkens 2005), along with the socioeconomic conditions of the society itself (Follér 1992). The origin, development, and progress of disease in past generations, as to how these individuals adapted to environmental changes can be investigated through the study of palaeopathology (Nesse and Williams 1994; Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998). Palaeopathology can be considered as a sub-discipline of osteoarchaeology-biological anthropology, focusing on primary evidence of abnormalities from human osteological remains that could indicate the presence of a health affliction (Roberts and Manchester 2007).

Osteoarchaeology: A Guide to the Macroscopic Study of Human Skeletal Remains covers the identification of bones and teeth, taphonomy, sex and ancestry assessment, age estimation, the analysis of biodistances, growth patterns and activity markers, and paleopathology. The book aims to familiarize the reader with the main applications of osteoarchaeology and provide the necessary knowledge required for the implementation of a broad range of osteological methods. It is ideal as a complement to existing textbooks used in upper level undergraduate and graduate courses on osteoarchaeology, human osteology, and, to some extent, forensic anthropology. Pedagogical features include ample illustrations, case study material, revision exercises, and a glossary. Additional features comprise macros that facilitate data processing and analysis, as well as an extensive chapter on applied statistics.

This paper presents the interim results from the archaeological excavation, and osteological analysis of the human remains found at the Neolithic site at Lumea Nouă, Alba Iulia, Romania, in August and September 2015. The human material from one burial pit, currently comprises 16 individuals, an MNI which may change during the ongoing analysis. There are seven adults; three females aged 40 to 45+, two males aged 17 to 30 years old, and two individuals of indeterminate sex, aged between 17 and 35 years old. There are one adolescent under 18 years old, two juveniles aged 8.5 to 10.5 years old, one 5.5 to 7.5 year old, and one 3.5 to 5.5 year old. There are also one adolescent, and three juveniles approximately three years old, one year old, and perinate, along with various un-associated skeletal elements, which have not yet been analysed. The individuals display common dental diseases such as caries, plaque and dental hypoplasia, and pathologies such as osteomyelitis, porotic hyperostosis, cribra orbitalia and possible ankylosing spondylitis. Dental pathologies such as odontoma and tooth agenesis were also noted. There is tentative evidence for activity wear in the dentition of one individual. The stature range for the females (151-158cm), and the males (156-162cm) show the individuals were of average height compared to contemporary Central Europeans. The age-at-death distribution show a bias towards older females and sub-adults. Older males are completely absent. This, together with the evidence for blunt force cranial trauma in nine of the 16 skeletons, and the various burial practices present, indicate burials which differ from the everyday community burial situation.

2009

Poster HYOID BONE TRAUMA FROM BRONZE AGE Al Oumaoui I, Jiménez-Brobeil SA, Roca Rodríguez MG, Fernández de la Gala J. Universidad de Granada, Spain We present a mature-age male from the Bronze Age discovered at the site of Motilla del Azuer (Daimiel, Ciudad Real) in the Spanish region of La Mancha. Hyoid bone from this individual exhibits changes thought to be due to a healed fracture, an exceptional finding in an archaeological population. This injury is very rare, and it is even more uncommon for individuals to survive this lesion. It was probably produced by a direct impact to the neck, either accidental, e.g., by fall, or resulting from intentional aggression. We discuss the latter possibility in the context of trauma patterns found at this and other sites from the Bronze Age. Poster NEW PALAEOPATHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF PRE-COLOMBIAN TREPONEMATOSES FROM NORTHERN FRANCE Armelle Alduc-Le Bagousse, Joël Blondiaux, Thomas Colart, Pierre-Marie Danzé, Anne-Sophie Drucbert, Xavier Demond...

Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 2007

2020

Nº 10, año 2020. urtea 10. zk.

Sharp force trauma to a 1,000-year-old skull from Jerusalem mountains, 2019

Well-preserved human skull, two upper vertebral bodies, and bones of the right hand were found in a remote cave in the Jerusalem mountains. The individual was identified as an adult male, 30-40 years old, who was C-14 dated to the 11th century. It was attributed to the local, Bedouin population. The skull manifested four sharp force trauma lesions, resulted from interpersonal violence in different occasions: Two represent past events, one is peri-mortem, and one is the direct cause of death. The current manuscript describes the pathologies and discusses possible interpretations, which combine physical anthropology with archaeology, history, and ethnography altogether.