Identifying Autopsy and Dissection on Human Skeletal Remains

Home , Autopsy

IDENTIFYING AUTOPSY AND DISSECTION ON HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS:

A CASE STUDY FROM POINT SAN JOSE (FORT MASON),

GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA

A Thesis

Presented

to the Faculty of

California State University, Chico

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts

Anthropology

Kelsie Mae Hart

Spring 2019

IDENTIFYING AUTOPSY AND DISSECTION ON HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS:

A CASE STUDY FROM POINT SAN JOSE (FORT MASON),

GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA

A Thesis

Kelsie Mae Hart

Spring 2019

APPROVED BY THE INTERIM DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES:

Sharon Barrios, Ph.D.

APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

Colleen Milligan, Ph.D., Chair

Georgia Fox, Ph.D.

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my mom, Julie Hart,

in loving memory.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank all of the professors of the Department of Anthropology for contributing to my academic and professional development during my time at CSU

Chico. I would like to extend special thanks to the faculty and staff of the Human

Identification lab for supporting my thesis research in various capacities, including Dr. P

Willey, Dr. Eric Bartelink, Dr. Ashley Kendell, and Alex Perrone. Most of all, I thank my thesis committee members, Dr. Colleen Milligan and Dr. Georgia Fox, for their mentorship and invaluable guidance during the conceptualization and writing of this thesis.

Thank you to the many authors of the 2016 and 2018 Point San Jose reports for contributing to the initial cataloging and inventory efforts, and for generating many important insights and analyses that laid the groundwork for this thesis project: Maria Cox,

Mallory Peters, Kasey Cole, Jessica Curry, Sarah Hall, Sam Mijal, Julia Prince Buitenhuys,

Valerie Sgheiza, Kristen Broehl, Jessica Curry, Matt Bond, Martha Diaz, and Heather

MacInnes. Thank you to Peter Gavette and Angela Locke Barton of the National Park

Service for sharing their work on the Point San Jose assemblage and for providing me with many helpful resources.

Thank you sincerely to my graduate cohort for providing companionship, comic relief, and emotional support through the rollercoaster of grad school highs and lows. I would like to extend special thanks to Tamara Maxey and Mallory Peters for their help in coordinating my thesis requirements after I moved out of state.

Thank you to Laura Silva for always supporting my educational goals, for working with my crazy schedule, and for letting me do school work when the office was slow. I wouldn’t have made it without that!

Thank you to my dad and my brother for your support, for believing in me, and knowing just how to lift me up when I’m down. I would also like to thank my extended family, especially Mike and DJ and the Howarth clan, for always offering me a little slice of home and a safe place to land when I need to get away from it all.

And a special thanks to my partner, Lance Robbins, for moving to the middle of nowhere with me, for standing by me through the writing process, for always reminding me of what’s truly important in life. I’m so looking forward to our next chapter together.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Dedication ...... iii

Acknowledgments...... iv

List of Tables ...... viii

List of Figures ...... x

Abstract ...... xii

CHAPTER

I. Introduction ...... 1

Research Questions ...... 2 Background ...... 3 Statement of the Problem ...... 5 Purpose of the Study ...... 6 Organization ...... 7

II. Background and Theoretical Perspective...... 9

History of Autopsy and Dissection ...... 9 Context of the Point San Jose Assemblage ...... 21 Theoretical Orientation ...... 34 Summary ...... 40

III. Literature Review...... 42

Analysis of Cut Marks on Bone ...... 42 Osteological Zonation Method ...... 48 Evidence for Anatomization ...... 51 Hypothesis Testing...... 74 Summary ...... 76

vi CHAPTER PAGE

IV. Materials and Methods ...... 77

Point San Jose Assemblage ...... 77 Comparative Assemblages ...... 80 Data Collection ...... 94 Statistical Analysis ...... 101 Hypothesis Testing...... 102 Summary ...... 104

V. Results ...... 106

Overview ...... 106 Skull ...... 110 Vertebrae ...... 112 Thorax and Shoulder ...... 115 Upper Limb ...... 118 Pelvis ...... 122 Lower Limb ...... 124 Chi-squared Tests...... 129 Summary ...... 132

VI. Discussion ...... 134

Diagnostic Criteria for Anatomization...... 134 Evaluating the Zonation Method ...... 142 Structural Violence ...... 157 Summary ...... 162

VII. Conclusions ...... 164

Research Questions Revisited ...... 164 Challenges and Limitations...... 167 Suggestions for Future Research ...... 169

References Cited ...... 173

Appendices

A. Summary table of bioarchaeology literature review ...... 188 B. Diagnostic table of criteria for various anatomization activities ...... 198 C. Illustrations of the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) ...... 203 D. Glossary of terms ...... 212 vii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1. Cut mark data for the Holden Chapel assemblage (adapted from Hodge et al. 2017:118-199,127)...... 83 2. Cut mark data for the Medical College of Georgia assemblage (adapted from McFarlin and Wineski 1997:122)...... 86

3. Cut mark data for the Medical College of Virginia assemblage (adapted from Owsley et al. 2017:152)...... 90

4. Cut mark data for the Blockley Almshouse assemblage (adapted from Crist et al. 2017:270-271)...... 93

5. Cut mark data for the entire Point San Jose assemblage by zones according to Knüsel and Outram (2004)...... 108

6. Cut mark data for the entire Point San Jose assemblage by fragments ...... 109

7. Cut marks on the cranium ...... 111

8. Cut marks on the mandible ...... 112

9. Cut marks on the vertebrae ...... 113

10. Cut marks on the ribs ...... 115

11. Cut marks on the sternum ...... 117

12. Cut marks on the clavicle ...... 117

13. Cut marks on the scapula ...... 118

14. Cut marks on the humerus ...... 119

15. Cut marks on the radius ...... 120

16. Cut marks on the ulna ...... 121

viii

TABLE PAGE

17. Cut marks on the hand ...... 123

18. Cut marks on the sacrum...... 124

19. Cut marks on the os coxae ...... 124

20. Cut marks on the femur...... 125

21. Cut marks on the tibia ...... 126

22. Cut marks on the fibula ...... 127

23. Cut marks on the foot ...... 128

24. Summary of selected cut mark data from Point San Jose and the four comparative assemblages...... 129

25. Summary of Pearson’s chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test results ...... 132

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

1. Two maps of Point San Jose from 1877 ...... 24

2. Photograph of the post hospital at Point San Jose, circa 1891 ...... 24

3. Map of the hospital site where the Point San Jose assemblage was discovered ...... 26

4. Photographs of U.S.A. Hospital Department medicinal bottles used to date the Point San Jose assemblage ...... 26

5. Excavation photograph showing commingled skeletal remains and broken glass artifacts near the top of the Point San Jose pit ...... 28

6. Undated photograph of Dr. Edwin Bentley ...... 31

7. Cranial fragment with evidence for craniotomy (GGNRA #43092) ...... 143

8. Manubrium with evidence for thoracotomy (GGNRA #42234) ...... 144

9. Calotte with evidence for craniotomy and bisection of the cranium (GGNRA #42908, conjoins with #43092 in Figure 7) ...... 145

10. Mandible with evidence for bisection (GGNRA #42828) ...... 146

11. Thoracic vertebra with evidence for laminectomy (GGNRA #43192) ...... 147

12. Superior view of a cervical vertebra, showing a transverse saw cut to the body and right superior articular facet (GGNRA #43452) ...... 147

13. Superior view of a lumbar vertebra, showing a transverse saw cut through the neural arch and the vertebral body (GGNRA #43411) ...... 148

14. Fragment of the olecranon process, severed by a transverse saw cut to the proximal end of the ulna (GGNRA #43022) ...... 149

15. Posterior view of a proximal left femur with an oblique saw cut through the femoral neck (GGNRA #42380) ...... 149 x

FIGURE PAGE

16. Distal shaft of the tibia with a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #41766) ...... 150

17. Distal articulation of the tibia, severed from the rest of the bone by a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42711) ...... 150

18. Distal shaft of the fibula with a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42674) ...... 150

19. Distal articulation of the fibula, severed from the rest of the bone by a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42291) ...... 151

20. Proximal portion of the calcaneus (the calcaneal tuberosity), severed by a vertical saw cut though the body (GGNRA #42975) ...... 151

21. Posterior view of the left pubis, showing a vertical saw cut to the pubic symphysis (GGNRA #42535) ...... 151

22. Right humerus with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #42422) ...... 153

23. Right femur with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #41770) ...... 153

24. Right tibia with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #42845) ...... 153

ABSTRACT

IDENTIFYING AUTOPSY AND DISSECTION ON HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS:

A CASE STUDY FROM POINT SAN JOSE (FORT MASON),

GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA

Kelsie Mae Hart

Master of Arts in Anthropology

California State University, Chico

Spring 2019

The identification of autopsy and dissection on human skeletal remains is challenged by a lack of formal diagnostic criteria for distinguishing between various anatomization activities. The Point San Jose assemblage consists of commingled, fragmentary human skeletal remains dating to the late-nineteenth century. Cut and saw marks observed on the bones suggest that these individuals were subjected to autopsy or dissection. This thesis aims to identify the activities that contributed to the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage and uses this site as a case study to explore the challenges for the identification of autopsy and dissection on human skeletal remains.

The interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage was approached through a review of the bioarchaeology literature and the formation of diagnostic criteria for the identification of various anatomization activities. The cut marks on the Point San Jose

xii

assemblage were recorded using the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). The evidence indicates dissection as the best explanation for the cut marks observed on the

Point San Jose assemblage. Statistical analyses reveal that the cut mark data from Point

San Jose is most similar to the data from Holden Chapel. These results suggest that the

Point San Jose assemblage represents a “cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover skeletal elements following dissection and specimen preparation. This thesis makes a tentative argument for structural violence in the formation of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage based on the higher representation of Asian and Hispanic ancestries, which may suggest the targeting of marginalized populations for dissection.

xiii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In October 2010, a large assemblage of nearly 4,000 fragments of commingled human skeletal remains were discovered during a lead abatement project at

Point San Jose (formerly Fort Mason) near the post’s hospital building (Fagan 2010). The remains were found in a large pit feature in association with butchered faunal remains and historical artifacts dating to the late nineteenth century (Willey et all. 2016:ix). Many of the human skeletal elements in the assemblage show evidence of postmortem cut and saw marks, leading archaeologists and anthropologists to suspect some type of anatomical study of these remains, such as autopsy or dissection, prior to their interment

(Willey et al. 2016:1-2). In April 2016, the human remains were transferred to the

Anthropology Department at California State University, Chico, for analysis (Willey et al. 2016).

This thesis forms part of the research effort by CSU Chico faculty and graduate students to analyze and interpret the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. One of the main goals of this research effort is to identify the most likely explanation for the pattern of cut and saw marks observed on the bones. Autopsy and dissection have very different implications for the lives and deaths of the individuals represented in the Point

San Jose assemblage, so the accurate interpretation of cutmarks on the bones is critical to our understanding of the site and its social and historical context.

This thesis uses the Point San Jose assemblage as a case study to explore the challenges in identifying autopsy and dissection on a skeletal assemblage for which there

2 is little contextual information. The interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage is approached through a comprehensive review of the bioarchaeology literature and the formation of diagnostic criteria for the identification of various anatomization activities.

Independent data collection was conducted from June 11 to August 2, 2018, to record the representation of elements and the precise locations of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage using a zonation method. This cut mark data will be evaluated qualitatively, through comparison to the diagnostic criteria gleaned from the literature review, and quantitatively, through statistical comparison to several comparative assemblages.

Research Questions

This thesis aims to identify the activities that contributed to the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage and to broadly explore the challenges for the identification of autopsy and dissection on human skeletal remains in the historical archaeological record. The following research questions summarize my approach:

1. What are the criteria that bioarchaeologists use to differentiate autopsy, dissection, and other postmortem interventions on human skeletal remains?

2. According to the criteria identified in Question 1, which postmortem interventions are the best fit for the patterning of cutmarks observed in the Point San Jose assemblage?

3. Can the osteological zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) enhance the recording, analysis, and/or interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage and others like it? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this method?

4. What do the results of this study suggest about the lived experiences and death experiences of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage?

Background

Although the history of autopsy and dissection has been covered extensively in the historical and medical literature, these topics have been considerably less well- studied by anthropologists, particularly bioarchaeologists. Bioarchaeologists are uniquely positioned to enhance our understanding of autopsy and dissection in the past, because they specialize in the analysis of human skeletal remains. Such bioarchaeological studies of anatomized individuals can inform our understanding of health and disease in the past, enhance our knowledge of autopsy and dissection practices, and illuminate details from the lives (and deaths) of these individuals.

The first major bioarchaeological studies to identify autopsy and/or dissection in the United States were published in the late 1980s and the 1990s (Angel et al. 1987;

Mann et al. 1991; Owsley et al. 1995). The number of published studies that found evidence for autopsy and dissection in the archaeological record experienced moderate but steady growth throughout the 2000s and 2010s, but these skeletal assemblages were largely treated as interesting case studies rather than a formalized area of study within bioarchaeology.

The first attempt to synthesize the skeletal evidence for autopsy and dissection came in the form of an edited volume of studies from the United Kingdom (Mitchell

2012). A similar compilation for the United States would not arrive until 2017 with the publication on The Bioarchaeology of Autopsy and Dissection in the United States

(Nystrom 2017). This volume established the study of autopsy and dissection as a formal discipline within bioarchaeology and advanced the field into “new methodological and theoretical areas” (Martin 2017:v). Nystrom brings together virtually all of the known skeletal assemblages with evidence of autopsy and dissection in the United States, and groups them according to archaeological context: early colonial America, public cemeteries, medical institutions, and almshouse cemeteries (Nystrom 2017a:5).

Many bioarchaeological studies of autopsy and dissection contextualize these practices using a social bioarchaeological approach, which integrates critical social theory with studies of human skeletal remains in past populations (Nystrom 2017a:3;

Agarwal and Glencross 2011). Structural violence is one such theory adopted from the social sciences for the interpretation of historic autopsy and dissection practices.

Structural violence is defined as “harm done to individuals or groups through the normalization of social inequalities in political-economic organization” (Farmer et al.

2006). Studies of structural violence have traditionally focused on the lived experiences of individuals and the impacts of structural violence on health and differential mortality

(Nystrom 2014). More recently, Nystrom (2014) and others have been broadening the scope of structural violence to include “death experiences” visible to bioarchaeologists, including the subjection of certain bodies to anatomization.

Nystrom (2014) argues that the passing of anatomy laws in the United States in the mid-late 1800s that legalized the dissection of unclaimed bodies from almshouses was an act of structural violence, due to the psychological and physical harm resulting from this practice, which disproportionately affected the lower strata of society. Nystrom

(2014) stresses, however, that evidence of anatomization is not necessarily evidence of

5 structural violence. Rather, the identification of structural violence in the bioarchaeological record is dependent on the accurate differentiation between autopsy and dissection (Nystrom 2014).

The theoretical framework of structural violence is the driving force behind this thesis project. Much of the research effort is dedicated to understanding and identifying various anatomization activities on human skeletal remains; however, the reason why accurate identification of autopsy and dissection in the archaeological record is so important is because these activities have vastly different implications for the lived experiences and “death experiences” of the affected individuals.

Statement of the Problem

The Point San Jose skeletal assemblage poses several methodological and interpretive challenges that, when taken together, set it apart from the other studies in

Nystrom (2017). First, the analysis is challenged by the commingled and fragmentary nature of the remains, which limits the analysis to independent skeletal elements and precludes analysis of sets of remains as biological individuals. Second, the context of the assemblage is unique among the published literature on autopsy and dissection: the assemblage derives from California (examples from the West are rare), and it is associated with a military fort, for which no comparative samples exist in the published literature. Furthermore, there is an almost complete lack of contextual information in the form of historical documentary resources about late nineteenth century anatomy practices at Point San Jose.

Third, the published literature offers no comprehensive, verifiable osteological criteria that can be used to differentiate evidence of autopsy and dissection on skeletal remains that lack supporting contextual information. The studies presented in Nystrom

(2017) offer interpretations that are built upon the skeletal evidence in their respective assemblages and the documentary evidence available for these sites. As a result, the interpretations offered in Nystrom (2017) are highly specific to those sites and not easily generalized to other studies. Finally, the prospect of robust statistical comparisons between sites is tenuous due to the relatively small number of sites, wide variance in sample sizes (from a single individual to more than a thousand), different units of analysis (independent skeletal elements vs. burial units vs. individual skeletons), and different methods of data recording and reporting.

Purpose of the Study

The primary goal of this thesis is to determine the most likely explanation for the patterning of cutmarks observed in the Point San Jose assemblage. A secondary outcome of this project is to create a diagnostic framework for distinguishing between autopsy and dissection on human skeletal remains that can be applied to future bioarchaeological studies, with the hope that these criteria will continue to be tested and revised. The osteological zonation method proposed by Knüsel and Outram (2004) will be used for data collection in this thesis and another secondary outcome of this project is to evaluate this method of data collection and its potential to enhance interpretations of autopsy and dissection in future bioarchaeological studies. Additionally, this thesis will

7 explore the concept of structural violence, how it relates to historical anatomy practices, and how this theoretical framework can be applied to bioarchaeological studies.

Organization

The first research question will guide the literature review and historical archival research for this thesis: What are the criteria that bioarchaeologists use to differentiate autopsy, dissection, and other postmortem interventions on human skeletal remains? Chapter II, Background, will address this project’s historical and theoretical background, including a comprehensive history of autopsy and dissection, a discussion of the theory of structural violence, and an overview of the historical and archaeological context of the Point San Jose site. Chapter III, Literature Review, will discuss approaches to cut mark analysis in the context of zooarchaeology, paleoanthropology, forensic anthropology, and bioarchaeology. This chapter will also introduce the osteological zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) and how it has been applied in other studies. The latter part of this chapter will be dedicated to a comprehensive overview of the published skeletal assemblages with evidence of anatomization and the evidence used to differentiate autopsy, dissection, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation at these sites.

Chapter IV, Materials and Methods, introduces the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage and describes four comparative assemblages, followed by an outline of the recording of cutmarks according to Knüsel and Outram (2004). Chapter IV also describes the use of statistical tests to compare cut mark data from the Point San Jose assemblage to

8 the comparative assemblages. The chapter concludes with a discussion of hypothesis testing for the Point San Jose assemblage.

Chapter V, Results, presents the cut mark data from the Point San Jose assemblage and the results of the statistical tests comparing this cut mark data to the four comparative assemblages. In Chapter VI, Discussion, these results are discussed with reference to the diagnostic table of criteria for various anatomization activities (autopsy, dissections, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation) based on the results of the bioarchaeology literature review to answer the second research question: Which postmortem interventions are the best fit for the patterning of cutmarks observed in the

Point San Jose assemblage?

Chapter VI will also address the third research question by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the osteological zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Chapter VI will conclude with a discussion of the evidence for structural violence at the site, addressing the fourth research question: What do the results of this study suggest about the lived experiences and death experiences of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage?

The seventh and final chapter, Conclusions, will summarize the entire research effort and revisit the findings for all four research questions. The chapter will conclude by discussing the challenges and limitations of this study and providing recommendations for future studies.

CHAPTER II

BACKGROUND AND THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

This chapter explores the social and historical context of autopsy and dissection practices in San Francisco at the time of the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage. The chapter begins with a historical overview of anatomical study in the

Western world, including how attitudes towards autopsy and dissection have changed over time. This is followed by a history of autopsy and dissection in the United States and a review of the specific anatomy laws governing late nineteenth-century California. The second section focuses on the history of Point San Jose as a military outpost and the archaeological context of the Point San Jose assemblage. This section also presents potential theories for the formation of the assemblage and suggests one individual who may be responsible for the anatomization of the human remains. The chapter ends with a discussion of social inequality and structural violence in relation to autopsy and dissection, which forms the theoretical framework for this thesis project.

History of Autopsy and Dissection

The Ancient World

The postmortem examination of the human body has its roots in the ancient world. The Egyptians performed extensive modifications to the body after death during mummification rituals, but these practices were primarily for religious reasons, rather than for the understanding of anatomy or disease (Burton 2005:278). The systematic study of human anatomy for the practice of medicine was first undertaken by Greek

10 physicians. In ancient Greece, animal dissection and the examination of wounds were initially used for the study of human anatomy (Burton 2005:278). These practices were promoted by the likes of Aristotle and formed the basis for early Greek medicine, culminating in the founding of the Alexandria school of medicine in the Third Century

B.C.E. (Burton 2005:278; Ghosh 2015:154). At the Alexandria school, two prominent

Greek physicians, Herophilus and Erasistratus, performed dissections on the bodies of executed criminals, despite significant religious, moral, and cultural objections to this practice (Ghosh 2015:154). Following the deaths of Herophilus and Erasistratus, human dissection remained largely taboo in ancient Greece (Burton 2005:278).

The most influential Greek physician and anatomist was Galen (129 – ca. 216

C.E.), whose views on human anatomy were formed by his extensive experience with animal dissections, and a theory of disease based on an imbalance of the body’s

“humors,” or essential bodily fluids (Burton 2005:278). Galen was summoned to Rome by Emperor Marcus Aurelius, where Galen published his Treaty of Anatomy (Elizondo-

Omaña et al. 2005:11). Galen’s theories of human physiology, including his erroneous ideas about the anatomy of several major organs, remained largely unchallenged until the

Renaissance (Burton 2005:278).

The Byzantine and Medieval Periods (300 – 1300s)

There is written evidence to suggest that autopsies and human dissections were performed in Byzantine Europe (the Eastern or Greek portion of the former Roman

Empire) in the period between C.E. 300-1300s (Burton 2005:279). Anatomization in the

Greek world was primarily in the form of autopsies to explore the nature of disease; these autopsies were conducted on the bodies of criminals, in some cases as a form of

11 punishment (Burton 2005:279). The work of Galen continued to influence medical theory, if not practice, in both Eastern and Western Europe (Elizondo-Omaña et al.

2005:11).

Although human autopsy and dissection were apparently tolerated under the religious and social mores of Byzantine Europe, in Western Europe such practices were generally antithetical to Catholic beliefs about the sacred nature of the body (Burton

2005:279). One exception was the division of the corpses of Saints, which was sometimes practiced in England, France, and Germany to create saintly relics that could be distributed among various churches and shrines (Burton 2005:279).

Another exception was the division or defleshing of the body for transport in the event that a nobleman died away from home (Burton 2005:279). The skeleton was viewed as the primary identifier of personhood after death, so this practice did not wholly violate Catholic ideas of the sanctity and integrity of the body (Burton 200:280). As for the practice of autopsy, postmortem examinations are absent from the few investigations of death and disease in medieval Western Europe, including coronial inquests in England

(Burton 2005:279). Ultimately, division of the body for any reason was prohibited by

Pope Boniface VIII in 1299 and made punishable by excommunication from the Catholic

Church (Burton 2005:279).

Reemergence of Autopsy and Dissection (1300s – 1500s)

The birth of universities in the twelfth century led to considerable advances in science and saw the reemergence of autopsy and dissection. At first, the Catholic Church did not explicitly embrace nor forbid anatomization, although Pope Alexander III prohibited religious clerks from studying anatomy or practicing surgery in 1163 (Ghosh

2015:154). In 1231, the study of anatomy received a boost from Holy Roman Emperor

Frederick II when he mandated that a public human dissection be held at least once every five years for the education of those wishing to practice medicine or surgery (Ghosh

2015:155). The recognition of the value of dissection as a tool for teaching and research resulted in the legalization of dissection in several European countries in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries. Meanwhile, autopsy gained recognition as a tool to better understand the nature of epidemic disease as evidenced by several accounts from thirteenth to fourteenth century Italy of the postmortem examination of victims of the

Black Death (Burton 2005:279).

The practice of dissection was halted in some countries in 1299 by an edict from Pope Boniface VIII that prohibited the manipulation and defleshing of corpses

(Ghosh 2015:155), This edict, however, had little effect on universities in Italy, where the

University of Bologna had emerged as the leading European institution for the study of medicine (Ghosh 2015:155). Accounts of autopsies and postmortem examinations performed in Italy date back to at least 1286, and the first officially sanctioned human dissection since Herophilus and Erasistratus was performed publicly in Bologna by

Mondino de Liuzzi in 1315 (Ghosh 2015:155). After this initial display, regular anatomy teaching sessions that included public dissection of executed criminals were performed by De Liuzzi twice a year (Ghosh 2015:155). Attitudes towards autopsy and dissection continued to shift as a greater number of these procedures were performed in Italy during the fourteenth century and became a required component of medical education (Burton

2005:279; Ghosh 2015:156).

Renaissance Europe (1400s – 1500s)

Autopsies were commonly practiced by the mid-fifteenth century, and the

Catholic Church officially sanctioned dissection by medical students in Padua and

Bologna by the end of the sixteenth century (Burton 2005:279). The Renaissance brought about an intense public interest in naturalism, art, science, and a revival in classical Greek and Roman thought (Ghosh 2015:156). This revival prompted a renewed interest in the anatomical theories of Galen, which intensified the demand for dissections by medical students and physicians (Ghosh 2015:156). Interest in anatomical studies also flourished among the great artists of Renaissance Italy who sought to understand the form and function of the human body (Ghosh 2015:156). Leonardo DaVinci and Michelangelo

Buonarroti are among the artists who undertook human dissections to more accurately portray the muscles, tendons, and bone structure underlying the human form (Ghosh

2015:156).

Andreas Vesalius, a skilled practitioner of dissections, presented the first major challenge to Galenic medicine with the 1543 publication of De humani corporis fabrica (On the Fabric of the Human Body; Burton 2005:280). Vesalius believed that human anatomy could not be learned from the study of textbooks, but must be experienced first-hand through the practice of dissections (Ghosh 2015:158). This was a break from the traditional manner of practicing dissection in which a barber surgeon would perform the cuts while the anatomist or lecturer would dictate instructions from a textbook, believing it to be undignified to perform the cuts themselves (Ghosh 2015:158).

Vesalius’s extensive firsthand experiences with human dissection led him to correct several long-held erroneous theories of Galenic medicine (Ghosh 2015:158).

The first permanent structure designed for the public performance of anatomical dissections was constructed in Italy in 1594 at the University of Padua (Ghosh

2015:156). This prompted the construction of several other anatomical theatres across

Europe. The first anatomy theatre in Northern Europe was established by Pieter Pauw in

1597 in Leiden (located in the Netherlands today) and was granted permission to publicly dissect executed criminals (Burton 2005:280). Dissection became a popular added punishment for those who had committed capital crimes as it was believed to prevent the accused from reaching heaven (Burton 2005:280). Autopsies, in contrast, were usually reserved for royalty and nobility, whose elite status warranted a formal investigation into their cause of death (Burton 2005:280). By 1537, the Catholic Church under Pope

Clement VII officially accepted the use of human dissection for the teaching of anatomy

(Ghosh 2015:158).

By the sixteenth century, enormous growth in the practice of dissection was far outstripping the supply of cadavers from criminals (Ghosh 2015:156). Physicians obtained cadavers by offering free funerals to families of the deceased, recommending unnecessary autopsies, and collecting unclaimed bodies of foreigners and the indigent from charity hospitals (Ghosh 2015:156). Physicians and medical students increasingly turned to illicit means—including the exhumation of graves, stealing corpses awaiting burial, and even interrupting funeral processions—to maintain a steady supply of cadavers for dissection (Ghosh 2015:156). In Italy, the public perception of anatomists was mixed: on one hand, communities expressed fear and acute concern over anatomists’ greed for corpses, but on the other hand, they also relished in the spectacle of public dissections (Ghosh 2015:156).

Anatomization in England (1500s – 1800s)

In contrast to much of mainland Europe, human dissection was prohibited in

England until 1565, when a select group from the Royal College of Physicians and

Company of Barber Surgeons were granted permission to dissect a limited number of cadavers (Ghosh 2015:159). Prior to this event, anatomical knowledge was based on animal dissection, manuscripts from ancient Greece, and more recent writings from Italy

(Ghosh 2015:159). Throughout the sixteenth century, dissections were performed almost exclusively on the bodies of executed criminals (Ghosh 2015:159). The Royal College of

Physicians and the Company of Barber Surgeons remained the only groups that were officially sanctioned to receive cadavers for dissection until the mid-eighteenth century, and this process was strictly controlled by quotas for each group (Ghosh 2015:159). After a perfunctory examination by one of these groups, the bodies were then distributed to various medical schools for further anatomization (Ghosh 2015:159).

By the early 1600s, however, the demand for dissections increased dramatically in response to the availability of printed anatomy books from Italy and

France (Ghosh 2015:159). Under pressure from medical schools, England’s Murder Act was finally passed in 1752, which sanctioned the use of the bodies of executed murderers for dissection by medical schools (Ghosh 2015:159). This Act was aimed at increasing the number of bodies available for dissection while also creating an additional deterrent for the commission of murder (Ghosh 2015:159). Dissection was reviled and feared for its mutilation of the corpse and the denial of a traditional funeral to the deceased (Ghosh

2015:160). To further increase the supply of cadavers, the government significantly expanded the number of crimes punishable by hanging (Ghosh 2015:159). Both of these

16 measures, however, were insufficient to meet rising demands for anatomical study

(Ghosh 2015:159).

Following the passage of the Murder Act in 1752, the demand for corpses in

England dramatically outpaced the supply of criminals provided by the courts (Burton

2005:282). Many European countries had already passed laws to allow the dissection of unclaimed bodies from poorhouses, prisons, mental institutions, and charitable hospitals

(Ghosh 2015:160). But no such laws yet existed in England, so anatomists increasingly turned to the black market to source their cadavers, most of which were obtained through grave-robbing (Burton 2005:282). The enterprising “resurrectionists” or “body-snatchers” who exhumed these corpses earned hefty profits from their sales to physicians and medical students (Burton 2005:282). There are even accounts of resurrectionists who used murder to source their cadavers, most notably William Burke and William Hare who were tried in 1829 (Burton 2005:282).

The sensational nature of the Burke and Hare murder trial, and the resulting fear and panic among the public, influenced the passage of England’s Anatomy Act in

1832 (Burton 2005:282). The Anatomy Act allowed for the dissection of bodies from workhouses and charitable hospitals that remained unclaimed 48 hours after death

(Ghosh 2015:161). In a major break from European precedent, England’s Anatomy Act also outlawed the use of the bodies of criminals for dissection and instead established a voluntary program of body donation (Ghosh 2015:161). The Anatomy Act successfully eliminated “body-snatching” by sufficiently increasing the supply of the cadavers as to render grave-robbing unprofitable, but the Act also caused tremendous social changes

(Ghosh 2015:161). The Anatomy Act effectively shifted the punishment of dissection from criminals to those in poverty (Ghosh 2015:161).

The rich, whose bodies were virtually never at risk for dissection, viewed anatomization as a positive and essential component of the advancement of science and medicine (Ghosh 2015:161). The poor, on the other hand, viewed dissection with fear and revulsion, which resulted in the fomentation of distrust and hostility towards the medical establishment (Ghosh 2015:161). These tensions were escalated by the manipulations of lawmakers, funeral directors, and institutions to artificially increase the number of unclaimed bodies for use in dissections, constituting a new form of “body-snatching”

(Ghosh 2015:161). In addition to the poor and mentally ill, these practices disproportionately targeted minority groups, especially immigrants and African slaves

(Ghosh 2015:161).

Anatomization in the United States (1600s – 1800s)

The historical development of autopsy and dissection in the United States roughly parallels the trajectory of anatomization in the European countries from which early Americans emigrated (Crist and Sorg 2017:30). The earliest evidence of skeletal autopsy in the New World was found on St. Croix Island, at the border between Maine and Canada, from an autopsy conducted in the winter of 1604-1605 (Crist and Sorg

2017:26). Additional accounts of autopsies appear in the documentary record of North

America later in the seventeenth century (Burton 2005:280). As in Europe, autopsies were primarily conducted to investigate cause of death while dissections were used for teaching and research. In the United States executed criminals were the sole source of cadavers for dissection until the eighteenth century (Ghosh 2015:162). The dissection of

18 criminals was sanctioned by federal law and used as a deterrent for capital crimes (Ghosh

2015:162).

The demand for bodies increased significantly after the debut of the nation’s first formal anatomy course at the University of Pennsylvania in 1745 (Ghosh 2015:162).

Similar to the pattern in England, the increased demand for cadavers prompted various practices of grave-robbing and body-snatching which plagued communities throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Ghosh 2015:162). The poor were the most vulnerable to grave robbing, as the rich could afford to reinforce their family graves with iron cages and night watchmen (Lovejoy 2017). Among the poor, African Americans were disproportionately victimized by body-snatchers as slave burial grounds were common targets for grave-robbing (Lovejoy 2017). The illegal procurement of bodies for dissection prompted public outcry and even violence. At least 17 “Anatomy Riots” were recorded in the United States between 1765 and1854 in which citizens attacked medical schools to reclaim the bodies of their family members (Lovejoy 2017).

In the 1830s, Massachusetts became the first state to enact laws that allowed for the dissection of unclaimed bodies from hospitals, asylums, prisons, and other public institutions (Ghosh 2015:162). Following the precedent in Massachusetts, other states passed similar legislation over the next few decades (Ghosh 2015:162). These laws had a similar effect as England’s 1832 Anatomy Act by transferring the punishment of dissection from criminals to the poor (Ghosh 2015:162). The exploitation of marginalized communities for dissection also took on a distinctly racial orientation in the United States with the targeting of African Americans and other minorities (Nystrom 2017a:2).

Modernization (1800s)

The study of anatomy progressed during the nineteenth century and began to resemble the practices of today. This period saw the rise of new anatomical disciplines and the standardization of autopsy and dissection procedures. By the late eighteenth century, anatomists and medical practitioners began to recognize the value of detailed, comprehensive accounts of autopsies and dissections for advancing medical research, particularly the in-depth study of disease (Burton 2005:281). Histology, or the microscopic study of bodily tissues, gained ground in the nineteenth century as an important tool for anatomical studies (Burton 2005:281). During this time, Rudolf

Virchow made significant advancements in pathology, particularly his insistence on the detailed examination of bodily organs (King and Meehan 1973:535). The nineteenth century also saw the first attempts to standard anatomization practices. An American pathologist, Francis Delafield, published the first systematic instruction book for dissections in 1872 (King and Meehan 1973:536). This was followed by Virchow’s 1876 treatise, which was the first to propose a standardized method for the conduction of autopsies (King and Meehan 1973:535).

Anatomization in Nineteenth Century San Francisco

Protections against grave-robbing or “body-snatching” were passed early in

California’s history. In 1854, “An act to protect the bodies of deceased persons, and public grave-yards” was passed which prohibited the disinterment, mutilation, or removal of bodies after burial (Hittell 1870:486). However, anatomy laws in California became progressively more favorable to physicians and researchers throughout the mid- nineteenth century. In 1864, California passed“An act to promote the study of anatomy”

(Hittell 1870:62). This law explicitly made it legal for physicians and surgeons to possess bodies or body parts for the purpose of anatomical study (Hittell 1870:62). The law also allowed for the bodies of persons who died while in the custody of the State prison, or who were executed for a crime, to instead be surrendered to a physician or medical school for anatomical study (Hittell 1870:62). The only exceptions given were for persons who request to be buried shortly before their death, for bodies claimed by a friend or relative within 36hours, and for “strangers or travelers” who died suddenly

(Hittell 1870:63).

The legal supply of bodies for anatomical study helped support research and education at San Francisco’s first medical schools. In 1858, the Dr. Elias Cooper organized the first medical school in the western United States, the Medical Department of the University of the Pacific (Lyman 1925:564). The school disintegrated after

Cooper’s death in 1864, but was reorganized as the Medical College of the Pacific in

1870 (Michael 1955:427). Meanwhile, Dr. Hugh Toland founded a second medical school in San Francisco in 1864. Dissections at Toland Medical College began during the first academic year after the passage of the 1864 Anatomy Act.

Just two years later, in 1866, the Anatomy Act was amended to remove the requirement that bodies donated for anatomical study be those of State prisoners or executed criminals only (State of California 1866:326). This effectively expanded the law to allow for the surrender of the bodies of any “such persons as are required to be buried at the public expense,” which may include individuals who died in the custody of a county poorhouse, county prison, or public hospital (Hittell 1870:62). In 1870, a new

Anatomy Act was passed which further expanded the provisions of the 1864 Act. The

1870 Act compelled the surrender of bodies to physicians and medical schools, rather than merely allowing it (State of California 1870:405). This Act also shortened the period in which friends and family could claim a body and prevent it from dissection, from 36 hours to 24 hours (State of California 1870:405). Alongside the passage of laws expanding the legal avenues for obtaining bodies for dissection, California also strengthened punishments for those obtaining bodies by illegal means. The state’s 1872

The Medical College of the Pacific began offering courses in microscopic anatomy, descriptive anatomy, and pathology, when it was re-organized in 1870 (Michael

1955:427). By 1871, the school featured a dissecting room that was “open the year round

[sic] for the use of Students,” likely boosted by the expanded supply of cadavers under the 1870 Anatomy Act (Wilson 1998). The Medical College of the Pacific later became the Stanford University School of Medicine. The Toland Medical College was gifted to the University of California in 1873 and operates as the University of California, San

Francisco today (UCSF 2019). These two medical schools were leaders in the study of anatomy and pathology in California, a trend which continues today, and the professors and graduates of these programs were the primary practitioners of autopsy and dissection in late nineteenth century San Francisco (Michael 1955:427).

Context of the Point San Jose Assemblage

History of Point San Jose (Fort Mason)

Point San Jose is located on the northern coast of the San Francisco peninsula, just east of the Presidio. The geography of the site makes it a strategic location for command of the adjacent cove, as well as the passage between the mainland and Alcatraz

Island (National Park Service 2016). The site was recognized for its military value as early as 1797, when Spanish forces built Bateria San Jose to defend La Yerba Buena anchorage (known today as Aquatic Park Cove; Sebby 2009). The site was largely abandoned by 1806, and by 1846 was so overgrown with brush that it was referred to as

“Black Point” (Sebby 2009). In the meantime, the governance of California had changed hands several times: the region became part of the newly-independent Mexican Empire in

1821, which was subsequently re-organized as the Republic of Mexico in 1823; in 1846, the American military occupation of California was initiated and held until the end of the

Mexican-American War and the formal annexation of California by the United States in

1848 (Sebby 2009).

In 1851, President Millard Fillmore designated the area around “Black Point” as the Point San Jose Military Reservation (Sebby 2009). Although the military claimed ownership of the site, steps were not immediately taken to develop the site for military use (National Park Service 2016). Shortly following the discovery of gold in California in

1848, San Francisco became inundated with fortune-seekers from all over the world and suddenly developed into a major world city (National Park Service 2016; Sebby 2009).

This population explosion, coupled with the shortage of available land and housing, quickly led to the unauthorized construction of several homes for wealthy civilians on the unguarded military lands at Point San Jose (National Park Service 2016; Sebby 2009).

The outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 forced the military to re-evaluate land usage at Point San Jose. There were rumors of Confederate sympathizers agitating in San

Francisco and fears of possible attacks on commercial ships, especially those carrying gold in their cargo (Sebby 2009, National Park Service 2016). In 1863, U.S. army forces took control of Point San Jose under orders from the Secretary of War to develop the site for military defense (Hart 2009). Despite civilian outcry, the private citizens living at the site, including General John C. Frémont, were evicted, and several of the grand homes were razed to make way for construction of the East Battery (Sebby 2009). Like most nineteenth-century military posts, Point San Jose was designed to function like a self- contained town for the men stationed there (National Park Service 2016). The construction included a grassy parade ground, post headquarters, barracks, officer’s quarters, guardhouses, stables, various outbuildings, and a post hospital (National Park

Service 2016). Figure 1 shows two maps of Point San Jose from 1877. The Point San

Jose assemblage was discovered next to the hospital building, which is circled in red.

Figure 2 shows a photo of the hospital building circa 1891.

Point San Jose was most active during its use as a defensive outpost during the

Civil War (Sebby 2009). Point San Jose (renamed Fort Mason in 1882) played a negligible role in the Spanish-American War and the Philippine insurrection, but provided security and relief following the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 (Sebby

2009). During the First World War, the Second World War, and the Korean War, Fort

Mason served as a port for transporting troops and supplies (Sebby 2009). In 1973, supervision of Fort Mason was transferred to the United States National Park Service as

24 part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (Sebby 2009). It continues to operate under the aegis of the National Park Service.

Figure 1. Two maps of Point San Jose from 1877. The location of the post hospital is circled in red. This map is believed to be in the public domain, accessed from the National Archives, RG77, Cartographic Division, Fortifications File.

Figure 2. Photograph of the post hospital at Point San Jose, circa 1891. This image is believed to be in the public domain, accessed from the National Archives, RG92, Still Photography Division, Box 10, Series F, (92-F-37-7).

Archaeological Context of the Point San Jose Assemblage

A large pit feature containing several thousand fragments of commingled human skeletal remains, butchered faunal remains, and artifacts was discovered at Point

San Jose in 2010 during a lead abatement project to remove contaminated soils surrounding some of the post’s oldest buildings (Fagan 2010; Gavette 2018). Figure 3 is a map of the hospital site that shows the location of the assemblage (labeled here as the

“Medical Waste Pit”) in relation to adjacent buildings and the lead abatement trenches.

The history of the buildings, site stratigraphy, and artifact analysis were used to estimate the likely date range in which the remains were deposited. The pit was initially dated to the late nineteenth century based on its proximity to a building which served as the outpost’s infirmary from 1864-1903 (Gavette 2018). This range was later narrowed to

1864-1891, based on site stratigraphy, namely a layer of sandstone conglomerate above the pit but below the foundation of the adjacent Steward’s quarters, which were constructed in 1891 (Gavette 2018).

National Park Service archaeologists then attempted to narrow the estimated date range further by studying the artifacts found in and around the pit. The styles and manufacturing details of various glass bottles found at the site broadly date to the late nineteenth century and are consistent with the previously established date ranges for the site (Locke Barton 2018). The most numerous and precisely dated artifacts are U.S.A.

Hospital Department bottles, which had a limited production run from 1862-1865, but may have been in use in frontier locations into the early 1870s (Locke Barton 2018).

Some of these U.S.A. Hospital Department bottles are depicted in Figure 4. The details

26 of several other bottle types also support a deposition date in the early-to-mid 1870s

(Locke Barton 2018).

Figure 3. Map of the hospital site where the Point San Jose assemblage was discovered. The main pit feature is identified by the solid green circle. The shaded green ovals show other locations where human remains, faunal remains, and artifacts were found. Used with permission from Angela Locke Barton.

Figure 4. Photographs of U.S.A. Hospital Department medicinal bottles used to date the Point San Jose assemblage. Used with permission from Angela Locke Barton.

The artifacts found in and around the pit include a large number of medicinal bottles as well as alcohol bottles, ink bottles, Worcestershire sauce bottles, a hair oil bottle, clay tobacco pipe fragments, marbles, buttons, and one pair of medical scissors

(Locke Barton 2018). Many items are consistent with the practice of medicine at the site while other items are suggestive of daily life at Point San Jose. Some of the non- medicinal bottles may not have contained their original contents, but rather may have been reused to hold liquid medicines, a common practice in frontier regions where supplies were hard to come by (Locke Barton 2018). A large number of butchered faunal remains were also discovered in and around the pit. These remains are consistent with the typical diet of late nineteenth-century military officers or infirmary patients, who had greater access to medium- and high-quality meat cuts than enlisted men (Willey et al.

2018: 59-60).

The preponderance of archaeological evidence suggest that the formation of the pit was a single depositional event, rather than an accumulation of materials over time as in a midden deposit (Locke Barton 2018). A reconstruction of the depositional event by Willey and colleagues suggests the following sequence for the formation of the pit: larger articulated body portions, mostly torsos, were deposited in the bottom of a steep- sided pit; this was followed by skulls and vertically oriented limb bones (2018:28).

As the deposition of remains progressed, the body portions became smaller, less articulated, more horizontal in orientation, and were commingled with a greater number of artifacts, mostly broken glass and ceramics (Willey et al. 2018:28). Faunal remains were distributed evenly throughout the pit (Willey et al. 2018:30). Figure 5 is an excavation photograph that shows commingled skeletal remains (mostly human) and

28 artifacts near the top of the pit. The final stage of deposition consisted of several long bones placed horizontally and commingled with more broken glass and ceramic (Willey et al. 2018:28-29). The pit was then capped with a large piece of cast iron (Willey et al.

2018:29). The pit was apparently undisturbed from the time of initial deposition until its discovery and excavation in 2010. At least some of the remains were fleshed at the time of deposition, as evidenced by the discovery of body portions still in articulation.

Figure 5. Excavation photograph showing commingled skeletal remains (mostly human) and broken glass artifacts near the top of the Point San Jose pit feature. Used with permission from Peter Gavette.

Locke Barton (2018) and Gavette (2018) hypothesize that a staff change, such as the departure of a physician and practicing anatomist, may have prompted the disposal of the anatomized human remains at Point San Jose. It may have been a matter of

29 practicality and efficiency to dispose of other discards, such as the faunal remains and medicinal bottles, in the same pit as the human remains since burial was a common method of trash disposal in the late nineteenth century. Contributing archaeologist Angela

Locke Barton hypothesizes that the defunct nature of the medicinal bottles precipitated their mass disposal, as many of them were no longer able to be returned to the Medical

Depot for reuse by the mid-1870s (2018).

The association of the anatomized human remains with medical waste and butchered faunal remains certainly supports the hypothesis that the human remains were considered to be trash and that the pit was designed to serve as a means for their disposal

(Willey et al. 2018:32). Willey and colleagues suggest that the separation of the pit from other garbage, and the capping of the pit with the cast iron plate, may reflect some degree of respect and ceremony for the disposal of the remains (2018:32). However, the creation of a special pit feature near the infirmary building may have been simply a matter of convenience to avoid transporting the large number of remains (probably rather grisly and odorous at the time) to another disposal location. The cast iron plate, too, may have served a more utilitarian function by protecting the site from animal scavenging or inadvertent human intrusions, such as the lead abatement project that lead to its discovery in 2010.

It is unclear whether the informal burial of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage was in compliance with the anatomy laws of California at the time. All of the statutes in the mid-nineteenth century required that dissected bodies be buried in a public graveyard, at the expense of the physician or medical institution, after their use for anatomical study (Hittell 1870:63; State of California 1870:405). The human remains in

30 the Point San Jose assemblage likely do not represent complete individuals, so it is possible that the rest of the bodies were given a formal cemetery burial elsewhere.

Furthermore, California’s 1854 statute regulating “Grave-yards, Cemeteries,

Yews, Etc.” defines a public graveyard simply as a place “where the bodies of six or more persons are buried” (Hittell 1870:486). It is possible that the Point San Jose pit feature, which contains the partial remains of at least 25 individuals, meets this definition of a public graveyard (Willey et al. 2018:65). It is also possible that this portion of the law was not strictly monitored or enforced.

Dr. Edwin Bentley

Peter Gavette, National Park Service archeologist for the Golden Gate

National Recreation Area, examined the roster of surgeons who were stationed at Point

San Jose in the late nineteenth century to see if any were involved with anatomical studies during their tenure. Based on his investigation of these surgeons, Gavette proposes Dr. Edwin Bentley as the most likely person responsible for the anatomization of the remains in the Point San Jose assemblage (Gavette 2018). Dr. Bentley, depicted in

Figure 6, was stationed in California from 1869-1875 and served as post surgeon at Point

San Jose from 1871-1874 (Cobb 1980; Powell and Shippen 1892:35; Wilson 1998). This tenure was considerably longer than many other surgeons at the post, who usually only served a few months, and overlaps nicely with the estimated date ranges for the material artifacts in the Point San Jose assemblage (Gavette 2018; Locke Barton 2018). Dr.

Bentley’s medical career was devoted to the study of anatomy, pathology, and surgical techniques. Furthermore, there is ample evidence to support his collection of “specimens”

(portions of the body or its tissues) for anatomical and pathological study.

Figure 6. Undated photograph of Dr. Edwin Bentley. This photograph is in the public domain, accessed from the digital collections of the National Library of Medicine.

Edwin Bentley was born in 1824 in New London, Connecticut (Lamb

1900:111). He earned his medical degree from the University Medical College of New

York City in 1849 and established a practice in Norwich, Connecticut (Cobb 1980). Dr.

Bentley enlisted in the army in 1861 and served as a physician and surgeon during the

Civil War (Henker 2019). In 1862, a circular issued by Surgeon General William

Hammond established the Army Medical Museum and directed medical officers to

“diligently collect and forward to the office of the Surgeon General all specimens of morbid anatomy, surgical or medical, which may be regarded as valuable” (Devine

2017). A subsequent circular directed medical officers to submit case studies, which were later compiled into the six-part Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion

(1861-1865) (Devine 2017). Dr. Bentley was one of five brigade surgeons given special

32 recognition for the quality and high volume of their contributions to the office of the

Surgeon General (Gavette 2018). Dr. Bentley submitted more scientific articles than any other surgeon, including over 100 autopsy reports (Gavette 2018).

In addition to his contribution of autopsy and surgical reports, Dr. Bentley sent at least 205 anatomical specimens to the newly-formed Army Medical Museum in

Washington, D.C. (now the National Museum of Health and Medicine; Lamb 1917:148).

During this time, Dr. Bentley also apparently retained anatomical specimens for his personal use. In 1869, a keg of human body parts was discovered at the former home of

Dr. Edwin Bentley in Norwich, Connecticut. Apparently, Dr. Bentley had been shipping amputated limbs and other specimens of anatomical or pathological interest to his former home for temporary storage, and the keg had been mistakenly included in the current resident’s estate sale (Sacramento Daily Union 1869:1). The grisly discovery caused a

“lively sensation” among the crowd of townspeople, but their concerns were quickly quieted upon the explanation of the keg’s origins (Sacramento Daily Union 1869:1).

Apparently, the personal retention of anatomical specimens by medical professionals was not considered to be particularly unusual at the time.

After the end of the Civil War, Dr. Bentley continued to serve in the Army and practice medicine in civilian venues. In 1868, Dr. Bentley served a short tenure as the first Professor of Anatomy at Howard University in Washington, D.C., where his teaching activities included “demonstrations at the post mortem table” (Lamb 1900:112).

Dr. Bentley was then transferred to California in 1869 (Cobb 1980). During his time on the West Coast, Dr. Bentley served as the post-surgeon for Point San Jose from 1871-

1874 and as Professor of Descriptive and Microscopic Anatomy and Pathology at the

Medical College of the Pacific (now the Stanford University School of Medicine) from

1870-1875 (Powell and Shippen 1892:35; Wilson 1998). He also operated a clinic and served at the pathologist for the City and County Hospital of San Francisco (Gavette

2018). Dr. Bentley contributed numerous publications to the Pacific Medical and Surgical

Journal between 1871-1874, including a regular series on pathology, which was a relatively young science in the mid-to-late nineteenth century (Gavette 2018; Bentley

1870; Michael 1955:427).

Dr. Bentley apparently relished the opportunities for anatomical study on the

West Coast and was well-respected by his colleagues. Gibbons and Gibbons, the editors of the Pacific Medical and Surgical Journal, praised Bentley’s experience in practical pathology as “not excelled, if equaled, on this coast” (1872:225). In his 1872 commencement address for the Medical College of the Pacific, Dr. Bentley extolled the benefits of studying anatomy in California (Daily Alta California 1872:1). He did not discuss specific California anatomy laws, but proclaimed California as the leader “in the matter of assistance lent by States to carry on anatomical study and researches [sic]”

(Daily Alta California 1872:1). He praised the “liberal enactments” in the State to support anatomy research and the “ample” supply of bodies available for study (Daily Alta

California 1872:1). He contrasted the attitudes towards anatomical study in California with those back East:

In the Eastern States there was a strong and deeply-rooted prejudice in this regard, which had existed in all times even up to the present day. There the physician is compelled to risk his life, liberty and reputation to obtain the requisite anatomical knowledge to enable him to intelligently and conscientiously practice his profession. For if he is detected in obtaining material for dissection, he is denounced as a monster, and is held up in the community as “A Body Snatcher” [Daily Alta California 1872:1, emphasis in original].

After his tenure in California, Dr. Bentley continued his long and distinguished career in medicine. In 1878, he was transferred to Little Rock, Arkansas, where he co-founded the Medical Department of Arkansas Industrial University (now the

College of Medicine of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences) (Henker 2019).

He later retired from the Army and actively practiced medicine in Little Rock until his death in 1917 at the age of 92 (Henker 2019). Dr. Bentley’s contributions to the study of anatomy, pathology, and surgery and his demonstrated collection of anatomical specimens make him a likely candidate for the anatomization of the remains in the Point

San Jose assemblage.

Theoretical Orientation

One of the primary goals of this thesis is to interpret the “death experiences” of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage through an understanding of the anatomization of their bodies, and explore what the circumstances of their deaths can reveal about the social status and experiences of these individuals during life. This thesis will take a social bioarchaeology approach to the study of cutmarks in the Point

San Jose assemblage, using the theories of structural violence and personhood. This theoretical framework will facilitate the discussion of social inequality and race as they relate to nineteenth-century practices of autopsy and dissection.

Social Bioarchaeology

Interpretations of structural violence fall under the umbrella of “social bioarchaeology,” a recently-named approach which integrates critical social theory into studies of human skeletal remains in past populations (Agarwal and Glencross 2011).

Social bioarchaeology integrates osteological data with insights from archaeology, ethnography, history, and sociology to build rich contextual analyses of past societies with an emphasis on humans as social actors (Crandall and Martin 2014:430). The application of social bioarchaeology within historic contexts can also help reveal the experience of communities that are often “voiceless” in the historic record, such as women, children, immigrants, and the enslaved (Agarwal and Glencross 2011:6; Orser

2010:128). This thesis draws upon the theories of personhood and structural violence to interpret a skeletal assemblage from nineteenth century San Francisco.

Dissection and autopsy have very different implications for the personhood and social status of the deceased. The death experience of dissected individuals, namely their dismemberment and informal discard, reflects the low status of these individuals during life (Bruwelheide et al. 2017:58). Many bioarchaeologists describe the dissection of the poor and enslaved without the consent of these individuals or their families as a form of structural violence (Nystrom 2014; Halling and Seidemann 2017:166). Nancy

Scheper-Hughes (2011) outlines how biological death is not the end of the social life of an individual, and argues that death may even serve to intensify the personhood of the deceased for those left behind. The treatment of the dead, thus, evokes relationships and structural forces that extend far beyond the life of the deceased individual.

Structural Violence

Structural violence is defined as “harm done to individuals or groups through the normalization of social inequalities in political-economic organization” (Nystrom

2014:765). Specifically, structural violence is the result of unequal access to critical resources coupled with disparities in the power to control the distribution of these

36 resources (Farmer et al. 2006). Studies of structural violence have traditionally focused on the lived experiences of individuals and the impacts of structural violence on health and differential mortality (Nystrom 2014). More recently, Nystrom (2014) and others have been broadening the scope of structural violence to include “death experiences,” including the subjection of certain bodies to postmortem examinations.

In the United States and Britain during the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, dissection was used as punishment for executed criminals, and as a deterrent to crime and poverty (Nystrom 2014). Nystrom (2014) argues that dissection could only function as an effective deterrent if there was a societal consensus regarding the violent nature of dissection and the conceptualization of the body as a social entity, capable of suffering from such abuses. Therefore, the passing of anatomy laws in the United States in the mid- late 1800s that legalized the dissection of unclaimed bodies from almshouses was an act of structural violence. According to Nystrom (2014) and Novak (2017), due to the psychological and physical harm resulting from this practice, which disproportionately affected the lower strata of society, unwanted dissections can have profound effects for not only the physical body, but also the social identity of the decedent, and the psyches of their living relatives.

Nystrom (2014) stresses, however, that evidence of postmortem examination is not necessarily evidence of structural violence. The identification of structural violence in the bioarchaeological record is dependent on the accurate differentiation between autopsy and dissection (Nystrom 2014). Novak (2017) argues that bodies were treated as subjects (or persons) in the context of autopsy, but objects (or things) in the context of dissection. The social status of the deceased was largely the determining factor in what

37 type of postmortem examination a body was subjected to (Novak 2017). Due to the disfiguring and dehumanizing nature of dissection and its use as a punishment for criminals, dissection was more emotionally fraught than autopsy (Nystrom 2014).

Individuals who were autopsied, in contrast, were deemed important enough to warrant an investigation into their cause of death (Nystrom 2017a). Furthermore, autopsied individuals were typically interred as single burials in a formal cemetery context whereas dissected individuals may be commingled, disarticulated, and interred in informal disposal areas such as wells and middens (Nystrom 2017a).

Personhood

Duncan and Schwarz (2014) argue that the consideration of how bodies are divided, disarticulated, and manipulated after death can shed light on how persons and bodies are conceptualized. Autopsy and dissection are both forms of body fragmentation, and consequently provide insights for the interpretation of the lived experiences of the individuals subject to these postmortem examinations (Duncan and Schwarz 2014:155).

The more limited interventions associated with autopsy represent a greater retention of the personhood of the individual, further reinforced by their respectful burial as a single interment in a formal cemetery (Nystrom 2017b).

In contrast, the disarticulation, fragmentation, and commingling of dissected body parts suggests a dehumanized, objectified view of these bodies (Nystrom 2017b).

During dissection, the personhood of the body is literally eroded through the

“atomization” of the body into usable parts (Nystrom 2017b:338). This denial of personhood is further reinforced by the interment of body parts in non-cemetery contexts,

38 such as middens and privies, alongside other discards such as butchered faunal remains and medical waste (Nystrom 2017a).

Identifying Structural Violence

Two principles will guide the theoretical orientation of this thesis: 1) the death experiences of the individuals subject to postmortem examinations reflect their lived experiences; and 2) the lived experiences of the deceased, specifically their social status, are materialized in their bodies (or embodied) during the processes of autopsy and dissection. The following criteria for structural violence in the context of historical autopsy and dissection practices were gleaned from Nystrom (2014; 2017a; 2017b) and

Novak (2017):

 Osteological evidence for dissection

 Commingling, fragmentation and disarticulation of the body

 Informal (non-cemetery) burial context, such as a privy, midden, or well

 Interment of human remains with other discards, such as animal bones or medical

waste

 Public perception of dissection as an unwanted outcome (e.g. the association of

dissection with the punishment of criminals)

 Evidence that dissected individuals were disproportionately drawn from

marginalized groups in society (e.g. from an oppressed racial or ethnic group and/or

of lower socioeconomic status)

 Evidence that bodies were procured illicitly and/or without the consent of the

deceased individuals or their families.

This thesis will explore the evidence for anatomization on the human skeletal remains at Point San Jose in an effort the understand the social status and experiences of these individuals during life. Distinguishing between skeletal evidence of autopsy and dissection will have profound implications for the interpretation of this assemblage.

The following section addresses some dimensions of social inequality in nineteenth century San Francisco that may inform our interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage.

Social Inequality in Nineteenth Century San Francisco

By the time of Dr. Edwin Bentley’s tenure as post surgeon at Point San Jose,

California’s anatomy laws were exceedingly favorable to physicians, providing them with a regular supply of unclaimed bodies from prisons, public hospitals, and county poorhouses. While a boon to anatomists and pathologists like Dr. Bentley, these statutes targeted some of the community’s most vulnerable populations, namely individuals of low socioeconomic status. In the Eastern regions of the United States, similar practices led to the disproportionate targeting of African American individuals for anatomization

(Nystrom 2017a:2,4). This pattern is not evident on the West Coast, as California had a very small African American population in the late nineteenth century. In the 1870 census, African Americans comprised less than one percent of the population of San

Francisco at only 1,330 individuals (Gibson and Jung 2005:35).

The small size of the African American population did not diminish racial tensions in San Francisco. Late nineteenth-century San Francisco had a significant population of Asian descent (eight percent of the population in 1870), most of whom were Chinese or Chinese Americans (Gibson and Jung 2005:35). The Chinese were

40 considered to be at the bottom of the “racial ladder” in California, and the primary racial divide in San Francisco was between “white” and “Chinese” rather than “white” and

“black” as it was in the rest of the country (Berglund 2005:6). Over 25,000 Chinese immigrants arrived in California during the Gold Rush and quickly became the state’s largest foreign-born ethnic group (Kanazawa 2005:4).

Discrimination against the Chinese fomented in the mining camps as the

Chinese were seen as a threat to the productivity and profits of American-born miners

(Kanazawa 2005:6). Chinese communities in California continued to face severe discrimination after the Gold Rush and were subject to exclusionary laws and targeted taxes (Kanazawa 2005:9). Nationwide hostility against the Chinese culminated in the passage of the federal Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 (Kanazawa 2005:2). It is unclear whether Chinese individuals in California were targeted for anatomization as African

Americans were in other regions of the United States, but this is one potential avenue for future research. Understanding the ethnic background and socioeconomic status of the individuals in the Point San Jose assemblage could prove critical for the interpretation of structural violence at this site.

Summary

For over two millennia there has been “questionable legality and social unease surrounding dissection” and autopsy (Chapman and Kostro 2017:62). The dramatic growth of medical education and research following the Renaissance created new social unrest over the procurement of cadavers for anatomical study. By the time of the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage, the study of anatomy and pathology were

41 well established in the San Francisco Bay Area and California’s liberal anatomy laws provided medical schools with a steady stream of cadavers in the form of unclaimed bodies from public institutions. Based on the historical and archaeological context of the assemblage, a prominent anatomist, physician, and pathologist named Dr. Edwin Bentley may be responsible for the anatomization of the human skeletal remains discovered at

Point San Jose.

A social bioarchaeological approach using the theories of structural violence and personhood may aid in interpreting the social status and lived experiences of these individuals, who may derive from marginalized communities in late nineteenth century

San Francisco. Distinguishing between the skeletal evidence for autopsy and dissection will have profound implications for the interpretation of this assemblage. Other criteria for structural violence include: evidence for commingling and disarticulation of the body, informal burial with other discards, negative public perception of dissection, and illegal and nonconsensual procurement of bodies. Next, Chapter III will review the bioarchaeological literature on autopsy and dissection and address methodological approaches for the analysis of cut marks on human skeletal remains.

CHAPTER III

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter presents an overview of the archaeological literature related to the recording and analysis of cut marks on bone. This overview includes insights from zooarchaeology, human paleontology, archaeology, historical archaeology, and forensic anthropology. Next, the chapter reviews the zonation recording method of Knüsel and

Outram (2004) and introduces its use in this thesis project for the recording of the Point

San Jose assemblage and the locations of cut and saw marks on each fragment. The largest section of the chapter consists of a detailed review of 30 bioarchaeology studies from the United States and United Kingdom that present evidence for autopsy or dissection. The osteological evidence for anatomization is discussed in detail for five activities: autopsy, dissection, surgery, specimen preparation, and experimentation. In the final section of the chapter, the approach to hypothesis testing in this thesis project is briefly discussed in light of the results of the bioarchaeology literature review.

Analysis of Cut Marks on Bone

Zooarchaeology

Identifying cut marks. Archaeological assemblages are the result of a complex interaction of site formation processes, and archaeologists must take care to distinguish between these natural and cultural processes (Schiffer 1983:676;682). When examining cut marks on bone in archaeological contexts, researchers first need to distinguish these marks from other taphonomic factors. Careful examination is required to distinguish

43 trampling damage from true cut marks (Olsen and Shipman 1988). Carnivore gnawing may also mimic cuts on bone, but often includes tell-tale puncture marks (Landon

1996:60). Rodent gnawing and root etching may sometimes resemble cut marks on bone, however these processes do not produce long, linear incisions and are patterned differently than butchery, autopsy, or dissection cuts (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:79).

Surface abrasions from sedimentary and fluvial processes may be particularly difficult to distinguish, but these abrasions are typically smaller, more numerous, and more random in orientation than stone tool cut marks (Fisher 1995:17; Landon 1996:60).

The margins of surface abrasions are more irregular than the margins of cut marks, and surface abrasions typically result in other damage or deterioration of the bone itself

(McFarlin and Wineski 1997:108). Finally, excavation unfortunately may result in damage that mimics cut or chop marks to human bone, however this damage is usually identified by color differences between the freshly abraded surfaces and the rest of the bone (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:79; McFarlin and Wineski 1997:108). Furthermore, the margins of excavation damage are often “caved in” by the blunt force of excavation tools, a feature not seen in cut marks created by metal blades or saws (McFarlin and Wineski

1997:198).

The work of Richard Potts and Pat Shipman helped define criteria for the identification of anthropogenic cut marks; these marks have straight and narrow channels which are V-shaped to U-shaped in cross section with multiple parallel striae on the cut walls when viewed under microscopy (Potts and Shipman 1981:577; Landon 1996:60).

True cut marks also sometimes have “shoulder effects,” which are other marks running parallel to the cut that are considered diagnostic of the human use of stone tools (Potts

44 and Shipman 1981:577; Fisher 1995:15). Autopsy and dissection cuts made by sharp metal tools are generally easily recognized with the naked eye or a simple hand lens due to their “clean” linear intrusion into the bone and the characteristic striations visible within the cut surfaces (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:108). In some cases, however, microscopy may be needed to definitively distinguish cut marks from other taphonomic surface modifications. Scanning electron microscopy offers continuous magnification and can produce high quality photomicrographs (Fisher 1995:51). In addition, casts of cut marks can be made to highlight surface topography and to protect fragile specimens from excessive handling (Fisher 1995:51).

Interpretation of cut marks. Several classificatory schemes have been proposed for the systematic recording of cut mark variations. Different types of cut marks may be associated with different steps, activities, or tool types in the processing of remains (Landon 1996:58). Categories of cut marks include: scrape (shallow, straight mark that may be single or multiple), cut (straight narrow line, deeper than a scrape), chop (results in a wedge of bone being removed), shear (a straight edge where bone has been cut through), and saw (parallel striations from a toothed instrument) (Landon 1996, following Crader 1990; Fisher 1995). In the context of autopsy and dissections with metal tools, modifications are classified as either cut marks (created by an incised blade such as a scalpel) or saw marks (created by a toothed instrument) (McFarlin and Wineski

1997:108). Saw marks may penetrate the surface of a bone, or they may completely sever or “section” the bone into multiple pieces (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:110).

In addition to the morphology of cutmarks, researchers also consider the orientation, anatomical location, and potential “purpose” of surface modifications when

45 constructing their interpretations (Lyman 1987; Landon 1996:59). In zooarchaeology, the purpose of a cut mark refers to the utility of cuts in that area for butchery. For example, this could include the proximity to muscle origin or insertion sites (Lyman 1987). Binford

(1981:47) suggested that cuts on the lower legs and phalanges and the lower margins of the mandible and skull are associated with skinning, while cuts near the long bone epiphyses and the surfaces of the vertebrae and pelvis are associated with disarticulation.

He originally proposed that filleting results in longitudinal cuts on the shafts of long bones (Binford 1981:47).

Although the motivations behind autopsy and dissection are very different from that of butchery, bioarchaeologists can take the same approach to the analysis of cutmarks on human remains by assessing the educational purpose or medicolegal value of each cut. This approach may help differentiate between dissection cuts for teaching and research, cuts related to surgery or the collection of pathological specimens, and experimental or exploratory cuts. These inferences are discussed in detail later in this chapter.

Cut Marks on Human Remains

Archaeological contexts. Postmortem cut marks are analyzed on human remains in a variety of contexts, including paleoanthropology, archaeology, historical studies, and forensic anthropological investigations. In paleoanthropological and archaeological studies, cutmarks on hominin and human remains are analyzed to understand cannibalistic practices, mortuary ritual, and trophy-taking. Much research has focused on the criteria for distinguishing cannibalism from mortuary rituals that involve defleshing or disturbance of primary burials. For example, White (1986) described

46 cutmarks on the cranium of an early anatomically modern human, “Bodo,” as evidence of mortuary defleshing based on the location and orientation of the cuts. Excarnation, in which flesh is deliberately removed from the corpse with tools or by animal means (e.g. vultures), has been documented in various cultures ranging from the ancient Maya, to

Neolithic Çatalhöyük and Medieval Europe (Weiss-Krejci 2006; Pilloud et al. 2016;

Weiss-Krejci 2005).

Evidence for cannibalism has been evaluated in Neandertal populations, the

Anasazi in the American Southwest, and in Fiji (Villa et al. 1986; Turner and Turner

1999; Degusta 1999). Proposed physical and contextual evidence indicative of cannibalism include: human bones scattered in domestic settings, the burial of multiple individuals at once in a manner inconsistent with the typical burial pattern, absence of grave goods, human and animal remains buried together, the absence of animal scavenging, perimortem fracture and cut marks on human bone, evidence of burning, absence or crushing of vertebrae, evidence of hammerstone marks, “pot polish,” human teeth marks on human bone, and coprolite analysis (Knüsel and Outram 2006:255-258;

Lambert et al. 2000; Turner 1983; White 1992).

Interpersonal violence is another potential source for cut marks and other postmortem modifications on human remains (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:79). Andrushko et al. (2005) describe evidence for postmortem trophy-taking from burials in Central

California, including perimortem forearm amputation with cut marks on the distal humerus; drilled and polished radii and ulnae matching these individuals were found elsewhere at the site. Scalping during raiding and warfare is documented in prehistoric and historic North America and can be identified osteologically (Owsley et al. 1977).

Historical contexts. Different considerations are needed for the analysis of cut marks in historical contexts for both human and faunal remains. Cut marks in historical times are produced primarily with metal tools rather than stone tools. Metal tools tend to leave deeper and more distinctive marks than stone tools and require different classificatory schemes for interpretation (Landon 1996:59). There is an extensive body of literature on butchery practices in historical archaeology, with many studies that examine food preferences, food practices, and ethnic differences in the historical United States

(e.g. Landon 1996; Reitz 1987; Crader 1990). Cut marks on historical human remains are studied in the context of surgery, medical experimentation, dissection, and autopsy; these practices are discussed in detail later in this chapter.

Forensic contexts. The analysis of skeletal trauma is a critical component of forensic anthropological investigations in a modern medicolegal setting. The forensic anthropologist must carefully determine whether any sharp force trauma, such as cut marks, were inflicted antemortem (before death), perimortem (around the time of death), or postmortem (after death) (Symes et al. 2002:204). Symes and colleagues describe a burn case in which the remains had to be defleshed with scalpels prior to analysis; incidental scalpel cuts incurred during defleshing were differentiated from perimortem trauma using a scanning electron microscope (2002:413-416). Postmortem cut and saw marks may indicate mutilation or dismemberment of the corpse by the assailant (Symes et al. 2002:404). In one forensic case, cut marks on the mastoid processes, zygomatic bones, occipital, phalanges, and metacarpals were interpreted as evidence of defleshing and skinning of the victim to obscure their identity (Symes et al. 2002:423-425). The

48 osteological markers used in this case are similar to the criteria proposed by Binford

(1981) for identifying evidence of skinning on faunal remains.

Osteological Zonation Method

This thesis will use Knüsel and Outram’s (2004) osteological zonation method to record the Point San Jose assemblage. Knüsel and Outram (2004) proposed a new method for recording cut marks and other taphonomic alterations on large fragmentary and commingled assemblages of human skeletal remains. Instead of recording skeletal individuals or elements, this method divides each bone into one or more anatomical zones. The use of zones allows for greater precision in the recording of fragments and the location of taphonomic alterations, facilitating several types of analyses that may not otherwise be possible for fragmentary and commingled assemblages. The authors designed this recording method for use in a variety of contexts including: historical archaeology (e.g. medieval charnel deposits, church crypts, and crowded cemeteries), prehistoric archaeology (e.g. excarnation, trophy taking, cannibalism, and animal scavenging), forensic anthropology investigations (e.g. dismemberment and commingling), and for the study of curated museum collections which may have become commingled through institutional practices and poor record-keeping (Knüsel and Outram

2004:85-86).

The zones used by Knüsel and Outram (2004) for the human skeleton were derived from Dobney and Rielly’s (1988) zonation recording method for faunal remains.

Dobney and Rielly’s zones are based on fracture patterns and anatomical features, such as muscle attachment sites, to approximate bone fragments that are commonly encountered

49 in archaeological contexts (Knüsel and Outram 2004:86). Dobney and Rielly’s zones were designed to be generally applicable to “all the economically important domestic animals,” facilitating inter-species comparisons (1988:81). Knüsel and Outram (2004) adapted these zones for human skeletal anatomy with the intention of facilitating direct comparisons between taphonomic patterns on human and faunal remains. Such comparisons may be useful for the interpretation of cannibalism, human sacrifice, or other processes that involve similar treatment of human and animal remains (Knüsel and

Outram 2004:86).

This integrated approach to recording human and faunal remains was applied by Outram and colleagues (2005) to a case study from Velim Skalka, Czech Republic.

Excavations revealed a large commingled assemblage of human and faunal remains with signs of butchery or trauma. The osteological zonation methods of Dobney and Rielly

(1988) and Knüsel and Outram (2004) were used to record and directly compare trauma on the human and faunal remains. The patterning of taphonomic alterations on the human skeletal remains were found to be consistent with trauma and perimortem injury, while the taphonomic alterations on the faunal remains were found to be consistent with butchery (Outram et al. 2005:1708). The use of osteological zonation methods and the direct comparison of human and faunal data helped exclude ritual disarticulation and excarnation as possible interpretations for the cutmarks seen on the human skeletal remains (Outram et al. 2005:1708).

Knüsel and Outram’s (2004) zonation method has also been adapted to refine estimates for minimum number of individuals (MNI) (Osterholtz et al. 2014; Stodder and

Osterholtz 2010), to assess the completeness of fragments (Lockau et al. 2013), and for

50 the recording of natural and cultural taphonomic alterations (Osterholtz 2012). The widest application of Knüsel and Outram’s (2004) osteological zonation method, however, has been by the United States Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency’s

Central Identification Laboratory (DPAA-CIL). The zonation method was used to record the large commingled assemblage of human remains from the USS Oklahoma and is the standard recording method for human remains at DPAA-CIL at Offut Air Force Base in

Omaha, Nebraska (Brown 2017; Palmiotto et al. 2019).

An open-source web application for forensic anthropology recording and analysis is currently in development by the University of Nebraska, Omaha, in consultation with DPAA-CILThis application, known as CoRA (Commingled Remains

Analytics), utilizes Knüsel and Outram’s (2004) osteological zonation method for the inventory of commingled assemblages (Brown 2017; CoRa 2019). The developers of

CoRA hope that the adoption of this web application by forensic anthropologists and bioarchaeologists will lead to greater standardization of recording and analysis for human skeletal remains and facilitate direct comparisons between assemblages (Brown 2017).

The osteological zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) was selected for use in this thesis due to the fragmentary, commingled, and disarticulated nature of the

Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. Assemblages of this nature present unique challenges for recording and analysis and the zonation method is designed specifically to address these challenges. The Knüsel and Outram (2004) zonation method also facilitates the precise recording of the location of taphonomic alterations. This standardizes the recording of cut and saw marks on the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage, significantly streamlining the data collection process for this large assemblage. Finally, the zonation

51 method was designed to test hypotheses about taphonomic processes and facilitate direct comparisons between assemblages (see Outram et al. 2005, above). This thesis uses the zonation method to construct testable hypotheses for discerning between the taphonomic signatures of autopsy, dissection, and other anatomization activities. This thesis provides a model for similar data collection in future studies, potentially aided by the use of

CoRA, to increase standardization in the bioarchaeological study of autopsy and dissection and facilitate direct comparisons between sites.

Evidence for Anatomization

One of the goals of this thesis project is to conduct a comprehensive review of all skeletal assemblages that have been excavated and published in the United States that show evidence of anatomization. This was achieved through a “snowball” or chain- sampling approach beginning with Nystrom (2017), The Bioarchaeology of Autopsy and

Dissection in the United States. This publication was selected as the starting point for the literature review since it is the most recent and comprehensive source that explicitly addresses autopsy and dissection in bioarchaeological studies. All of the skeletal assemblages mentioned in this volume were recorded, then the references associated with these assemblages were consulted for any additional assemblages with evidence of anatomization, and so on. This chain sampling approach was continued until no new assemblages or references could be found. The results of this literature review are summarized in detail in Appendix A.

The bioarchaeology literature review ultimately yielded a list of 23 sites in the

United States and seven sites in the United Kingdom (U.K.) that display archaeological

52 evidence of autopsy or dissection. The United Kingdom sites were included based on references to these assemblages in the literature from the United States, and their inclusion in Mitchell (2012). The U.K. sites were added to enlarge the sample of available data for this project, but this endeavor was not a comprehensive review of the skeletal evidence for autopsy and dissection in the United Kingdom. The results of the literature review are used later in this thesis to construct testable hypotheses for the prevalence of cut and saw marks in the Point San Jose assemblage.

The original research design for this thesis included a comprehensive survey of historical autopsy and dissection manuals intended to enhance the diagnostic criteria employed in this thesis and contextualize the interpretation of cutmarks on the Point San

Jose assemblage. However, this approach was ultimately abandoned for two reasons.

First, it was discovered that many of the publications in the bioarchaeological literature review performed comprehensive historical research and incorporated insights from autopsy and dissection manuals into their analyses. Thus, the bioarchaeology literature review doubled as a rough survey of the major autopsy and dissection manuals and it seems unlikely that an independent review of these sources would contribute additional meaningful insights for this project relative to the amount of research this endeavor would require. Second, autopsy and dissection procedures were only formalized towards the end of the nineteenth century (King and Meehan 1973:535-536). It is unclear whether the practitioners of autopsy and dissection at the sites included in the literature review were working from, or had access to, a written procedure. Furthermore, dissection and surgical practices have changed over time so the information in autopsy and dissection manuals may not be relevant for all times and locations. For example, McFarlin and

Wineski (1997:157) found that nineteenth century dissection practices at the Medical

College of Georgia were far more extensive and placed greater emphasis on practicing surgical techniques relative to practices in the twentieth century.

The bioarchaeology literature review revealed five main categories of interpretations that are used to explain the patterning of cut and saw marks observed in these assemblages: autopsy, surgery or surgical practice, dissection, specimen preparation, and experimentation. Autopsy refers to the medicolegal investigation of the body to determine cause of death. Surgery refers to invasive medical procedures undertaken on a living individual for the treatment of trauma or pathology. Only surgeries that impacted the skeleton, typically through cut and saw marks, can be recognized in archaeological contexts.

Surgery is typically understood as a premortem activity but may be considered perimortem in the case of individuals who did not survive the procedure. Postmortem practice surgeries on cadavers are also observed. Dissection refers to the opening of the body to examine its internal anatomy for the purpose of medical education or research.

Specimen preparation refers to the retention and preservation of body portions or bodily tissues for the purpose of teaching, display, or research. Finally, “experimentation” is a poorly defined term that some authors used to describe unusual cuts or saw marks to the body that did not match their expectations for autopsy, dissection, surgery, or specimen preparation.

This section describes each of these postmortem interventions in detail: autopsy, surgery, dissection, specimen preparation, and experimentation. First, the archaeological, historical, and / or social context of these practices are introduced, where

54 information is available. Next, osteological evidence from the bioarchaeology literature review is presented and discussed. The studies included in the literature review based their inferences on multiple lines of evidence including the patterning of cut and saw marks observed on the skeletons, documentary evidence associated with these sites, and historical autopsy and dissection manuals. Finally, any quantitative information regarding the prevalence of cut and saw marks is reported. Appendix B provides a diagnostic table of criteria for these five anatomization activities based on the findings of this chapter.

This diagnostic table also describes the osteological zones affected by each criterion, based on the zones of Knüsel and Outram (2004), which are described in Chapter IV and illustrated in Appendix C.

Autopsy

Context. The literature review generated a list of eight skeletal assemblages that present unambiguous osteological evidence for autopsy, deriving mainly from public cemeteries. The literature review also revealed eight additional assemblages that bear evidence for both autopsy and dissection activities. These assemblages derive from almshouse cemeteries and medical institutions, contexts that are more closely associated with dissection. The insights outlined below draw upon all 15 skeletal assemblage that show evidence of autopsy.

Autopsied individuals are likely to be found as complete, articulated skeletons in formal burial contexts, such as public cemeteries or family crypts (Chapman and

Kostro 2017:65). These burial contexts may reflect the relatively higher status of individuals subject to autopsy. Autopsied individuals are more likely than dissected individuals to be from elite and bourgeois classes because their deaths were deemed

55 important enough to warrant a medicolegal inquiry (Novak 2017:88). Alternatively, individuals of any social class may be autopsied if they died as the result of pathology.

Novak (2017:88) argues that the relatively respectful and formal treatment of autopsied bodies retains their social identity as subject and person, in contrast to the depersonalization of bodies subjected to dissection.

Osteological evidence. Autopsies are typically identified by evidence of craniotomy (opening of the skull), or craniotomy and thoracotomy (opening of the chest cavity), combined with the absence of cutmarks on the rest of the postcranial skeleton.

Since craniotomy and thoracotomy may also be seen in dissections, autopsies are most accurately identified on individually-buried skeletons that are relatively complete. While standard autopsies typically do not involve examinations beyond the skull and thorax, dissection of other tissues may be undertaken when there is visible trauma or pathology that warrants investigation. For example, autopsies at the post cemetery of Fort Craig, included postmortem interventions such as the removal of the thoracic spine, the excision of the pubic symphysis, and transverse cuts to the lumbar spine (Goff 2009). The extended autopsies seen at Fort Craig are likely a reflection of the higher rate of traumatic injury at this cemetery, which was primarily utilized for veterans of the Civil War and other regional conflicts, in comparison to the civilian cemeteries that make up the bulk of this literature review.

Craniotomy is identified by transverse or oblique saw marks that completely penetrate the circumference of the skull for the removal of the cranial cap, allowing for access to the brain (Owsley 1995; Halling and Seidemann 2017:173). Craniotomy saw marks may be associated with superficial cut marks on the sides and back of skull for

56 detachment of the scalp (Crist and Sorg 2017:32). Many autopsied remains show evidence of false starts and directional changes in the sawing of the cranium for craniotomy (Bruwelheide et al. 2017; Crist and Sorg 2017), but overall autopsies were more likely to be performed by skilled doctors since they were conducted for the purpose of assisting medicolegal investigations (Chapman and Kostro 2017:65).

Thoracotomy, or the opening of the thoracic cavity for examination of the heart and other internal organs, is also associated with autopsy (Owsley 1995). Skeletal evidence of thoracotomy includes sagittal cuts or saw marks on the sternum, anterior ribs, and clavicle (Halling and Seidemann 2017:173). In some cases, examination of the thorax may extend to dissection or defleshing of the vertebral column, which may result in cutmarks to the vertebrae and posterior ribs (Richards et al. 2017:244).

Thoracotomy does not always leave marks on the bone, as many historical autopsy manuals suggest cutting through the costal cartilage, rather than the ribs themselves, to open the thoracic cavity (Dougherty and Sullivan 2017:222). Furthermore, there is historical evidence that some autopsy practitioners avoided damage to the sternum to facilitate later cosmetic reconstruction of the thorax (Fowler and Powers

2012a:168). Cuts to the clavicle, however, are common in both autopsy and dissection. In autopsy, sectioning of the clavicle may facilitate the examination of the organs of the neck, as well as the opening and removal of organs from the thoracic cavity (Richards et al. 2017:246).

Prevalence. Autopsied individuals are relatively rare in the public cemetery samples, often just a single individual out of the entire recovered assemblage. In the eight assemblages with unambiguous evidence of autopsy, the overall prevalence of

57 individuals with signs of autopsy ranges from 0.2 – 7.8 percent. In all the studies, autopsies were primarily identified by evidence of craniotomy. Three examples of autopsy and craniotomy were associated with visible pathologies: scurvy, congenital syphilis, and hyperostosis frontalis interna (Crist and Sorg 2017; Novak 2017; Angel et al. 1987). Fort Craig is an outlier in among these samples, with an unusually high prevalence of autopsies at 7.8 percent (five out of 64 individuals). The higher prevalence of autopsies at this site may be related to its use as a military cemetery. The enlisted men buried at Fort Craig died as a result of injuries sustained in combat or were the victims of accidents, disease, homicide, or suicide—all circumstances which may warrant a formal death investigation (Goff 2009:3).

The eight samples with evidence of both autopsy and dissection activities show a wide range of craniotomy prevalences. It is anticipated that these sites will show a higher prevalence of craniotomies than the sites with evidence of autopsy alone, since craniotomy is a feature of both autopsy and dissection. The higher rate of craniotomies found in the almshouse cemeteries and medical institutions versus the public cemeteries may also be influenced by a rise in the use of autopsies at hospitals and asylums in the nineteenth century to investigate the origins of mental illness (Dougherty and Sullivan

2017:227).

Two sites show craniotomy prevalence rates in line with the autopsy sites above: one percent of individuals at the Spring Street Presbyterian Church, and 3.2 percent of individuals at the Erie County Poorhouse (Novak 2017; Nystrom et al. 2017).

Two sites have slightly higher craniotomy prevalence rates at 14 percent of individuals at the Newcastle Infirmary Burial Ground, and 9.4 – 13.4 percent at the Milwaukee County

Poorhouse (Chamberlain 2012; Dougherty and Sullivan 2017; Richards et al. 2017). The other four sites show a much higher prevalence for autopsy and craniotomy from 27.7 percent of primary burials at the Royal London Hospital to 82.1 percent of crania at the

Blockley Almshouse (Fowler and Powers 2012; Crist et al. 2017). For the few sites which report cut mark prevalences for postcranial elements, postmortem modifications are seen in 0.3 – 37.7 percent of ribs and 0.4 – 7.1 percent of sterna (Fowler and Powers 2012;

Dougherty and Sullivan 2017; Crist et al. 2017).

Surgery

Osteological evidence. Sometimes autopsied remains also show signs of surgeries attempted just prior to death. Trephination and amputation are the main surgical procedures that are commonly observed on skeletons in historical contexts (Dittmar and

Mitchell 2015:73). Trephination is a form of cranial surgery that involves removal of a section of cranial vault to alleviate pressure on the brain in the event of serious head injuries or certain pathologies (Bruwelheide et al. 2017:46). Amputation involves sawing transversely through one or more long bones to remove the distal portion of the limb.

Both trephination and amputation are typically limited to a single region of the body and are undertaken in response to trauma or pathology (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:73). If the procedures are successful and the individual lived for a time after surgery, the saw marks will show evidence of healing in the form of bone remodeling.

Evidence for trephination and amputation may also be seen in dissected individuals in the form of practice surgeries. The differentiation of perimortem amputation from postmortem surgical practice by students is extremely challenging in most circumstances because perimortem surgeries will exhibit no signs of healing. At the

Royal London Hospital in the nineteenth century, some individuals who died as a result of amputation procedures were later subject to autopsy, dissection, or even practice amputations postmortem, further complicating the interpretation of cutmarks in these remains (Fowler and Powers 2012:168). In some cases, however, practice surgeries may be identified by multiple interventions in the same region of the body, the absence of adjacent trauma or pathology, and the poor skill with which the procedures were conducted.

Prevalence. The literature review revealed nineteen sites with evidence for surgery or surgical practice. Trephination of the cranium was observed in eight of these sites. At two sites, bone remodeling of the circular saw cuts suggests that these trephinations represent successful premortem surgeries: the Albany County Almshouse

(Lowe 2017) and the Old Ashmolean Museum (Boston and Webb 2012). At James Fort, a circular saw mark on the cranium with no signs of healing was interpreted as a failed perimortem trephination (Bruwelheide 2017).

In contexts where dissections were also practiced, trephinations were attributed to postmortem surgical practice: 2.4 percent of individuals at the Milwaukee

County Poorhouse (Dougherty and Sullivan 2017); 8.1 percent of individuals at the

Blockley Almshouse (Crist et al. 2017); one individual (1.9 percent of those recovered), associated with a projectile injury and also subject to autopsy, at the Medical College of

Virginia (Owsley et al. 2017); one individual at the Medical College of Georgia

(McFarlin and Wineski 1997) and an unknown number of individuals at the Newcastle

Infirmary Burial Ground (Chamberlain 2012).

The literature review revealed 14 sites with evidence for amputation. In two cases, the amputations were clearly undertaken premortem as the severed bones showed signs of healing (Lowe 2017; Nystrom et al. 2017). The two military cemeteries also show evidence for premortem, or at least perimortem, amputations. At Snake Hill, associated with enlisted men from the War of 1812, 23.3 percent of individuals showed signs of amputation in the form of saw cuts to the femur, humerus, radius, and ulna

(Owsley et al. 1991). At the post cemetery of Fort Craig, 3.1 percent of individuals had evidence of amputation of the humerus and femur and an additional six amputated limbs were recovered, all associated with traumatic gunshot wounds (Goff 2009).

In four contexts where dissections were also practiced, evidence of amputation in the form of transverse saw marks to the long bones was attributed to postmortem surgical practice. The prevalence of severed long bones includes: up to 50 percent of femora and tibiae, and up to 33.3 percent of fibulae at Holden Chapel (Harvard

Medical School); (Hodge et al. 2017); 26 to 40 percent of long bones at the Blockley

Almshouse (Crist et al. 2017); between 1.8 to 7.6 percent of long bones at the Medical

College of Georgia (McFarlin and Wineski 1997); and several examples of practice amputations with circumferential knife cuts at William Hewson’s Anatomy School

(Kausmally 2012).

Six sites do not distinguish between pre-, peri-, and postmortem amputations.

These sites include three transected and missing limbs at the Alameda-Stone Cemetery

(Heilen et al. 2012); numerous bisected limb bones (approximately 25 percent of femora and tibiae, and 10 percent of upper limb bones) at the Worcester Royal Infirmary

(Western 2012); 200 amputated limb bones at the Newcastle Infirmary Burial Ground,

80.5 percent of which were tibiae and fibulae and 12.5 percent of femora (Chamberlain

2012); and a number of sawn long bones at the Royal London Hospital (Fowler and

Powers 2012), Charity Hospital (Halling and Seidemann 2017), and the Milwaukee

County Poor Farm (Dougherty and Sullivan 2017).

Three additional examples of surgery were described in this literature review that are neither trephination nor amputation. At Champlain’s Cemetery, Crist and Sorg

(2017) describe an individual whose anterior teeth and palate were removed with evidence of healing. At the Dunning Poorhouse, Grauer and colleagues (2017) describe a mandible with three circular perforations to the outer table of the bone, performed using an instrument like those used in cranial trephinations.

The perforations reveal the tooth roots and other internal structures, but the mandible lacks any signs of pathology or trauma. The lesions exhibit no signs of healing and are hypothesized to have occurred postmortem. The purpose of these marks is unclear, but the authors suggest some form of surgical practice or experimentation

(Grauer et al. 2017:310). Finally, excavations at the Royal London Hospital revealed a four long bones with several small holes drilled into them. These modifications do not conform to any known surgical practice and may suggest the creation of artifacts from human bone (Fowler and Powers 2012a:186).

Dissection

Context. In contrast to autopsied individuals, the bodies of dissected individuals are more fragmentary, disarticulated, and “atomized,” with cuts and saw marks of various skill levels, reflecting their use in teaching, research, and student practice (Chapman and Kostro 2017:65). Dissected remains more likely to be disposed of

62 in a covert or informal manner as isolated elements, commingled in multiple burials in potter’s fields or institutional cemeteries, or with other discards in wells, latrines, and middens (Dougherty and Sullivan 2017:208). Dissected remains are often found commingled with animal bones and medical waste (Blakely and Harrington 1997; Boston and Webb 2012; Bruwelheide et al. 2017; Chapman and Kostro 2017; Crist et al. 2017;

Hodge et al. 2017; Kausmally 2012; Owsley et al. 2017; Richards et al. 2017).

Individuals subject to dissection were disproportionately drawn from the poor, disenfranchised, enslaved, and racially marginalized, and their skeletal remains may bear bony evidence of malnutrition and poor health (Halling and Seidemann 2017:166).

The literature review revealed that most dissected remains were recovered in association with medical institutions, but were also found in association with almshouses, public cemeteries, and early colonial sites. In addition, one site from the United Kingdom featured dissected remains of executed criminals (Boston and Webb 2012), and one assemblage was derived from an anatomical collection of crania that were retained following dissection (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015).

Osteological evidence. Craniotomy and thoracotomy are features of both autopsy and dissection, complicating the identification of these activities on human skeletal remains. Any non-craniotomy cuts to the cranium, however, are generally considered to be evidence for dissection. Non-craniotomy cuts to the skull may include:

 Bisection of the cranium or mandible (Crist et al. 2017; Dougherty and Sullivan

2017; Kausmally 2012; Dittmar and Mitchell 2015; Owsley et al. 2017; McFarlin

and Wineski 1997);

 Other sectioning of the mandible, usually vertical (Fowler and Powers 2012a;

Halling and Seidemann 2017; McFarlin and Wineski 1997);

 Superficial cut marks to the scalp and muscle attachment sites for

defleshing(Boston and Webb 2012; Dittmar and Mitchell 2015; Western 2012;

Richards et al. 2017);

 Cut marks to the temporal bone for investigating the inner ear (Boston and Webb

2012; Grauer et al. 2017; Fowler and Powers 2012a; Halling and Seidemann 2017;

McFarlin and Wineski 1997);

 Cut marks to the facial bones for investigating internal facial anatomy, for example

the eyes, nose, mouth, and sinuses (Chamberlain 2012; Fowler and Powers 2012a;

McFarlin and Wineski 1997);

 Removal of the mandible as evidenced by cut marks to the condyle and ascending

ramus of the mandible and / or cut marks to the zygomatic process and glenoid

fossa of the temporal bone (Owsley et al. 2017; Boston and Webb 2012).

Although autopsy cut and saw marks are limited to the cranium and anterior thorax, dissected bodies may show cut marks throughout the postcranial skeleton (Novak

2017:94). Dissections may include saw cuts to bones that show no evidence of pathology, cut marks around joint surfaces for disarticulation, and cut marks near muscle attachment sites for defleshing (Western 2012; Halling and Seidemann 2017). Multiple cut marks in a single region and hesitation marks may indicate student work, either from inexperience or from the repetition of procedures on a single specimen (Chapman and Kostro 2017:67-

68; Halling and Seidemann 2017:177).

Some autopsies may involve oblique incision marks to the thoracic vertebrae and posterior ribs as part of the investigation of the chest cavity (Richards et al.

2017:244), however significant interventions to the vertebral column are considered to be evidence for dissection. Dissections may result in incisions to the vertebrae, but these are more commonly seen on the posterior aspect of the vertebral column during defleshing of the back and spine (Chapman and Kostro 2017). Dissections may also involve laminectomy, or the sawing of the vertebral lamina on either side of the spinous process in order to reveal the spinal column for examination (Dougherty and Sullivan 2017;

McFarlin and Wineski 1997; Nystrom et al. 2017).

Hemisection, the sagittal sectioning of vertebrae, may also be used to reveal the spinal column or the internal pelvic anatomy in the case of the lumbar section of the spine (Western 2012; Dougherty and Sullivan 2017). Transverse sections of the vertebral column are seen in several sites and are thought to facilitate the dismemberment of the body for cadaver sharing in medical institutions (Owsley et al. 2017; Western 2012;

Dougherty and Sullivan 2017). Transverse sections of cervical vertebrae may facilitate the removal of the head and mandible, while transverse or oblique sections of the lumbar vertebrae may facilitate the removal of the lower half the body (Boston and Webb 2012;

Lowe 2017, Walker et al. 2014; McFarlin and Wineski 1997).

In addition to the separation of the head at the cervical vertebrae and the lower body at the lumbar vertebrae, Walker and colleagues (2014:392) describe evidence at the

Royal London Hospital for the separation of additional body sections:

 Cuts to the clavicle and distal humerus for removal of the shoulder, scapula, and

upper arm;

 Cuts to the distal humerus and proximal radius and ulna for removal of the elbow;

 Cuts to the distal radius and ulna for removal of the wrist and hand;

 Sagittal cuts to the pubis, sacrum, and lumbar vertebrae for the separation of the

legs and pelvis; variations may include oblique cuts to the sacrum (Lowe 2017),

or cuts to the sacroiliac joint instead of the sacrum itself (Hodge et al. 2017);

 Cuts to the femoral shaft for separation of the hip and the distal portion of the leg;

 Cuts to the distal femur and the proximal tibia and fibula for the removal of the

knee;

 Cuts to the distal tibia and fibula for removal of the ankle and foot.

These body portions are consistent with postmortem modifications in 11other sites with evidence for dissection (Boston and Webb 2012; Owsley et al. 2017; Hodge et al. 2017; Lowe 2017; McFarlin and Wineski 1997; Grauer et al. 2017; Davidson 2007;

Halling and Seidemann 2017; Nystrom et al. 2017; Crist et al. 2017; Richards et al.

2017). Transverse saw cuts to the long bones for dissection and dismemberment overlap with the evidence for amputation discussed in the previous section, complicating the interpretation of some sites. Postmortem amputations for surgical practice or dismemberment may feature multiple cuts to the same bone (Owsley et al. 2017) or wet bone breakage at the saw mark, indicating that the bone was sawn most of the way through and then snapped off (Boston and Webb 2012).

Prevalence. The literature review revealed 11 sites for which dissection was the primary explanation for the patterning of cut marks observed on the skeletal remains.

For these sites, the overall prevalence of postmortem modifications ranges from a low of three percent of individuals at Fort James (Bruwelheide et al. 2017) and 3.3 percent of

66 individuals at the Dunning Poorhouse (Grauer et al. 2017), to a high of 8.1 percent of individuals at Oxford Castle (Boston and Webb 2012) and 14 percent of elements at the

Craven Street Anatomy School (Kausmally 2012). This range excludes three sites for which there was not enough information to calculate the prevalence of cut and saw marks and two sites with unusual contexts: Dittmar and Mitchell (2015) and Davidson (2007).

The anatomical collection of crania studied Dittmar and Mitchell (2015) were found to have tool marks on 80 percent of the crania. This assemblage is comprised of specimens retained from dissections, in contrast to the archaeologically-derived sites which likely contain many individuals that were not subject to postmortem interventions.

Freedman’s Cemetery, the only public cemetery among these 12 sites, was found to have just two out of 1,156 individuals, or 0.2 percent, with signs of postmortem intervention

(Davidson 2007).

In addition to these 11 sites with evidence for dissection, the literature review revealed eight sites that have evidence for both autopsy and dissection. At these sites, skeletal modifications associated with craniotomy and thoracotomy were considered to be evidence of autopsy, transected long bones and trephinations were considered to be evidence of surgery or surgical practice, and all other skeletal modifications were considered to be evidence of dissection. The overall prevalence of postmortem modifications at these sites range from 1.6 percent of individuals at the Spring Street

Presbyterian Church (Novak and Willoughby 2017) to 12.2 – 46.2 percent of burials in various sections of the Milwaukee County Poorhouse cemetery (Dougherty and Sullivan

2017; Richards et al. 2017).

Cranial elements in general show a higher prevalence of cut and saw marks than the total assemblage. However, there is a considerably wide range in the number of cut marks reported for cranial remains; this is apparently influenced by the context of the assemblage and the manner of reporting (by individual cranial element or by whole crania). The number of crania displaying evidence of postmortem examination ranges from approximately 4.65 percent of cranial fragments at the Albany County Almshouse

(Lowe 2017) to 80 percent of crania at the University of Cambridge (Dittmar and

Mitchell 2017), with middle values of 11.4 to 17.9 percent at three other sites (Hodge et al. 2017; Owsley et al. 2017; McFarlin and Wineski 1997).

The Albany County Almshouse is unique in this sample because it is a formal cemetery while the other assemblages are informal burial contexts affiliated with medical schools. It is likely that only a small portion of the cemetery sample buried at the Albany

County Almshouse was subjected to dissection relative to the other assemblages included in this analysis; this may account for the substantially lower rate of cranial modifications observed in the Albany cemetery. The University of Cambridge sample is unique because these crania are not from an archaeological context, but rather are specimens retained from nineteenth-century anatomical dissections (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015).

This fact may partially account for the unusually high percentage of cranial modifications observed in this assemblage.

Detailed prevalence rates for postcranial elements were only reported for

Holden Chapel (Hodge et al. 2017), Medical College of Virginia (Owsley et al 2017), and the Medical College of Georgia (McFarlin and Wineski 1997). The prevalence of cut marks to the thorax and vertebral column were reported to be one to four percent for

68 vertebrae, 4 to 5.8 percent for clavicles, 12.3 to 50 percent of sterna, and 4.1 to 16 percent for ribs. Cut marks were reported on 2.4 percent of scapulae and 4.7 percent of sacra at the Medical College of Virginia. Cut marks to the pelvic bones ranged from 1.1 percent of ossa coxae at the Medical College of Georgia to 28.6 percent of ossa coxae at Holden

Chapel.

Modifications to the appendicular skeleton were almost exclusively observed as complete transverse cuts to the proximal, medial, or distal diaphyses of the long bones.

Cut mark prevalence rates for the upper limb were reported to be 1.1 to 6.1 percent of humeri, 3.4 to 8.2 percent of radii, and 5.2 to 5.7 percent of ulnae. Cut mark prevalence rates for the lower limb were reported to be 7.6 to 50 percent of femora, 6 to 50 percent of tibiae, and 1.8 to 33 percent of fibulae. A small number of cut marks were reported for hand and foot bones at the Medical College of Georgia: 1.2 percent of feet and 0.1 percent of hands.

Specimen Preparation

Portions of the body were often retained from dissections for use as specimens or “preparations” in medical teaching, research, and display (Nystrom 2017a:5). Skulls, especially those with signs of pathology or trauma, were highly prized for specimens. At the Albany County Almshouse, crania associated with congenital syphilis and a gunshot wound were retained as specimens (Lowe 2017). At James Fort, retained cranial fragments found in building fill displayed evidence for trephination and craniotomy

(Bruwelheide et al. 2017). Sometimes the only evidence of specimen retention is the absence of the skull in an otherwise complete burial, especially if there is evidence of cuts to the cervical vertebrae or signs of postcranial dissection (Hodge et al. 2017;

Dougherty and Sullivan 2017). The entire skeletal sample of 140 individuals studied by

Dittmar and Mitchell (2015) consisted of crania retained from dissections at the

University of Cambridge. Cranial specimens were often articulated for display by drilling small holes in the bones and attaching them with wire (Boston and Webb 2012; Crist et al. 2017; Lowe 2017). Wires were used to attach the cranial cap in skulls that had been subjected to craniotomy, to articulate the mandible with the cranium, and to articulate the cranial base with the cervical vertebrae (Boston and Webb 2012).

Post-cranial remains may also feature wires, pins, screws, and drill holes for articulation (Hodge et al. 2017; Chapman and Kostro 2017; Owsley et al. 2017; Fowler and Powers 2012a). Anatomical specimens may also exhibit staining from the injection of colored dyes and waxes to highlight certain anatomical features, especially blood vessels (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015; Western 2012; Fowler and Powers 2012; Richards et al. 2017). Specimens are often informally deposited with other medical waste and specimen bottles, rather than in formal burials of articulated skeletons (Blakely and

Harrington 1997; Richards et al. 2017). In one case, however, an elbow appears to have been retained as a specimen from an articulated individual at the Erie County Poorhouse

(Nystrom et al. 2017). The distal portion of the left humerus and the proximal portions of the left radius and ulna were absent, with saw and cut marks on the bones that were left behind (Nystrom et al. 2017:291-293). Overall, the literature review revealed 11 sites with evidence for anatomical specimen retention, all of which were associated with dissection activities.

Experimentation

“Experimentation” is a term that some authors used to describe unusual cuts or saw marks to the body that do not match their expectations for autopsy, dissection, surgery, or specimen preparation (Halling and Seidemann 2017:174). The literature review revealed six sites with postmortem interventions that were attributed to experimentation, as well as dissection and surgical activities. As previously described, the

Dunning Poorhouse cemetery featured one mandible with multiple circular saw cuts with no signs of healing and no evidence of pathology (Grauer et al. 2017).

Similarly, Crist and colleagues (2017) described multiple trephinations on the same crania with no associated pathology or trauma as evidence for surgery practice or experimentation at the Blockley Almshouse. Several sites describe unusual cuts to the crania and facial bones as evidence for experimentation, including multiple sections of the mandible, removal of the anterior dentition, exposing of the frontal sinuses, and excision of the mastoid processes (Halling and Seidemann 2017; Dougherty and Sullivan

2017).

Unusual and “experimental” modifications to the postcranial skeleton include multiple cuts to the same bone, longitudinal sectioning of the long bones, the excision of small sections of bone from the shafts of long bones, and oblique or oddly-angled cuts to various elements (Halling and Seidemann 2017; Dougherty and Sullivan 2017). As previously described, several bones at the Royal London Hospital were riddled with many drilled holes with no apparent purpose (Fowler and Powers 2012a). Finally, two sawed femoral sections were discovered in the privy of a physician in Annapolis,

Maryland (Mann et al. 1991). These remains, which date to the late nineteenth century,

71 where interpreted as evidence for possible experimentation with amputation techniques

(Bruwelheide et al. 2017:56).

Interpretive Challenges

Comparisons to autopsy and dissection manuals. It is important to note that the diagnostic criteria outlined above are more appropriately characterized as trends or tendencies in the historical record; in practice it may be difficult or impossible to distinguish the skeletal evidence of autopsy and dissection in some remains (Chapman and Kostro 2017:65). Furthermore, it is possible that some individuals may have undergone both autopsy and dissection (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:74).

Dittmar and Mitchell (2015:74) consulted historical autopsy manuals, dissection manuals, and surgical texts dating from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries to understand the differences between these categories of procedures, as well as the variation in practices within each category. Their historical research revealed that both autopsy and dissection involve the opening of the cranial vault, the thoracic cavity, and the abdominal cavity using virtually identical procedures and tools. Dissection manuals, however, provided further instructions for the examination of tissues throughout the rest of the body, including the face and neck (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:74).

To address these interpretive difficulties, Dittmar and Mitchell (2015) undertook a study of 140 crania that were documented as subjects of dissection only (and not autopsy). Tool marks were observed on 82 percent of the crania in the dissection sample, however 46 percent of the crania did not show evidence of craniotomy (Dittmar and Mitchell 2015:76). This finding conflicts with the autopsy and dissection manuals, which depict craniotomy as an essential component of both procedures. However, the

72 pattern of cutmarks on the unopened crania suggest that the scalps of these individuals were removed. Dittmar and Mitchell (2015:77) hypothesize that these crania were intentionally left unopened and then were subsequently defleshed for use as intact teaching specimens. Following the results of this study, Dittmar and Mitchell (2015:78) propose that cutmarks on unopened crania may be considered a diagnostic marker for distinguishing dissected remains from autopsied remains.

Examination of an early twentieth-century autopsy manual, the Post-mortem

Manual: A Handbook of Morbid Anatomy and Post-Mortem Technique by Dr. Charles

Box, reveals a wide range of post-mortem examinations that may be conducted during the course of a medicolegal autopsy. Box (1910) provides a comprehensive overview of all possible examinations that could be conducted during a post-mortem, but he advises practitioners to be conservative and only make those incisions that are required to confirm cause of death.

Other lines of evidence, such as the decedent’s age, health history, and the circumstances of his or her death, should be used to narrow the scope of post-mortem examination. Thus, autopsied remains could vary considerably in their degree of anatomization. Autopsied remains with minimal intervention may be effectively invisible in the archaeological record, while the most intensely examined remains may be mistaken for dissection.

It is interesting to note that some of the cut marks described by Box (1910) as part of the autopsy procedure were identified in the bioarchaeological literature as signs of dissection or experimentation. These “experimental” cut marks include: excision of the hard palate for the examination of the nasal cavity (Box 1910:40), excision of the mastoid

73 process or petrous portion of the temporal for examination of the ear canal (Box 1910:

292-293), endocranial excision of the frontal, ethmoid, and/or sphenoid to examine the sinuses (Box 1910: 289), and damage for the dorsum sellae for the removal and examination of the pituitary gland (Box 1910:232). In addition, the “experimental” excision of small sections of cortical bone from the midshaft of the femur and tibia described by Dougherty and Sullivan (2017:222) was confirmed by Box (1910:273) as a method for accessing the medullary cavity for study of the yellow marrow.

Comparisons between sites. This chapter examined the prevalence of cut marks and saw marks for 30 skeletal assemblages listed in Appendix A. Direct comparisons between sites were hampered by the use of different methods of quantification for cut and saw marks at each site. Some sites reported the prevalence of cut marks according to the percentage of individuals or burials affected, while others reported the percentage of fragments or elements affected. This decision was likely influenced by the burial context of the assemblage, specifically whether the remains were individually buried or commingled.

Furthermore, some publications reported the overall cut mark prevalence for the entire assemblage, while other publications specified the cut mark prevalence according to element or region of the body (cranial versus postcranial). Finally, some sites only reported cut mark prevalence as a percentage and did not provide the raw counts of the number of elements / fragments or individuals / burials affected. For these sites, some reported the prevalence of cut marks on a particular element or region of the body as a percentage of the total sample, while others reported the prevalence of cut marks on a particular element of region of the body as a percentage of the cut sample

(e.g. 3.4% of the assemblage has evidence for cut marks and 76 percent of theses cut marks were found on the cranium).

Overall, the bioarchaeology literature review revealed significant challenges for comparing data between archaeological assemblages with signs of autopsy, dissection, and other postmortem modifications. These challenges all derive from the reality that archaeological assemblages are not published as complete datasets but rather as research articles or book chapters. Thus, the data accessible to other researchers is limited by how the authors choose to report and interpret their findings. Although the bioarchaeology literature review revealed many sites for possible comparison with the

Point San Jose assemblage, these sites varied considerably in their methods of reporting the prevalence of cut and saw marks, significantly limiting direct comparisons between sites. Furthermore, none of the sites included in the literature review used the Knüsel and

Outram (2004) zonation recording method that is used in this thesis for recording the

Point San Jose assemblage. Thus, it is not possible to do a zone-by-zone comparison of the Point San Jose assemblage with any other site, but this method of data recording will serve as a model for increased standardization and precision of data recording for future bioarchaeology studies of autopsy and dissection.

Hypothesis Testing

75 remains, which would help inform the interpretation of the Point San Jose site. However, the bioarchaeology literature review revealed no such clear differences in cut mark prevalences between these anatomization activities. Furthermore, many sites show evidence of multiple anatomization activities, in some cases on a single individual.

Finally, the different methods for reporting cut mark prevalences discussed in the previous section make it nearly impossible to draw general conclusions between sites, even those from similar contexts.

In light of these challenges, the attempt to define and identify anatomization activities using cut mark prevalences was abandoned. Instead, this thesis will compare the patterning of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage to the diagnostic table of criteria for the five anatomization activities: autopsy, dissection, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation (see Appendix B). Then, statistical comparisons will be performed for the Point San Jose assemblage and four comparative assemblages to evaluate whether there is a particular site that the Point San Jose assemblage is most similar to. These processes are described in detail in Chapter IV.

Based on the literature review, the archaeological context of the Point San

Jose assemblage is highly suggestive of dissection, particularly the commingled nature of the human remains and their association with butchered animal bones and medical waste.

This thesis project will reveal whether the cut mark evidence supports an interpretation of dissection and whether there is any evidence for other anatomization activities, including autopsy, surgery, specimen preparation, and experimentation.

Summary

The archaeology literature review offers key insights about how cut marks are identified, recorded, and interpreted on human and faunal remains. The zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) was selected for this thesis project due to the commingled and fragmentary nature of the Point San Jose assemblage and the need to record the precise locations of cut and saw marks on the remains. A comprehensive review of the bioarchaeology literature revealed five distinct categories of anatomization activities: autopsy, dissection, surgery, specimen preparation, and experimentation.

This review also highlighted the uniqueness of each site with regard to its historical and archaeological context, the condition of the remains and the mode of burial, the range of anatomization activities practiced, the prevalence and patterning of cut marks, and the methods of reporting these findings. The nature of the available comparative data presents challenges for the interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage, but this thesis project presents a model for the standardization of data collection in future studies.

CHAPTER IV

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This chapter describes the materials and methods used in this thesis to interpret the patterning of cutmarks in the Point San Jose assemblage. The materials for this thesis consist of the Point San Jose assemblage itself and cut mark prevalence data from four comparative assemblages. First, the scope and contents of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage are described, as well as the results of some preliminary analyses conducted by the faculty and graduate students of CSU Chico. Then the comparative assemblages are described, including their archaeological context, the demographics of each assemblage, and the osteological evidence for anatomization.

Next, the section on data collection outlines the recording of cutmarks in the

Point San Jose assemblage according to Knüsel and Outram (2004), including descriptions of the zones for each skeletal element. The statistical analysis section describes the use of chi-squared tests to compare the Point San Jose assemblage to the published data from each of the comparative assemblages. The final section describes how each hypothesis for the Point San Jose assemblage will be evaluated using the diagnostic table of criteria in Appendix B and the results of the chi-squared tests.

Point San Jose Skeletal Assemblage Background

The osteological sample examined in this thesis is the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. These remains were excavated in October 2010 from Point San Jose

(formerly Fort Mason), San Francisco, near the post’s hospital building (Fagan 2010). In

April 2016, National Park Service archaeologists from Golden Gate National Recreation

Area (GGNRA) transferred the large assemblage of human skeletal remains to the CSU

Chico anthropology department for inventory and analysis (Willey et al. 2016). The initial cataloging, labeling, photography, and analysis of the remains was completed by

CSU Chico anthropology faculty and graduate students in July 2016. At the time of data collection for this thesis, the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage was stored in a secure room of the Human Identification Lab at CSU Chico. The assemblage was organized and stored according to skeletal element. Cranial bones, bones of the shoulder girdle, bones of the pelvis, and long bones were stored in shallow foam-lined drawers in a metal archival cabinet. The vertebrae, ribs, hand bones, and foot bones were stored in polyethylene storage bags in archival boxes.

The results of the initial analyses were presented at a Point San Jose seminar in August 2016 at the GGNRA Archaeology Laboratory. The results were then compiled into a formal report and submitted to GGNRA authorities in September 2016. A continuation contract was negotiated and finalized in January 2017 to allow additional study of the remains through August 15, 2018. A second Point San Jose symposium was held in April 2018, this time at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American

Archaeology in Washington, D.C. An updated report with the results of the Phase II analyses was finalized in August 2018. Some of the findings from these reports and symposia are highlighted in the following section.

Description

The Point San Jose assemblage consists of nearly 4,000 fragments of human skeletal remains, organized into 2,176 catalog numbers. For most of the skeleton, catalog

79 numbers represent a single element or fragment. The large number of vertebrae, ribs, hand bones, and foot bones discouraged the individual cataloging of these elements, so they were instead grouped according to element, portion, and anatomical side and cataloged as “lots.” The minimum number of individuals (MNI) represented in the assemblage was estimated to be 25, based on the repetition of skeletal elements, as well as age and sex estimations (Willey et al. 2018:65). These individuals include at least eight adult males, six adult females, two adults of indeterminate sex, one juvenile aged 7-15 years, one juvenile aged 15-18 years, three fetal individuals, and four additional individuals of indeterminate age and sex (Willey et al. 2018:65).

Based on the MNI of 25 individuals, the overall recovery rate of skeletal elements was 38% (Willey et al. 2018:68). Long bones demonstrate a high rate of recovery, while carpals, metacarpals, patellae, and teeth demonstrate low recovery rates

(Willey et al. 2018:68). Scapulae, vertebrae, ribs, and sterna are over-represented, likely due to their high degree of fragmentation (Willey et al. 2018:68). Analyses did not reveal a significant difference in element representation based on anatomical side, nor based on upper versus lower limbs (Willey et al. 2018:69). Femora and crania demonstrated lower recovery rates than expected based on their high preservation potential (Willey et al.

2018:82). The prevalence of skeletal and dental pathologies, while significant, was found to be relatively low for a nineteenth century skeletal sample and largely related to childhood stresses and age-related changes (Willey et al. 2018:164).

Ancestry estimations based on the crania suggest three skulls of possible

Asian or Asian-related ancestry, two skulls of possible white or Caucasoid ancestry, and five skulls of possible Hispanic ancestry (Willey et al. 2018:95-97). Comparisons of this

80 ancestry distribution to the 1870 California census are limited by the fact that Hispanic ancestries are included in the same category as European ancestries (Willey et al.

2018:97). However, the relatively large proportion of possibly non-white ancestries in the

Point San Jose assemblage may suggest an over-representation of lower status individuals, such as Californios, Latin Americans, Native Americans, and / or individuals of Japanese or Chinese descent (Willey et al. 2018:104). In addition, stable isotope analyses revealed that a majority of sampled individuals spent their childhood years outside of Northern California, suggesting a high proportion of non-locals, possibly immigrants, represented in the Point San Jose assemblage (Willey et al. 2018:116).

Both sexes are approximately equally represented in the Point San Jose assemblage, eliminating the possibility that the assemblage derived from the post’s population of enlisted men (Willey et al. 2018: 98). Furthermore, the age distribution of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage does not compare favorably with the mortality profile of enlisted men, nor with the mortality data from the 1870

California census (Willey et al. 2018:100). The Point San Jose assemblage differs from the census data in that it shows a complete lack of children aged 0-5 years, unusual for a demographic with very high mortality in the late nineteenth century (Willey et al.

2018:99). Using several comparative samples, analyses revealed that the demographics of the Point San Jose assemblage most closely resemble that of a nineteenth century hospital sample (Willey et al. 2018:100).

Comparative Assemblages

Four sites were chosen from the bioarchaeology literature review to be used as comparative assemblages. These sites were selected because they are all large

81 assemblages of human skeletal remains and their associated publications provide detailed information about the prevalence of cut marks for individual skeletal elements. All four sites consist of fragmentary, commingled assemblages from informal burial contexts in association with medical institutions. Cut marks at these sites were interpreted primarily as evidence for dissection, although these assemblages also show evidence for surgical practice and specimen preparation. The Blockley Almshouse assemblage also has evidence of autopsied individuals, however the authors do not distinguish between evidence for autopsy and evidence for dissection in their analysis.

Holden Chapel

Holden Chapel, located on the campus of Harvard University in Cambridge,

Massachusetts, was retrofitted to house the Harvard Medical School from approximately

1801 to 1862 (Hodge et al. 2017:117). Excavations of the chapel basement in 1999 revealed an old dry well that contained a large assemblage of commingled and fragmentary human remains (n = 907), faunal remains (n = 357), and artifacts (n = 2,391)

(Hodge et al. 2017:117).

The artifact assemblage contains some domestic items, but is largely dominated by medical and laboratory items including test tubes, glass slides, graduated cylinders, flasks, and specimen jars (Hodge et al. 2017:117). Analysis of the artifact assemblage suggests that the well was filled in a single depositional event sometime between 1801 and 1850, with a most likely range during the 1810s-1830s (Hodge et al.

2017:120). The over-representation of limb bones and the under-representation of cranial and dental elements suggest to the authors that the Holden Chapel assemblage may

82 represent a single “cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover elements (Hodge et al.

2017:126).

The human remains represent a minimum number of individuals (MNI) of 16, including 12 adults (n = 757 fragments) and four juveniles (n = 38 fragments) (Hodge et al. 2017:125-126). The remaining 112 fragments could not be identified to element or side (Hodge et al. 2017:126). The four juvenile individuals consist of one fetus, two infants, and one child with an estimated age of two to four years (Hodge et al. 2017:126).

The inclusion of subadult remains was surprising to the authors because they were generally considered to be poor specimens for dissection, however infants were regularly used for specimen preparations to teach fetal circulation and dental anatomy (Hodge et al.

2017:120). Age, sex, and ancestry estimations were hampered by the lack of cranial and pelvic remains in the assemblage, however the five ossa coxae complete enough for analysis indicate that both males and females were utilized for dissections (Hodge et al.

2017:126).

Cut and saw marks on the human skeletal remains from Holden Chapel were interpreted primarily as evidence for dissection. These cuts include evidence of thoracotomy in the form of sagittal cuts to the ribs, sternum, and clavicle; sagittal cuts to the pubis and sacroiliac joint; and transverse cuts to the shafts of femora, tibiae, and fibulae (Hodge et al. 2017:128). The sectioning of long bones may also be considered evidence for surgical practice. Table 1 summarizes the prevalence of cut marks on various skeletal elements.

Few cranial remains were available for study, suggesting to the authors that skulls may have been retained as anatomical and teaching specimens (Hodge et al.

Table 1. Cut mark data for the Holden Chapel assemblage (adapted from Hodge et al. 2017:118-199,127). Number of Total Percentage of Element Fragments with Number of Fragments with Cut Marks Fragments Cut Marks Frontal 0 4 0.0% Parietal 2 4 50.0% Occipital 0 1 0.0% Temporal 2 3 66.7% Sphenoid 0 3 0.0% Zygomatic 0 3 0.0% Maxilla 0 5 0.0% Nasal 0 4 0.0% Mandible 0 3 0.0% Other cranial bones 0 5 0.0% Unidentified / Unsided 0 6 0.0% Total Cranial 4 41 9.8%

Vertebra 1 83 1.2% Clavicle 1 13 7.7% Sternum 4 8 50.0% Rib 18 122 14.8% Scapula 0 8 0.0% Humerus 0 11 0.0% Radius 0 13 0.0% Ulna 0 14 0.0% Hands and Feet 0 336 0.0% Sacrum 0 18 0.0% Os Coxae 2 27 7.4% Femur 9 21 42.9% Tibia 7 18 38.9% Fibula 5 16 31.3% Patella 0 9 0.0% Unidentified / Unsided 0 118 0.0% Total Postcranial 47 835 5.6%

Dental 0 31 0.0% Total 51 907 5.6%

2017:126). One articulated portion of a cranium does show evidence of postmortem intervention. The portion consists of the posterior half of the cranium with a coronal saw cut bisecting the cranium just anterior to the mastoid processes. There is evidence for pathological lesions on the remaining bone and the authors hypothesize that the face and mandible may have been severed for preparation into a pathological specimen (Hodge et al. 2017:128). Further evidence for specimen preparation is present in the form of vertebrae mounted on iron pins (Hodge et al. 2017:117).

Medical College of Georgia

In 1989, a large assemblage of human skeletal remains was discovered by construction workers in the basement of the original Medical College of Georgia building in August, Georgia (Blakely 1997:3). The building was used as a classroom and laboratory from 1835 to 1912, and activities included the dissection of cadavers for anatomical and surgical training (Blakely 1997:3).

Human dissection was illegal in Georgia until 1887, so the school made use of

“resurrection men” to illicitly obtain bodies from nearby cemeteries, funeral homes, and hospitals for use as dissection specimens (Blakely 1997:5). After the dissections were completed, most of the remaining bone and tissue was discarded in the building’s basement where the remains were covered with quicklime to reduce odors and hasten decomposition (Blakely 1997:5-6).

A large number of animal bones and medical artifacts were excavated in association with the human remains, including glass slides, test tubes, syringes, pipettes, scalpels, glass bottles, and ceramic jugs (Blakely 1997:6,9). These artifactual findings, along with the commingled and fragmentary nature of the human remains, reinforce the

85 idea that dissected individuals were considered to be trash or discards (Blakely 1997:15-

16).

The minimum number of individuals (MNI) represented in the assemblage 62, although Blakely and Harrington suspect that the actual number of individuals may be as high as 400 (Blakely 1997:11). Of the 24 individuals suitable for demographic assessment, 15 were estimated to be black males, four were estimated to be black females, four were estimated to be white males, and one was estimated to be a white female (Blakely and Harrington 1997:175).

In total, individuals of African descent were estimated to make up 79.2 percent of the Medical College of Georgia assemblage, despite representing only 37-49 percent of Augusta’s population in the mid-nineteenth century (Blakely and Harrington

1997:174-175). Individuals of all ages were represented in the Medical College of

Georgia assemblage, ranging from fetal to elderly (Blakely 1997:5). Sub-adults under the age of 20 years formed 27.4 percent of the assemblage, far lower than the proportion of subadult deaths recorded in Augusta in 1850 (64 percent of all deaths) (Blakely and

Harrington 1997:176-177). The disproportionately high number of adult black males in the Medical College of Georgia assemblage supports the hypothesis that the bodies of these individuals were targeted for dissection, paralleling the unequal treatment of these individuals during life (Blakely 1997:13).

The cut and saw marks present on the Medical College of Georgia assemblage were interpreted primarily as evidence for dissection, although there is also some evidence for the practice of surgical techniques. Table 2 summarizes the prevalence of cut marks on various skeletal elements for the Medical College of Georgia assemblage.

Table 2. Cut mark data for the Medical College of Georgia assemblage (adapted from McFarlin and Wineski 1997:122). Number of Total Percentage of Element Fragments with Number of Fragments with Cut Marks Fragments Cut Marks Total Cranial 110 708 15.5%

Vertebra 48 1,209 4.0% Clavicle 9 156 5.8% Sternum 10 81 12.3% Rib 75 1,831 4.1% Humerus 17 280 6.1% Radius 8 236 3.4% Ulna 15 289 5.2% Hand 2 1,383 0.1% Pelvis 3 277 1.1% Femur 33 433 7.6% Tibia 21 349 6.0% Fibula 4 219 1.8% Foot 18 1,506 1.2% Long bone fragments 16 119 13.4% Unidentified and teeth 0 732 0.0% Total Postcranial 279 9,100 3.1%

Total 389 9,808 4.0%

The most common postmortem intervention observed on the cranial remains is the circumferential saw cut for craniotomy, often accompanied by chipping on the endocranial margins of the saw cuts (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:133). Chipping is thought to be caused by a prying tool used to remove the calotte to allow for examination of the brain (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:155). Craniotomy cuts exhibit a range of angles and several false starts, possibly reflecting the inconsistent quality of student work

(McFarlin and Wineski 1997:133). One individual in the Medical College of Georgia

87 assemblage shows evidence for surgical practice in the form of a postmortem trephination on a skull with no evidence of pathology or trauma (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:156).

Cranial fragments also show vertical saw cuts to the occipital and temporal, especially in the area of the external auditory meatus and the mastoid process, and dissections of the orbital area and the facial bones (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:134).

Eight mandibles show evidence for dissection, including saw cuts to the alveoli, to the gonial angle, and the mandibular condyle; sagittal sectioning of the mandible; and various superficial cut marks (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:137). Overall, the Medical

College of Georgia assemblage features a greater number and variety of cuts to the skull than are seen in modern dissections. These cuts also suggest a greater emphasis on dissection of the oral region, perhaps due to the higher prevalence of oral pathologies prior to modern dentistry (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:156).

Cut marks to the vertebrae include transverse and sagittal saw cuts to the cervical vertebrae, laminectomy and superficial cut marks of the thoracic vertebrae, and oblique cut marks to the lumbar vertebrae (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:128). One hyoid exhibited an oblique saw cut to the body (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:137). Evidence for thoracotomy includes sectioning of the clavicle at midshaft, a variety of saw cuts to the sternum (both sagittal and transverse), sagittal sectioning of rib shafts near the sternal end, and superficial cut marks to the sternum, clavicle, and ribs (McFarlin and Wineski

1997:127,129).

The more anteriorly-oriented thoracotomy used at the Medical College of

Georgia, as evidenced by saw cuts to the midline sternum and the sternal ends of the rib shafts, suggests a more surgical style of opening the chest cavity than is commonly used

88 in dissection today (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:156). Some ribs display saw cuts near the vertebral end or at midshaft, perhaps related to other dissection activities (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:127). Pelvic fragments exhibit a saw cut to the iliac crest, a sagittal cut to the pubis, and an oblique cut to the ischium (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:129). Saw and cut marks were also observed on several of the hand and foot bones, including the longitudinal sectioning of one calcaneus (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:129).

The long bones exhibit several postmortem interventions including transverse saw cuts to long bone shafts (accompanied by false starts), cut marks to joint surfaces, and cut marks to muscle attachment sites (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:121). The extensive dissection and sectioning of long bones suggests a greater emphasis on practicing surgical techniques, such as amputations, than is seen in modern medical training (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:157). The emphasis on limb surgeries was likely influenced by the Civil War in which approximately 75 percent of field surgeries were amputations, and the fact that amputation was often the only available treatment for serious wounds or infections (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:157).

Medical College of Virginia

Excavations at the Medical College of Virginia in 1994 uncovered a large deposit of commingled human skeletal remains, faunal remains, and artifacts, including medical implements, that were informally deposited in a well (Owsley et al. 2017:144).

The assemblage dates to approximately1848 to 1860 (Owsley et al. 2017:147). There is historical documentary evidence of anatomy courses and surgical training taught using cadavers at the Medical College of Virginia during the nineteenth century (Owsley et al.

2017:144). There is also a reference from 1852 to the disposal of portions of used cadavers in a well dedicated for that purpose (Owsley et al. 2017:145).

The human remains represent a minimum number of individuals (MNI) of 44 adults and nine children under the age of 14 years (Owsley et al. 2017:148). Pair- matching suggests that there were 19 relatively complete individuals recovered, in addition to the partial remains of 34 individuals (Owsley et al. 2017:148). Of the 26 crania available for study, 17 were estimated to be males, eight were estimated to be females, and one was of indeterminate sex (Owsley et al. 2017:148). Eighteen of the skulls were estimated to be of African ancestry, two were estimated to be of European ancestry, and six were of indeterminate ancestry (Owsley et al. 2017:148).

The disproportionately large number of individuals of African ancestry represented in the assemblage supports the hypothesis that the bodies of free and enslaved African-Americans were targeted for grave-robbing and dissection (Owsley et al. 2017:148). It is hypothesized that the Medical College of Virginia obtained cadavers through illicit means from potter’s fields and the adjacent Negro burial ground, and through lawful means from the almshouse and the state penitentiary (Owsley et al.

2017:146). It was rumored that patients of the Medical College’s own infirmary–who were mostly slaves, free blacks, and immigrants–were used for dissections, but the school adamantly denied these claims (Owsley et al. 2017:146).

The cut marks on the human skeletal remains were interpreted primarily as evidence of dissection, although there is some evidence of autopsy, surgery, and specimen preparation. The prevalence of cut marks on various skeletal elements are reported in Table 3. One individual showed evidence for surgery in the form of a

90 perimortem trephination adjacent to a projectile injury, and evidence for autopsy in the form of craniotomy saw cuts (Owsley et al. 2017:153,159). Another individual showed evidence for anatomical specimen preparation in the form of a metal hook embedded postmortem into the glenoid fossa of the scapula, presumably for articulation (Owsley et al. 2017:155).

Table 3. Cut mark data for the Medical College of Virginia assemblage (adapted from Owsley et al. 2017:152). Number of Total Percentage of Element Elements with Number of Elements with Cut Marks Elements Cut Marks Frontal 6 23 26.1% Parietal 10 48 20.8% Occipital 3 21 14.3% Temporal 7 38 18.4% Zygomatic 1 22 4.5% Maxilla 0 26 0.0% Mandible 8 18 44.4% Total Cranial 35 196 17.9%

Clavicle 1 25 4.0% Scapula 1 41 2.4% Humerus 1 87 1.1% Radius 5 61 8.2% Ulna 4 70 5.7% Sacrum 1 21 4.8% Os Coxae 1 44 2.3% Femur 13 82 15.9% Tibia 10 86 11.6% Fibula 7 78 9.0% Total Postcranial 44 595 7.4%

Total 79 791 10.0%

Evidence for dissection observed on the crania includes: craniotomy saw cuts to the frontals and parietals with various angles and hesitation marks, chipped margins of the craniotomy cuts from the use of tools to pry off the calotte, saw cuts to the zygomatic process of the temporal bone, cut marks on the ascending ramus of the mandible, and midline sectioning of the mandible (Owsley et al. 2017:152-154). Evidence for dissection and / or surgical practice on the postcranial skeleton includes: transverse saw cuts to the midshafts of limb bones (sometimes multiple cuts to the same bone), various saw cuts to the ribs, vertical saw cuts to the neural arches of the vertebrae (laminectomy), and transverse sections of the vertebrae (Owsley et al. 2017:155-158).

Blockley Almshouse

The Blockley Almshouse assemblage was discovered during construction near the site in West Philadelphia and excavated in 2001 (Crist et al. 2017:260). The site was used as an informal cemetery and dumping grounds for human remains from approximately 1865 to 1895 (Crist et al. 2017:266). In addition to 167 grave shafts with multiple stacked coffin burials, archaeologists uncovered 11 clusters of fragmentary and commingled human remains that appeared to be subjected to autopsy and / or dissection

(Crist et al. 2017:266). These clusters were interred either in stacked rectangular boxes or dumped into large pits (Crist et al. 2017:267).

The commingled remains were found in association with cremated human remains, butchered animal bones, and medical waste, including medicine bottles and glass syringes (Crist et al. 2017:267). The almshouse also functioned as a hospital and center for medical training and was the site of heavy trafficking of dead bodies for use in dissections in the late nineteenth century (Crist et al. 2017:262-263). Bodies were

92 obtained from the almshouse morgue, while en route to burial, or were dug up from the almshouse cemetery or nearby potter’s fields (Crist et al. 2017:263). The remains of many dissected individuals were used as anatomical and pathological specimens in classrooms, laboratories, and the Pathological Museum on site (Crist et al. 2017:264).

The estimated minimum number of individuals (MNI) for the entire assemblage is 690 (Crist et al. 2017:266). The cranial remains from the commingled burial clusters were evaluated for age, sex, and ancestry, revealing a preponderance of older adult males of European ancestry (Crist et al. 2017:269). Of these 248 cranial individuals, 167 were estimated to be male, 74 were estimated to be female, and seven were of indeterminate sex (Crist et al. 2017:270).

Males and females were approximately equally represented in the sample of remains with evidence for postmortem intervention (Crist et al. 2017:270). All of the cranial individuals were adults, and 62 percent were estimated to be older than 35 years of age at the time of death (Crist et al. 2017:270). Ancestry estimations were indeterminate for most of the cranial individuals, but 17 individuals were estimated to be of European descent, three individuals were estimated to be of African descent, and two individuals were estimated to be of Asian or Native American ancestry (Crist et al.

2017:270).

The commingled remains of three burial clusters were selected for further analysis, with a total sample of 2,534 fragments (Crist et al. 2017:270). The prevalence of cut marks on various elements within this sample are reported in Table 4. The authors identify the following interventions as evidence for dissection and / or autopsy: bisection of the cranium, transverse craniotomy, bisection of the mandible, cut and saw marks to

93 the vertebrae, and bisection of the sternum during thoracotomy (Crist et al. 2017:271).

Interestingly, none of the ribs show evidence of postmortem intervention, which may suggest that the costal cartilage was cut instead of the rib cage in order to open the chest cavity. The transverse sectioning of long bones was interpreted as evidence for practice amputations and possibly the retention of hands and feet for anatomical specimens (Crist et al. 2017:271). There is additional evidence of specimen preparation and surgical practice, respectively, in the articulation of several elements with copper wire, and the presence of a number of crania with postmortem trephinations (Crist et al. 2017:263,270).

Table 4. Cut mark data for the Blockley Almshouse assemblage (adapted from Crist et al. 2017:270-271). Number of Total Percentage of Element Elements with Number of Elements with Cut Marks Elements Cut Marks Cranial bones 23 28 82.1% Mandible 5 11 45.5% Total Cranial 28 39 71.8%

Vertebra 19 341 5.6% Sternum 1 14 7.1% Rib 0 1,128 0.0% Humerus 11 43 25.6% Radius 13 35 37.1% Ulna 16 40 40.0% Os Coxae 0 45 0.0% Femur 24 60 40.0% Tibia 17 44 38.6% Fibula 18 46 39.1% Other elements 0 699 0.0% Total Postcranial 119 2,495 4.8%

Total 147 2,534 5.8%

Data Collection

Recording Cut Marks

Data collection for this project was conducted from June 11 to August 2, 2018 in the Human Identification Lab at CSU Chico. Data was recorded in Microsoft Excel using different worksheets for each skeletal element. The catalog number, element, anatomical side, storage location, and general condition were recorded for each fragment.

Columns were created for each zone assigned to that element (zones are described in detail in the next section). The following codes were used for data recording:

 0 – zone is absent or less than 50 percent complete;

 1 – more than 50% of the zone is present (no cut or saw marks);

 1C – more than 50% of the zone is present with at least one cut mark;

 1S – more than 50% of the zone is present with at least one saw mark;

 1CS – more than 50% of the zone is present with at least one cut mark and at least

one saw mark.

For the purposes of this study, cut marks were defined as linear depressions in the bone with a v-shaped cross section, caused by a metal incised blade. Cut marks were examined using a hand lens and a bright, angled light. Due to time constraints, microscopy was not employed in this study although it is recommended for future studies to ensure the correct identification of anthropogenic cut marks versus other taphonomic factors. In this study, a mark was considered to be a root etching if it was convex (e.g. a root fiber adhered to the bone surface), curvilinear, u-shaped in cross-section, or had an irregular margin (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:108). A few examples of excavation damage were identified by their relatively large size, wide profile (more like “chop”

95 marks), “caved in” margins, and by the markedly lighter color of the exposed bone versus the adjacent bone surface (McFarlin and Wineski 1997:108).

Saw marks were identified as marks made with a metal toothed instrument that partially or completely bisected the bone. The instruments’ teeth left distinct striations within the marks that were easily observed using a hand lens (McFarlin and

Wineski 1997:108). Saw marks that did not pass through the entire bone were described as “incomplete” and saw marks that passed through the entire bone, separating or

“sectioning” the bone into two pieces, were described as “complete” (McFarlin and

Wineski 1997:109). Finally, the location and orientation of all cut and saw marks were described, photographed, and marked on a skeletal homunculus for later reference.

According to Knüsel and Outram (2004), zones should only be recorded if at least 50% of the zone is present. This facilitates unambiguous data recording, prevents double counting of element during MNI estimation, and eliminates many smaller fragments that lack sufficient diagnostic features for analysis. However, in the Point San

Jose assemblage, some cut and saw marks were observed in zones with less than 50 percent of the zone present. In this case, the recording of cut and saw marks was privileged over consistency in data recording. Smaller zone fragments were recorded as present if they also had a cut or saw mark, and this exception was clearly recorded in the notes for each of these fragments.

In other cases, cut marks and saw marks overlapped with the boundaries between zones. Marks such as these were recorded as present in both zones. A few bones displayed complete saw marks that separated the bone exactly at the boundary between

96 two zones; in these cases, the saw mark was recorded as belonging to the present zone

(even though it technically straddles the present and absent zones of the bone).

The original CSU Chico catalog for the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage was used to cross-check the data collection for this study. This was done to ensure that no catalog numbers were missing or inadvertently skipped during data collection. Several catalog numbers were not located during data collection and were marked as missing in the Excel worksheets. The CSU Chico catalog also contained the initial data recording and description of cut marks within the Point San Jose assemblage. The recording of cutmarks for this thesis was conducted independently, however the CSU Chico catalog was consulted to make sure all potential cut marks were thoroughly evaluated.

The identification of cutmarks for this thesis and in the CSU Chico catalog were largely consistent with one another, however this analysis located some cut and saw marks that were not recorded in the initial inventory and several cut marks on the initial inventory were found to be root etchings in this analysis. These discrepancies were noted in the Excel worksheets and are reported in Chapter V. Records from previous analyses were also consulted to exclude cut and saw marks that were the result of destructive sampling for stable isotope analysis.

Osteological Zonation Recording Method

One goal of this project is to apply the osteological zonation method of data recording proposed by Knüsel and Outram (2004) and evaluate its potential to enhance interpretations of autopsy and dissection in future bioarchaeological studies. This method divides each skeletal element into several zones to facilitate the efficient, precise, and

97 unambiguous recording of osteological data. The zones for each element are described below. Illustrated figures from Knüsel and Outram (2004) are provided in Appendix C.

Cranium. The cranium is divided into 15 zones: 1) the right frontal; 2) the left frontal; 3) the right parietal; 4) the left parietal; 5) the occipital; 6) the left temporal; 7) the right temporal; 8) the left sphenoid; 9) the right sphenoid; 10) the left zygomatic; 11) the right zygomatic; 12) the left maxilla; 13) the right maxilla; 14) the left nasal bone; and 15) the right nasal bone.

Mandible. The mandible is divided into seven zones: 1) the premolars and molars and a section of the body of the mandible inferior to these teeth; 2) the canine and a section of the body of the mandible inferior to this tooth; 3) the portion of the ascending ramus inferior to, and slightly posterior to, the coronoid process; 4) the coronoid process;

5) the condyle and the posterior portion of the ascending ramus; 6) the gonial angle; and

7) the incisors and a section of the body of the mandible inferior to these teeth. These zones are the same for both the right and left sides of the mandible, resulting in a total of

14 zones in a complete bone.

Vertebral column. Each vertebra is divided into four zones: 1) the body; 2) the right transverse process including the pedicle and articular facets; 3) the left transverse process including the pedicle and articular facets; and 4) the spinous process. These zones are the same for all sections of the vertebral column: cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, and the sacrum.

Rib. The rib is divided into three zones: 1) the head; 2) the area of the rib angle and facets; and 3) the remaining shaft and sternal end.

Sternum. The sternum is divided into three zones: 1) the manubrium; 2) the sternal body; and 3) the xiphoid process.

Clavicle. The clavicle is divided into three zones: 1) the sternal end; 2) the acromial end; and 3) the diaphysis.

Scapula. The scapula is divided into nine zones: 1) the coracoid process; 2) the superior half of the glenoid fossa; 3) the inferior half of the glenoid fossa; 4) the acromial end and the lateral portion of the spine; 5) the bone surrounding the glenoid fossa including the neck and the area inferior to the coracoid process; 6) the middle portion of the spine and the supraspinous region; 7) the lateral half of the infraspinous region (scapular body); 8) the medial portion of the spine and the supraspinous region; and 9) the medial half of the infraspinous region (scapular body).

Humerus. The humerus is divided into 11 zones: 1) the greater and lesser tubercles; 2) the humeral head; 3) the lateral epicondyle; 4) the medial epicondyle; 5) the capitulum; 6) the trochlea; 7) the lateral half of the distal portion of the diaphysis; 8) the medial half of the distal portion of the diaphysis; 9) the area around the deltoid tuberosity

(postero-lateral half of middle diaphysis); 10) the area opposite zone 9 (the antero-medial half of middle diaphysis); and 11) the proximal portion of the diaphysis including the surgical neck.

Radius. The radius is divided into 11 zones: 1) the lateral half of the radial head; 2) the medial half of the radial head; 3) the lateral portion of the distal articular surface; 4) the medial portion of the distal articular surface; 5) the proximal portion of the diaphysis, including the radial tuberosity; 6) the lateral half of the diaphysis from zone 5 to the mid-point; 7) the medial half of the diaphysis from zone 5 to the mid-point; 8) the

99 portion of the diaphysis between zones 6/7 and zones 9/10; 9) the lateral half of the distal third of the radius; 10) the medial half of the distal third of the radius; and J) the styloid process of the distal end of the radius.

Ulna. The ulna is divided into seven zones: A/B) the olecranon process; C) the trochlear notch and the coronoid process; D) the radial notch; E) the proximal half of the diaphysis; F) the superior third of the distal shaft; G) the middle third of the distal shaft;

H) the distal third of the distal shaft; and J) the head and the styloid process.

Hand. The carpals are not divided into zones; instead they are simply marked as present or absent. Metacarpals and phalanges are each divided into three zones: 1) the proximal articulation; 2) the distal articulation; and 3) the diaphysis.

Os coxae. The os coxae is divided into 12 zones: 1) the superior portion of the acetabulum; 2) the posterior half of the inferior acetabulum; 3) the anterior half of the inferior acetabulum; 4) the superior portion of the ischium including the ischial spine; 5) the inferior portion of the ilium including the greater sciatic notch; 6) the superior portion of the ischial tuberosity; 7) the auricular surface of the ilium; 8) the superior portion of the pubis including the pectineal line and the pubic tubercle; 9) the inferior portion of the pubis including the pubic symphysis; 10) the greater part of the ilium; 11) the inferior portion of the ilium including the greater portion of the ischial tuberosity; and 12) the iliac crest.

Femur. The femur is divided into 11 zones: 1) the greater trochanter; 2) the lesser trochanter and the surrounding bone; 3) the gluteal region; 4) the head; 5) the neck;

6) the middle portion of the diaphysis until the bifurcation of the linea aspera; 7) the lateral half of the distal third of the diaphysis; 8) the medial half of the distal third of the

100 diaphysis; 9) the lateral condyle and epicondyle; 10) the medial condyle and epicondyle; and 11) the anterior distal articulation and the intercondylar space (posteriorly).

Tibia. The tibia is divided into 10 zones: 1) the medial proximal condyle; 2) the intercondylar fossa; 3) the lateral proximal condyle; 4) the tibial tuberosity; 5) the medial malleolus; 6) the lateral malleolus; 7) the proximal quarter of the diaphysis; 8) the second quarter of the diaphysis; 9) the third quarter of the diaphysis; and 10) the distal quarter of the diaphysis.

Fibula. The fibula is divided into six zones: 1) the proximal end including the styloid process; 2) the distal end; 3) the distal quarter of the diaphysis; 4) the third quarter of the diaphysis; 5) the second quarter of the diaphysis; and 6) the proximal quarter of the diaphysis.

Foot. The foot consists of tarsals (the largest of which are the calcaneus and talus), metatarsals, and foot phalanges. The calcaneus is divided into five zones: 1) the tuber; 2) the proximal portion of the body; 3) the sustentaculum tali; 4) the distal articulation; and 5) the distal portion of the body inferior to the articulations. The talus is divided into four zones: 1) the medial half of the trochlea; 2) the lateral half of the trochlea; 3) the medial half of the head; and 4) the lateral half of the head. The remaining tarsals are not divided into zones; instead they are simply marked as present or absent.

Metatarsals and phalanges are each divided into three zones: 1) the proximal articulation;

2) the distal articulation; and 3) the diaphysis.

Other elements: A small number of elements were recorded that do not belong into any of the above categories: hyoid bones, fragments of ossified cartilage, patellae,

101 portions of the coccyx, and unidentified shaft fragments. These were simply marked as present and their completeness described.

Statistical Analysis

Inferential statistics were conducted using IBM SPSS® software to make quantitative comparisons between the prevalence of cutmarks in the Point San Jose assemblage and the four comparative assemblages described earlier in this chapter. The desired outcome for these analyses will be to identify the site(s) that the Point San Jose assemblage most closely resembles, which may indicate the best interpretation for the pattern of observed cut marks.

The data were first arranged into contingency tables according to two variables: archaeological site (columns) and cut mark prevalence (rows). A parametric test was chosen because at least one variable, archaeological site, represents nominal data. The statistical comparisons were accomplished through a series of Pearson’s chi- squared tests, individually comparing the Point San Jose assemblage to one other site.

These tests were repeated for nine elements or regions of the body: cranial, postcranial, humerus, radius, ulna, femur, tibia, fibula, and the total assemblage. These parts of the body were selected because cut mark data was reported for these elements for all four comparative assemblages. In total, 36 statistical comparisons were performed. If the expected counts of any cell in the contingency table were less than five, than a Fisher’s exact test was performed instead of the Pearson’s chi-squared test since this Fisher’s exact test is applicable to all sample sizes.

102

The prevalence of cutmarks between sites was assessed for statistically significant differences at an alpha level of 0.05. The null hypothesis for these tests is that there is no significant difference between the prevalence of cut marks at Point San Jose and the prevalence of cut marks at the other site (the variables are not related). The research hypothesis is that there is a significant difference between the prevalence of cut marks at the two sites (cut mark prevalence and site are related variables). Thus, a p- value of less than 0.05 suggests that there is a statistically significant difference between the prevalence of cut marks at each site, and the null hypothesis should be rejected.

All results were further evaluated using a Phi coefficient to measure effect size. Effect size was measured to evaluate the strength of relationship between the two variables. This is an important component of any parametric test to avoid making a Type

II error: the acceptance of the null hypothesis when the research hypothesis is actually true. For the purposes of this study, statistically significant results are not very informative for addressing the research questions. Instead, any results found to be not significant (accepting the null hypothesis) indicate that the prevalence of cutmarks between the two sites are statistically similar. A result such as this suggests that the Point

San Jose assemblage is very similar to that site and may be the result of the same anatomization activities.

Hypothesis Testing

Two methods were employed in this thesis to find the most likely interpretation for the pattern of cut and saw marks observed on the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. First, the anatomical locations and descriptions of cut and saw marks on the Point San Jose assemblage were compared to the diagnostic table of criteria for

103 various anatomization activities provided in Appendix B. The interpretive possibilities given in this table are: autopsy, dissection, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation. A qualitative evaluation of the correspondence of the cut and saw marks of the Point San Jose assemblage to these criteria was conducted for each skeletal element and for the overall assemblage. Second, the prevalence of cut and saw marks on the Point

San Jose assemblage was compared statistically to the data for the four comparative assemblages described in this chapter.

There are several hypotheses for the interpretation of the Point San Jose site.

The first hypothesis is that all lines of evidence will point to autopsy as the most likely explanation for the patterning of cutmarks observed in the assemblage. For this hypothesis to be unequivocally supported, the cut mark data from Point San Jose should be consistent with the criteria for autopsy outlined in the diagnostic table and the cut mark prevalences should be statistically different from each of the four comparative samples, which are largely representative of dissection activities. This hypothesis seems unlikely due to the commingled, fragmentary, and disarticulated nature of the Point San

Jose assemblage and its informal burial in a waste pit. Autopsied remains are more likely to be interred as individual, complete burials in a formal cemetery context.

The second hypothesis is that all lines of evidence will point to dissection as the most likely interpretation for the Point San Jose assemblage. This hypothesis seems more likely due to the informal burial context and the commingled condition of the remains. For this hypothesis to be unequivocally supported, the cut mark data from Point

San Jose should be consistent with the criteria for dissection outlined in the diagnostic table in Appendix B. This interpretation would be strengthened by a statistical

104 correspondence between the prevalence of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage and the date from one or more of the comparative assemblages (i.e. chi-square test is not significant, p-value is greater than 0.05). All of the comparative assemblages are largely representative of dissection, but each site has a particular historical and archaeological context as well as its own mix of other anatomization activities, rendering the osteological evidence at each site unique.

A statistical similarity between the Point San Jose assemblage and one or more of the comparative assemblages may help interpret the context and types of anatomization activities that may have impacted the Point San Jose assemblage. On the other hand, the Point San Jose assemblage may be statistically different from all of the comparative assemblages due to unique circumstances at the site. In this case, the Point

San Jose assemblage may still be a good example of dissection activities if it meets the criteria outlined for dissection in Appendix B.

A third hypothesis is that these lines of evidence will not provide a clear indication of which interpretation is the best fit for the pattering of cutmarks on the Point

San Jose assemblage. In this case, the results will need to be carefully weighed and discussed in reference to the limitations of this study and the context of the assemblage. It is possible that multiple anatomization activities were practiced on these remains, or that the available evidence is inadequate to arrive at an informed interpretation for this site.

Summary

This chapter describes the materials and methods used in this thesis to interpret the patterning of cut marks in the Point San Jose assemblage. The elements and

105 cut marks of the Point San Jose assemblage were recorded using the osteological zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). The results were then compared to the diagnostic table of criteria for autopsy, dissections, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation provided in Appendix B. Chi-squared tests were conducted using

SPSS software to evaluate the statistical similarity between the prevalence of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage and the data from four comparative assemblages:

Holden Chapel, the Medical College of Georgia, the Medical College of Virginia, and

Blockley Almshouse. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses were used to infer the most likely interpretation for the patterning of cut marks in the Point San Jose assemblage. The results of these analyses are presented and discussed in Chapters V and

VI.

106

CHAPTER V

RESULTS

This chapter reports the results of the descriptive and quantitative analyses described in Chapter IV, Methods. The first section of the chapter reports the results of data collection on the Point San Jose assemblage using the zonation recording method of

Knüsel and Outram (2004). The cut mark data for the entire assemblage are reported using two different units of analysis: according to the zones of Knüsel and Outram

(2004), and according to fragments to facilitate comparisons with other sites. The cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage are then briefly described and the cut mark data are reported in tables for each major element of the body. These results are compared to the diagnostic criteria for various anatomization activities in Chapter VI,

Discussion. The second section of this chapter reports the results of the chi-squared and

Fisher’s exact tests comparing the cut mark data from the Point San Jose assemblage to four comparative assemblages: Holden Chapel, the Medical College of Georgia, the

Medical College of Virginia, and Blockley Almshouse.

Overview

The Point San Jose assemblage consists of approximately 3,852 identifiable fragments, organized into 2,175 catalog numbers during the original CSU Chico inventory. For many elements, a single catalog number was assigned to each fragment; however, for other elements—notably the vertebrae and ribs—a single catalog number may represent many fragments. This thesis project independently inventoried the

107 assemblage using the zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). This analysis recorded a total of 6,904 zones. During this analysis, 50 catalog numbers recorded on the original inventory were not able to be located. The cut marks on the Point

San Jose assemblage were recorded with reference to the catalog number, fragment, and zones affected. The cut mark data are summarized in Table 5 by zones according to

Knüsel and Outram (2004). This data is intended to serve as an example for future bioarchaeology studies of how the zonation method can increase standardization and specificity in the recording of taphonomic modifications.

Alternatively, Table 6 summarizes the cut mark data by fragments, rather than by zones. This method of reporting is in line with much of the existing literature regarding autopsy and dissection in the bioarchaeological record. The cut mark data reported by fragments are used later in this chapter for statistical comparison with the four comparative assemblages. In Chapter VI, Discussion, the cut mark data reported by zones is compared to the data reported by fragments to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the Knüsel and Outram (2004) recording method.

These two methods of recording yield different rates for the prevalence of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage. When recording by fragment, evidence for postmortem intervention was observed on 17.1 percent of cranial and mandible fragments and 5.9 percent of postcranial fragments. When recording by zone, evidence for postmortem intervention was observed only 5.9 percent of cranial and mandible zones and 4.0 percent of postcranial zones. The overall prevalence of cut marks observed on the

Point San Jose assemblage was 6.1 percent of fragments and 4.1 percent of zones.

108

Table 5. Cut mark data for the entire assemblage by zones according to Knüsel and Outram (2004). Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Element Blade Saw Both with Cut of Zones with Cut Marks Marks Cranial 10 2 8 0 117 8.5% Mandible 5 2 3 0 139 3.6% Total Cranial 15 4 11 0 256 5.9%

Vertebrae 127 64 63 0 1,837 6.9% Ribs 37 35 2 0 1,069 3.5% Sternum 8 0 8 0 21 38.1% Clavicle 6 5 1 0 54 11.1% Scapula 0 0 0 0 103 0.0% Humerus 14 12 0 2 252 5.6% Radius 13 13 0 0 326 4.0% Ulna 12 10 2 0 227 5.3% Hand 4 4 0 0 939 0.4% Sacrum 0 0 0 0 35 0.0% Os Coxae 3 2 1 0 276 1.1% Femur 8 4 4 0 224 3.6% Tibia 17 1 16 0 170 10.0% Fibula 10 4 6 0 125 8.0% Foot 7 2 5 0 967 0.7% Total Postcranial 266 156 108 2 6,625 4.0%

Hyoid 0 0 0 0 3 0.0% Ossified Cartilage 0 0 0 0 4 0.0% Coccyx 0 0 0 0 5 0.0% Patella 0 0 0 0 8 0.0% Long bone 0 0 0 0 3 0.0% fragment Total 281 160 119 2 6,904 4.1%

109

Table 6. Cut mark data for the entire assemblage by fragments. Number Total Percentage of Number of Not Element Fragments Blade Saw Both of Fragments located with Cut Fragments with Cut Marks Marks Cranial 7 1 6 0 0 48 14.6% Mandible 5 2 3 0 1 22 22.7% Total Cranial 12 3 9 0 1 70 17.1%

Vertebrae 110 62 48 0 3 1,377 8.0% Ribs 35 33 2 0 0 1,035 3.4% Sternum 8 0 8 0 0 29 27.6% Clavicle 6 5 1 0 0 27 22.2% Scapula 0 0 0 0 24 67 0.0% Humerus 11 10 0 1 1 46 23.9% Radius 6 6 0 0 1 49 12.2% Ulna 9 7 2 0 0 41 22.0% Hand 4 4 0 0 9 412 1.0% Sacrum 0 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% Os Coxae 3 2 1 0 2 84 3.6% Femur 7 4 3 0 0 37 18.9% Tibia 7 1 6 0 2 46 15.2% Fibula 9 4 5 0 1 44 20.5% Foot 7 2 5 0 6 441 1.6% Total 222 140 81 1 49 3,759 5.9% Postcranial

Hyoid 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.0% Ossified 0 0 0 0 0 4 0.0% Cartilage Coccyx 0 0 0 0 0 5 0.0% Patella 0 0 0 0 0 8 0.0% Long bone 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.0% fragment Total 234 143 90 1 50 3,852 6.1%

The cranial assemblage overall shows a higher prevalence of cutmarks than the postcranial remains. In addition, the cranium and mandible were more impacted by

110 saw cuts, while the postcranial remains were more impacted by superficial cuts from bladed instruments. Postcranial cut marks were most prevalent on the sternum, clavicle, and long bones. The lower limb bones were more impacted by saw cuts than the bones of the upper limb. The vertebrae, ribs, and os coxae display relatively moderate cut mark prevalence rates. Cut marks were infrequently observed on the hand and foot bones and are absent on the scapula and sacrum. The following sections describe the cut marks observed in each major region of the body.

Skull Cranium

The cranial assemblage consists of 48 catalog numbers, some of which represent multiple conjoining fragments. Six of these catalog numbers show evidence of postmortem intervention in the form of transverse saw cuts to the frontal, parietals, and occipital, consistent with craniotomy. Five of the craniotomy fragments conjoin with one another, representing a single individual. The calotte of this individual was also bisected in addition to the transverse craniotomy. The sixth fragment is a right parietal with one transverse saw cut above the squamosal suture with three grooves parallel to the saw cut, possibly the result of the instrument “skipping” during the sawing motion. Another fragment displays at least 10 small, parallel cut marks on the left parietal and the occipital squama, above and below the squamosal suture. These marks may suggest defleshing of the cranium. There was no evidence of craniotomy on this fragment. Table 7 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the

117 zones recorded, 10 (8.5 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

111

Table 7. Cut marks on the cranium. Number of Total Percentage Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1/2 - Frontal 3 0 3 0 17 17.6% 3/4 - Parietal 5 1 4 0 17 29.4% 5 - Occipital 2 1 1 0 8 25.0% 6/7 - Temporal 0 0 0 0 20 0.0% 8/9 - Sphenoid 0 0 0 0 14 0.0% 10/11 - Zygomatic 0 0 0 0 13 0.0% 12/13 - Maxilla 0 0 0 0 14 0.0% 14/15 - Nasal 0 0 0 0 14 0.0% Total Cranial 10 2 8 0 117 8.5%

Mandible

The assemblage of mandibles consists of 22 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. One of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory was not located during this analysis. This analysis found five catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Two additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with that assessment. Two fragments display sagittal bisection of the mandible in between the central incisors. The third fragment displays an incomplete “hesitation” saw cut to the inferior margin of the mandibular body on the right side in zone 1. The fourth fragment displays three parallel cut marks to the mandibular body on the left side below the first molar. The final fragment displays one oblique cut mark across the gonial angle on the right side of the mandible. Table 8 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 139 zones recorded, five (3.6 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

112

Table 8. Cut marks on the mandible. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Premolar/molar region 2 1 1 0 25 8.0% 2 - Canine region 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% 3 - Below coronoid 0 0 0 0 18 0.0% 4 - Coronoid Process 0 0 0 0 10 0.0% 5 - Condyle 0 0 0 0 15 0.0% 6 - Gonial angle 1 1 0 0 22 4.5% 7 - Incisor region 2 0 2 0 25 8.0% Total Mandible 5 2 3 0 139 3.6%

Vertebrae

The vertebral assemblage consists of 1,377 fragments, organized into 416 catalog numbers. During the original inventory, vertebrae were sorted and organized into lots by type (cervical, thoracic, lumbar), element representation (e.g. complete, body fragments, arch fragments, etc.), and evidence for pathology or taphonomic alterations.

Of these 1,377 fragments, 110 show evidence of postmortem intervention, including 62 fragments with cut marks from a bladed instrument and 48 fragments with saw cuts.

Three of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. Nineteen additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 9 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 1,837 zones recorded, 127 (6.9 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Fifteen cervical vertebrae zones display superficial cut marks in a variety of locations, including: on the superior articulation for the occipital on C1 vertebrae, below the dens on a C2 vertebra, at the margin of the inferior body articulation, on the anterior

113

Table 9. Cut marks on the vertebrae. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Body 7 3 4 0 145 4.8% 2 - L transverse process 7 3 4 0 117 6.0% 3 - R transverse process 10 5 5 0 127 7.9% 4 - Spinous process 5 4 1 0 88 5.7% Total Cervical 29 15 14 0 477 6.1%

1 - Body 6 3 3 0 271 2.2% 2 - L transverse process 25 13 12 0 239 10.5% 3 - R transverse process 10 6 4 0 244 4.1% 4 - Spinous process 6 3 3 0 162 3.7% Total Thoracic 47 25 22 0 916 5.1%

1 - Body 9 5 4 0 132 6.8% 2 - L transverse process 20 11 9 0 116 17.2% 3 - R transverse process 18 6 12 0 99 18.2% 4 - Spinous process 3 2 1 0 81 3.7% Total Lumbar 50 24 26 0 428 11.7%

Unidentified vertebrae 1 0 1 0 16 12.5% Total Vertebrae 127 64 63 0 1,837 6.9%

aspect of the body, on the transverse processes, on the laminae, and on the spinous processes. Fourteen cervical vertebrae zones display saw marks, all of which were transverse in orientation except for one oblique saw cut to the inferior aspect of the body and the transverse process. Transverse saw cuts impact the superior articular facets, the body and uncinate processes, the transverse processes, and the laminae. Overall, 6.1 percent of zones on the cervical vertebrae display evidence of postmortem intervention.

Twenty-five thoracic vertebrae zones display superficial cut marks in a variety of locations, including: cuts at the margins of body facets, vertical cut marks to the

114 lamina and transverse processes, transverse cut marks above the inferior articular facets, transverse and oblique cut marks on the spinous processes, and oblique cut marks to the body. Twenty-two thoracic vertebrae zones display saw marks, most of which are vertical in orientation. The most commonly observed cut was a vertical saw cut to the lamina of the vertebral arch, sometimes impacting the superior and inferior articular facets. These cuts are consistent with laminectomy. Two fragments show multiple incomplete vertical cuts to the neural arch, on the inferior articular facet and on the lamina. Vertical saw cuts were also observed on the pedicle and spinous process. Only two fragments display transverse cuts to the lamina. Overall, 5.1 percent of zones on the thoracic vertebrae display evidence of postmortem intervention.

Twenty-four lumbar vertebrae zones display superficial cut marks in a variety of locations, including: vertical cut marks on the laminae (the most commonly observed modification), transverse cut marks on and around the inferior articular facets, transverse cut marks to the superior articular facets, vertical cut marks to the transverse processes, cuts to the spinous processes, and cuts on and around the body facets. Twenty-six lumbar vertebrae zones display saw marks, almost all of which are transverse in orientation. The most commonly observed saw cut was a transverse saw cut to the neural arch, severing the inferior articular processes and sometimes the inferior portion of the laminae and spinous process. Transverse saw cuts also impacted vertebral bodies and laminae, and in some cases bisected the entire vertebra. In two cases, the saw cuts to the inferior articular processes were oblique, rather than transverse in orientation. One fragment showed an incomplete “hesitation” saw cut to the margin of the vertebral body and one showed a vertical saw cut the pedicle. Finally, there is one case of attempted laminectomy to a

115 lumbar vertebra, as evidenced by a complete vertical saw cut to the lamina on one side and an incomplete vertical saw cut to the lamina on the other side. Overall, 11.7 percent of zones on the lumbar vertebrae displayed evidence of postmortem intervention.

One unidentified vertebra shows evidence of a transverse saw cut to the transverse process. Three hyoid fragments were also recovered, but none show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Thorax and Shoulder

Ribs

The assemblage of ribs consists of 1,035 fragments, organized into 117 catalog numbers. During the original inventory, ribs were sorted and organized into lots by rib number, element representation (e.g. complete, head and neck fragments, shaft fragments, etc.), and evidence for pathology or taphonomic alterations. Of these 1,035 fragments, 35 show evidence of postmortem intervention. One additional catalog number had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 10 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 1,069 zones recorded, 37 (3.5 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 10. Cut marks on the ribs. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Head and neck 1 1 0 0 241 0.4% 2 - Angle 18 18 0 0 294 6.1% 3 - Shaft 18 16 2 0 534 3.4% Total Ribs 37 35 2 0 1,069 3.5%

116

Thirty-five zones display cut marks from a bladed instrument. Only one fragment displays cut marks to the head or neck of the rib, in the form of two vertical cut marks on the tubercle. Eighteen fragments show vertical or oblique cut marks in the area of the rib angle. The most commonly observed modification was multiple (up to 10) parallel, oblique cut marks to the external surface of the rib angle. Cuts were also observed on the internal surface and on the superior margin of the rib angle. Sixteen fragments show cuts to the rib shaft, all of which were vertical or oblique in orientation.

These cuts were observed on the external surface of the rib, on the internal surface, and on the superior margin of the rib shaft. Only two rib fragments displayed saw cuts, both in the form of oblique saw cuts to the rib shaft.

Sternum

The sternum assemblage consists of 29 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. This analysis found eight catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention, all in the form of saw cuts to the manubrium or sternal body.

Seven of these postmortem interventions were vertical saw cuts bisecting the manubrium or sternal body. The final postmortem intervention was a saw cut to the right clavicular notch of a manubrium fragment. One additional catalog number had a saw mark recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. This “saw mark” is more likely to be postmortem damage due to the irregular margins of the area of damage and the lack of striations from a toothed instrument. Table 11 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 21 zones recorded, eight (38.1 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

117

Table 11. Cut marks on the sternum. Number of Total Percentage Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Manubrium 5 0 5 0 10 50.0% 2 - Body 3 0 3 0 10 30.0% 3 - Xiphoid 0 0 0 0 1 0.0% Total Sternum 8 0 8 0 21 38.1%

Clavicle

The assemblage of clavicles consists of 27 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. This analysis found six catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Two additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Superficial cut marks were observed on the posterior and inferior margins of the shaft, as well as at the attachment site for the deltoid muscle. One fragment shows a vertical saw cut to the sternal end of the clavicle. Table 12 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 54 zones recorded, six (11.1 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 12. Cut marks on the clavicle. Total Percentage Number of Number of Zones Zone Zones with Blade Saw Both of with Cut Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Sternal end 3 2 1 0 18 16.7% 2 - Acromial end 1 1 0 0 20 5.0% 3 - Shaft 2 2 0 0 16 12.5% Total Clavicle 6 5 1 0 54 11.1%

118

Scapula

The assemblage of scapulae consists of 67 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. Twenty-four of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. This analysis found no evidence of postmortem intervention on the scapula. Table 13 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 103 zones recorded, none show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 13. Cut marks on the scapula. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Coracoid 0 0 0 0 12 0.0% 2 - Glenoid, superior 0 0 0 0 16 0.0% 3 - Glenoid, inferior 0 0 0 0 15 0.0% 4 - Spine, acromial 1/3 0 0 0 0 15 0.0% 5 - Neck and base of spine 0 0 0 0 16 0.0% 6 - Spine, middle 1/3 0 0 0 0 9 0.0% 7 - Body, lateral 1/2 0 0 0 0 9 0.0% 8 - Spine, medial 1/3 0 0 0 0 7 0.0% 9 - Body, medial 1/2 0 0 0 0 4 0.0% Total Scapula 0 0 0 0 103 0.0%

Upper Limb

Humerus

The assemblage of humeri consists of 46 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. One of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory was not located during this analysis. This analysis found 11 catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Postmortem interventions to the humerus consist of

119 superficial cut marks to the shaft and to the anterior and posterior aspects of the distal epiphysis. One humerus is sawn obliquely near midshaft and displayed cut marks in the region of the deltoid tuberosity. Three additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 14 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram

(2004). Of the 252 zones recorded, 14 (5.6 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 14. Cut marks on the humerus. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Proximal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 19 0.0% tubercles 2 - Proximal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% head 3 - Distal epiphysis, 2 2 0 0 19 10.5% lateral epicondyle 4 - Distal epiphysis, 1 1 0 0 21 4.8% medial epicondyle 5 - Distal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 20 0.0% capitulum 6 - Distal epiphysis, 3 3 0 0 23 13.0% trochlea 7 - Shaft, distal, lateral 1 1 0 0 26 3.8% half 8 - Shaft, distal, medial 1 1 0 0 26 3.8% half 9 - Shaft, deltoid 2 1 0 1 26 7.7% tuberosity 10 - Shaft, opposite zone 9 1 0 0 1 25 4.0% 11 - Shaft, proximal 3 3 0 0 25 12.0% Total Humerus 14 12 0 2 252 5.6%

120

Radius

The assemblage of radii consists of 49 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. One of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory was not located during this analysis. This analysis found six catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention, all of which were superficial cut marks. Superficial cut marks were observed on the anterior and posterior aspects of the distal shaft, on the styloid process, on the radial tuberosity, and on the proximal shaft near the radial head.

Three additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 15 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 326 zones recorded, 13 (4.0 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 15. Cut marks on the radius. Number Percentage Total of Zones of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both Number with Cut with Cut of Zones Marks Marks 1 - Proximal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 27 0.0% lateral 2 - Proximal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 26 0.0% medial 3 - Distal epiphysis, lateral 2 2 0 0 30 6.7% 4 - Distal epiphysis, medial 1 1 0 0 30 3.3% 5 - Shaft, proximal 1/4 3 3 0 0 29 10.3% 6 - Shaft, second 1/4, lateral 0 0 0 0 31 0.0% 7 - Shaft, second 1/4. 0 0 0 0 31 0.0% medial 8 - Shaft, third 1/4 0 0 0 0 31 0.0% 9 - Shaft, distal 1/4, lateral 2 2 0 0 32 6.3% 10 - Shaft, distal 1/4, 3 3 0 0 31 9.7% medial J - Distal epiphysis, styloid 2 2 0 0 28 7.1% process Total Radius 13 13 0 0 326 4.0%

121

Ulna

The assemblage of ulnae consists of 41 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. This analysis found nine catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Superficial cut marks were observed on the posterior olecranon process (the most commonly observed modification), on the coronoid process, and on the shaft of the ulna. Two fragments displayed transverse saw cuts severing the olecranon process. One additional catalog number had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 16 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 227 zones recorded, 12 (5.3 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 16. Cut marks on the ulna. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks A+B - Proximal 0 0 0 0 31 0.0% epiphysis, olecranon C - Proximal epiphysis, 6 4 2 0 31 19.4% trochlear notch D - Proximal epiphysis, 0 0 0 0 28 0.0% radial notch E - Shaft, proximal half 5 5 0 0 30 16.7% F - Shaft, distal half, 0 0 0 0 29 0.0% proximal 1/3 G - Shaft, distal half, 0 0 0 0 29 0.0% middle 1/3 H - Shaft, distal half, 1 1 0 0 28 3.6% distal 1/3 J - Distal epiphysis, head 0 0 0 0 21 0.0% and styloid Total Ulna 12 10 2 0 227 5.3%

122

Hand

The assemblage of hand bones consists of approximately 412 elements or fragments. Nine of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. This analysis found four catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Two lunates display superficial cut marks and two metacarpals display superficial cut marks on the shaft. Nine additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings.

Table 17 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and

Outram (2004). Of the 939 zones recorded, four (0.4 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Pelvis Sacrum

The sacrum assemblage consists of 24 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. This analysis found no evidence of postmortem intervention on the sacrum. In addition, five coccyx fragments were recorded, none of which show evidence for postmortem intervention. Table 18 summarizes the cut mark data on the sacrum according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 35 zones recorded, none show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Os Coxae

The os coxae assemblage consists of 84 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. Two of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. This analysis found three catalog

123 numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention, two from a bladed instrument and one from a saw. One os coxae displayed a superficial cut mark on the superior aspect of the iliopubic ramus, and another displayed six parallel cut marks on the posterior surface of the ischiopubic ramus. One pubis displays a vertical saw cut severing the pubic symphysis. Two additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 19 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 276 zones recorded, three (1.1 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 17. Cut marks on the hand. Number Percentage Total of Zones of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both Number with Cut with Cut of Zones Marks Marks Capitate 0 0 0 0 11 0.0% Hamate 0 0 0 0 15 0.0% Lunate 2 2 0 0 13 15.4% Pisiform 0 0 0 0 4 0.0% Scaphoid 0 0 0 0 15 0.0% Trapezium 0 0 0 0 16 0.0% Trapezoid 0 0 0 0 11 0.0% Triquetral 0 0 0 0 9 0.0% Total Carpals 2 2 0 0 94 2.1%

1 - Proximal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 110 0.0% 2 - Distal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 101 0.0% 3 - Shaft 2 2 0 0 121 1.7% Total Metacarpals 2 2 0 0 332 0.6%

1 - Proximal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 163 0.0% 2 - Distal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 173 0.0% 3 - Shaft 0 0 0 0 177 0.0% Total Phalanges 0 0 0 0 513 0.0%

Total Hand 4 4 0 0 939 0.4%

124

Table 18. Cut marks on the sacrum. Number Percentage Total of Zones of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both Number with Cut with Cut of Zones Marks Marks 1 - Body 0 0 0 0 9 0.0% 2 - L lateral portion 0 0 0 0 7 0.0% 3 - R lateral portion 0 0 0 0 8 0.0% 4 - Spinous process 0 0 0 0 11 0.0% Total Sacrum 0 0 0 0 35 0.0%

Table 19. Cut marks on the os coxae. Number Percentage Total of Zones of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both Number with Cut with Cut of Zones Marks Marks 1 - Acetabulum, superior half 0 0 0 0 28 0.0% 2 - Acetabulum, inferior half, 0 0 0 0 27 0.0% posterior 3 - Acetabulum, inferior half, 0 0 0 0 23 0.0% anterior 4 - Ischium, superior 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% 5 - Ilium, inferior (body) 0 0 0 0 26 0.0% 6 - Ischium, tuberosity, 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% superior 7 - Ilium, auricular surface 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% 8 - Pubis, tubercle and 1 1 0 0 17 5.9% pectineal line 9 - Pubis, pubic symphysis 1 0 1 0 23 4.3% 10 - Ilium, wing/blade 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% 11 - Ischium, tuberosity, 1 1 0 0 20 5.0% inferior 12 - Ilium, iliac crest 0 0 0 0 18 0.0% Total Os Coxae 3 2 1 0 276 1.1%

Lower Limb Femur

The assemblage of femora consists of 37 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. This analysis found seven catalog numbers with evidence of

125 postmortem intervention. Superficial cut marks were observed proximally on the femoral head, neck, and greater trochanter, and distally on the patellar surface. Two femurs display saw cuts through the neck, severing the femoral head. One femur is sectioned transversely through the shaft near the border between zone 6 and zones 7/8. Three additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Eight patellae were also recorded, but none show evidence for postmortem intervention. Table 20 summarizes the cut mark data for the femur according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 224 zones recorded, eight (3.6 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 20. Cut marks on the femur. Number Percentage Total of Zones of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both Number with Cut with Cut of Zones Marks Marks 1 - Proximal, greater trochanter 1 1 0 0 19 5.3% 2 - Proximal, lesser trochanter 0 0 0 0 21 0.0% 3 - Proximal, gluteal tuberosity 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% 4 - Proximal, head 2 1 1 0 17 11.8% 5 - Proximal, neck 2 1 1 0 21 9.5% 6 - Shaft, middle 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% 7 - Shaft, distal, lateral half 1 0 1 0 22 4.5% 8 - Shaft, distal, medial half 1 0 1 0 22 4.5% 9 - Distal, lateral condyle and epicondyle 0 0 0 0 21 0.0% 10 - Distal, medial condyle and epicondyle 0 0 0 0 18 0.0% 11 - Distal, intercondylar space/articulation 1 1 0 0 19 5.3% Total Femur 8 4 4 0 224 3.6%

126

Tibia

The assemblage of tibiae consists of 46 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. Two of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. This analysis found seven catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. One tibia displays multiple parallel, transverse cut marks to the medial malleolus. Six tibiae were severed by transverse saw cuts, three of which were cut more than once. Most of the transverse saw cuts impacted the distal articulation and/or the distal shaft, but one severed the bone at midshaft and another severed the proximal end of the bone. Table 21 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 170 zones recorded, 17 (10.0 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 21. Cut marks on the tibia. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Proximal, medial condyle 1 0 1 0 15 6.7% 2 - Proximal, intercondylar fossa 1 0 1 0 12 8.3% 3 - Proximal, lateral condyle 1 0 1 0 14 7.1% 4 - Proximal, tibial tuberosity 0 0 0 0 18 0.0% 5 - Distal, medial malleolus 6 1 5 0 16 37.5% 6 - Distal, lateral malleolus 5 0 5 0 20 25.0% 7 - Shaft, proximal 1/4 0 0 0 0 19 0.0% 8 - Shaft, second 1/4 0 0 0 0 20 0.0% 9 - Shaft, third 1/4 2 0 2 0 20 10.0% 10 - Shaft, distal 1/4 1 0 1 0 16 6.3% Total Tibia 17 1 16 0 170 10.0%

127

Fibula

The assemblage of fibulae consists of 44 catalog numbers, each representing a single element or fragment. One of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory was not located during this analysis. This analysis found nine catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Three fibulae display multiple parallel, transverse cut marks to the lateral malleolus, and another fibula features multiple parallel cut marks to the proximal shaft. Five fibulae were severed by transverse saw cuts, mostly to the distal shaft. One fibula was severed more than once. Table 22 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Of the 125 zones recorded, 10 (8.0 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Table 22. Cut marks on the fibula. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Proximal epiphysis 1 1 0 0 12 8.3% 2 - Distal epiphysis 4 3 1 0 19 21.1% 3 - Shaft, distal 1/4 3 0 3 0 24 12.5% 4 - Shaft, third 1/4 2 0 2 0 25 8.0% 5 - Shaft, second 1/4 0 0 0 0 23 0.0% 6 - Shaft, proximal 1/4 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% Total Fibula 10 4 6 0 125 8.0%

Foot

The assemblage of foot bones consists of approximately 441 elements or fragments. Six of the catalog numbers recorded in the original inventory were not located during this analysis. This analysis found seven catalog numbers with evidence of postmortem intervention. Four calcaneus fragments display saw cuts, three of which were

128

Table 23. Cut marks on the foot. Number Total Percentage of Zones Number of Zones Zone Blade Saw Both with Cut of with Cut Marks Zones Marks 1 - Tuberosity 0 0 0 0 24 0.0% 2 - Proximal body 2 0 2 0 22 9.1% 3 - Sustentaculum tali 0 0 0 0 29 0.0% 4 - Distal articulation 0 0 0 0 22 0.0% 5 - Distal body 2 0 2 0 27 7.4% Total Calcaneus 4 0 4 0 124 3.2%

1 - Trochlea, medial 0 0 0 0 37 0.0% 2 - Trochlea, lateral 0 0 0 0 37 0.0% 3 - Distal (head), medial 1 1 0 0 35 2.9% 4 - Distal (head), lateral 0 0 0 0 34 0.0% Total Talus 1 1 0 0 143 0.7%

Cuboid 0 0 0 0 17 0.0% Navicular 0 0 0 0 27 0.0% Medial Cuneiform 0 0 0 0 23 0.0% Intermediate Cuneiform 1 1 0 0 14 7.1% Lateral Cuneiform 0 0 0 0 25 0.0% Total Other Tarsals 1 1 0 0 106 0.9%

Total Tarsals 6 2 4 0 373 1.6%

1 - Proximal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 124 0.0% 2 - Distal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 85 0.0% 3 - Shaft 0 0 0 0 126 0.0% Total Metatarsals 0 0 0 0 335 0.0%

1 - Proximal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 82 0.0% 2 - Distal epiphysis 0 0 0 0 82 0.0% 3 - Shaft 1 0 1 0 91 1.1% Total Phalanges 1 0 1 0 255 0.4%

Sesamoids 0 0 0 0 4 0.0% Total Foot 7 2 5 0 967 0.7%

129 sawn transversely through the body. One talus has a superficial cut mark on a facet for the calcaneus. Many other tali have recent saw cuts from destructive sampling for stable isotope analysis. One intermediate cuneiform has a superficial cut mark on the plantar surface. One first phalanx has been sawed transversely, severing the basal facet. Thirteen additional catalog numbers had cut marks recorded on the original inventory, but this analysis did not agree with those findings. Table 23 summarizes the cut mark data according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). This table excludes the recent saw cuts for stable isotope sampling. Of the 967 zones recorded, seven (0.7 percent) show evidence of postmortem intervention.

Other Elements

In addition to the elements above, four fragments of ossified cartilage and three long bone fragments were also identified, none of which show evidence of postmortem intervention. The original CSU Chico inventory records 29 bags of unidentified fragments that were not included in this analysis.

Statistical Analysis

The cut mark data for the Point San Jose assemblage was compared statistically to the data from four comparative assemblages: Holden Chapel, the Medical

College of Georgia, the Medical College of Virginia, and the Blockley Almshouse. Table

24 shows the prevalence of cut marks for the Point San Jose assemblage and the four comparative sites in major elements or regions of the body. At first glance, the results appear mixed: the prevalence of cut marks on the cranial remains of the Point San Jose assemblage appears to be most similar to the data from the Medical College of Virginia,

130 the postcranial data is most similar to Holden Chapel, and the overall prevalence of cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage is most similar to the Blockley

Almshouse.

Table 24. Summary of selected cut mark data from Point San Jose and the four comparative assemblages. Medical College Medical College Blockley Point San Jose Holden Chapel Element of Georgia of Virginia Almshouse # Cut % Cut # Cut % Cut # Cut % Cut # Cut % Cut # Cut % Cut Total 110 / 35 / 12 / 70 17.1% 4 / 41 9.8% 15.5% 17.9% 28 / 39 71.8% Cranial 708 196

Humerus 11 / 46 23.9% 0 / 11 0.0% 17 / 280 6.1% 1 / 87 1.1% 11 / 43 25.6% Radius 6 / 49 12.2% 0 / 13 0.0% 8 / 236 3.4% 5 / 61 8.2% 13 / 35 37.1% Ulna 9 / 41 22.0% 0 / 14 0.0% 15 / 289 5.2% 4 / 70 5.7% 16 / 40 40.0% Femur 7 / 37 18.9% 9 / 21 42.9% 33 / 433 7.6% 13 / 82 15.9% 24 / 60 40.0% Tibia 7 / 46 15.2% 7 / 18 38.9% 21 / 349 6.0% 10 / 86 11.6% 17 / 44 38.6% Fibula 9 / 44 20.5% 5 / 16 31.3% 4 / 219 1.8% 7 / 78 9.0% 18 / 46 39.1% Total 222 / 47 / 279 / 44 / 119 / Post- 5.9% 6.6% 3.3% 7.4% 4.8% 3770 708 8368 595 2495 cranial

234 / 47 / 389 / 79 / 147 / Total 6.1% 5.6% 4.0% 10.0% 5.8% 3852 835 9808 791 2534

In order to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences between the cut mark data from Point San Jose and the other four sites, 36 Pearson’s chi-squared tests were conducted using IBM SPSS®. The results of these tests are summarized in Table

25. Fisher’s exact test was used when the expected count for any cell was less than five.

Statistically significant results are highlighted. Overall, the Point San Jose data was most similar to the Holden Chapel data and least similar to the Medical College of Georgia data.

No statistically significant differences were found between the cut mark data for Point San Jose and for Holden Chapel. The data for the Medical College of Georgia

131

Table 25. Summary of Pearson’s chi-squared test and Fisher’s exact test results. Element or Chi-squared Comparison 2 df p-value Phi (φ) Region (χ )

Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel 0.242 1 0.623 0.007 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia 28.252 1 0.000 0.045 Overall Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 15.979 1 0.000 -0.059 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 0.204 1 0.651 0.006 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel 1.144 1 0.285 0.102 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia 0.124 1 0.724 0.013 Cranial Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 0.018 1 0.893 -0.008 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 32.203 1 0.000 -0.544 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel 0.594 1 0.441 -0.012 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia 42.858 1 0.000 0.059 Postcranial Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 2.038 1 0.153 -0.022 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 3.653 1 0.056 0.024 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel Fisher's exact test 0.99 0.239 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0.000 0.222 Humerus Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia Fisher's exact test 0.000 0.378 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 0.33 1 0.855 -0.019 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel Fisher's exact test 0.328 0.169 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0.019 0.155 Radius Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia Fisher's exact test 0.535 0.067 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 6.811 1 0.009 -0.283 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel Fisher's exact test 0.092 0.258 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0.001 0.213 Ulna Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia Fisher's exact test 0.015 0.244 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 3.091 1 0.079 -0.195 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel 3.843 1 0.05 -0.257 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0.028 0.109 Femur Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 0.171 1 0.679 0.038 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 4.677 1 0.031 -0.22 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel Fisher's exact test 0.051 -0.257 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0.032 0.115 Tibia Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 0.344 1 0.557 0.051 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 6.307 1 0.012 -0.265 Point San Jose vs Holden Chapel Fisher's exact test 0.492 -0.113 Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Georgia Fisher's exact test 0 0.321 Fibula Point San Jose vs Med. Coll. of Virginia 3.254 1 0.071 0.163 Point San Jose vs Blockley Almshouse 3.735 1 0.053 -0.204

132 was significantly different from the Point San Jose data for all regions of the body except the cranium. The data for the Medical College of Virginia was significantly different from the Point San Jose data for the humerus, the ulna, and the overall assemblage. The data for Blockley Almshouse was significantly different from the Point San Jose data for cranium, the radius, the femur, and the tibia.

The phi coefficient, which measures effect size, revealed a weak relationship between the variables of cut mark prevalence and archaeological site for each test. This indicates that there is not a strong difference between the cut mark data for each site when compared to the Point San Jose assemblage, even for the comparisons which yielded statistically significant results. The small effect size is likely influenced by the small sample sizes for many of these statistical comparisons.

Summary

This chapter reported the results of data collection on the Point San Jose assemblage according to the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). The cut mark data was reported according to two different units of analysis: zones and fragments.

These two methods of data reporting will be compared in Chapter VI, Discussion, to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the Knüsel and Outram (2004) zonation method for recording cut marks on human skeletal remains.

The overall prevalence of cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage was 6.1 percent of fragments (4.1 percent of zones). Evidence for postmortem intervention was observed on 17.1 percent of cranial and mandible fragments

(5.9 percent of zones) and 5.9 percent of postcranial fragments (4.0 percent of zones).

133

The cranial assemblage overall shows a higher prevalence of cutmarks than the postcranial remains. In addition, the cranium and mandible were more impacted by saw cuts, while the postcranial remains were more impacted by superficial cuts from bladed instruments. Postcranial cut marks were most prevalent on the sternum, clavicle, and long bones. The lower limb bones were more impacted by saw cuts than the bones of the upper limb. The vertebrae, ribs, and os coxae display relatively moderate cut mark prevalence rates. Cut marks were infrequently observed on the hand and foot bones and are absent on the scapula and sacrum

This chapter also reported the results of statistical tests comparing the Point

San Jose data to four comparative assemblages. The Point San Jose cut mark data by fragments was compared to the cut mark data from Holden Chapel, the Medical College of Georgia, the Medical College of Virginia, and Blockley Almshouse using Pearson’s chi-squared tests and Fisher’s exact tests. These tests revealed that the Point San Jose data is most similar to the data from Holden Chapel, and least similar to the data from the

Medical College of Georgia. These results are interpreted in Chapter VI, Discussion.

134

CHAPTER VI

DISCUSSION

This chapter discusses the results of the thesis project and interprets the patterning of cutmarks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage. First, the advantages and disadvantages of the zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) are discussed in the context of bioarchaeology studies of autopsy and dissection. The following section compares the cut mark evidence from the Point San Jose assemblage to the diagnostic criteria for various anatomization activities outlined in Appendix B. An interpretation for the Point San Jose assemblage is offered based on multiple lines of evidence including the cut mark data, the results of the statistical tests, and the archaeological context of the assemblage. Finally, the potential evidence for structural violence in the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage is presented and discussed.

Evaluating the Zonation Method

This thesis project independently recorded the element representation and location of cut marks for the Point San Jose assemblage using the zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). This method proved to have both advantages and disadvantages for the recording and interpretation of cut marks in the context of bioarchaeological studies of anatomization. The chief advantage of this method is that it offers precision, standardization, and specificity in the recording of element representation and taphonomy on the bones. This method streamlines the data collection process significantly and ensures that the resulting data is intelligible to other researchers.

135

The zonation method also maximizes the potential for future analyses to be conducted using the initial data set. For example, cut mark analysis was the focus of this thesis, but my zonation data for the Point San Jose assemblage could be used to estimate

MNI and element recovery rates, to study breakage patterns and fragmentation, and to identify potentially conjoining fragments, among other possibilities.

Zones

There are some elements for which the zones of Knüsel and Outram (2004) were cumbersome or confusing to follow and other elements for which the number of zones seemed inadequate for some descriptions and analyses. I have outlined the difficulties I experienced with data recording below. I have also included my own recommendations for how the zonation method could be improved for the recording of human skeletal remains. It is important to note that these recommendations may make the zonation method less accurate for comparing the zones of human remains to the zones of animal remains as in Dobney and Reilly (1988).

Skull. For the cranium, each major element represents a single zone.

Recording would be enhanced by adding “sub-zones,” perhaps with letter designations, for many of the elements. For example, the temporal could be divided into three subzones: the petrous portion, the temporal squama, and the mastoid process. For the purpose of this thesis, a more fine-grained recording of cranial elements would help differentiate between dissection of the middle ear in the form of saw cuts to the petrous portion, for example, and an abnormally low craniotomy cut in the form of saw marks to the temporal squama. Furthermore, there should be zones for the smaller facial bones which are excluded by Knüsel and Outram (2004): ethmoid, vomer, palatines, lacrimals,

136 and nasal conchae. While these bones proved insignificant to the results of this thesis project, other studies may require recording of these elements.

For the mandible, the zones of Knüsel and Outram (2004) do not distinguish between right and left sides of the bone. It was unclear if each zone represents that portion on both sides (e.g. zone 4 encompasses the right and left coronoid process), or if the zones are mirror on each side (e.g. there is a zone 4 for the right mandible and a separate zone 4 for the left mandible). I chose the latter interpretation for use in this thesis.

Vertebral column. The recording of vertebrae proved to be the most challenging. Numerous cut marks were observed on the lamina and on the superior and inferior articular facets, but it was unclear how to record these marks in a meaningful way according to the zones defined by Knüsel and Outram (2004). For example, the articular facets are supposed to belong to Zones 2 and 3 with the transverse processes and pedicles; however, in a fragmentary state, the inferior articular facets were more commonly found attached to the spinous process (Zone 4), rather than the transverse process. It is unclear from the illustrations where the boundaries lie between Zone 4 and zones 2 and 3, making it difficult to record the locations of cut marks to the lamina of the vertebrae. In my opinion, recording would be enhanced by creating separate zones for the superior articular facets, for the inferior articular facets, and for the lamina on each side.

Knüsel and Outram (2004) consider the sacrum to be a single element with four zones, corresponding to the zones of the vertebrae. For example, Zone 1 encompasses the bodies of all sacral vertebrae fused together. However, this method of recording offers little guidance for how to record the completeness of fragmentary or

137 juvenile sacral vertebrae. It also offers little precision for the recording of taphonomy, pathology, and other observations for the sacrum. I think that recording would be enhanced by assigning the four zones for each sacral segment, instead of the sacrum as a whole.

Ribs. Data recording for this thesis would have been enhanced by the creation of a fourth zone for the sternal end of the rib. This would have helped identify cut and saw marks related to thoracotomy.

Scapula. In my opinion, the zones for the scapula are confusing and do not enhance the recording of element representation nor taphonomy. I think the zones for this element could be revised using the ossification centers for the scapula and common fracture patterns.

Long bones. I think the recording and interpretation of data for the long bones would be improved by standardizing the way the shaft is divided into zones. In Knüsel and Outram (2004), each long bone has its own pattern of zones for the shaft, which inhibits direct comparisons between bones.

Calcaneus. I found the zones on the calcaneus to be confusing, particularly the boundaries between the zones 2-5 on the superior aspect of the bone. The illustrations in

Knüsel and Outram (2004) only show these zones from an inferior view of the calcaneus.

Quantification

Reporting element representation and cut mark data by zone produces different results than reporting by fragment, which is more commonly seen in the bioarchaeology literature. For the Point San Jose assemblage, the zonation method produced more conservative estimations of cut mark prevalence for nearly every element and region of

138 the body (see Chapter V, Tables 5 and 6 for a complete account of these differences).

When recording by fragment, evidence for postmortem intervention was observed on

17.1 percent of cranial and mandible fragments and 5.9 percent of postcranial fragments.

When recording by zone, evidence for postmortem intervention was observed only 5.9 percent of cranial and mandible zones and 4.0 percent of postcranial zones. The overall prevalence of cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage was 6.1 percent of fragments and 4.1 percent of zones.

These differences are largely due to factors affecting sample size. The zonation method typically increases the sample size for data collection for each element, sometimes quite dramatically. This is because individual fragments usually represent more than one zone. For example, the zonation method nearly doubled the overall sample size for the Point San Jose assemblage from 3,852 fragments to 6,904 zones. The potential for larger sample sizes may make the zonation method attractive for many researchers because larger sample sizes generally strengthen the power of statistical tests.

However, unless a bone has multiple cut or saw marks, the zonation method does not dramatically increase the number of units with evidence for postmortem intervention. The combination of larger sample sizes and relatively modest increases in the number of units with cut marks resulted in lower estimated prevalence rates for cut marks on many elements in the Point San Jose assemblage. For example, the sample size for cranial elements increased from 70 fragments to 256 zones, but the number of units with cut marks only increased from 12 fragments to 15 zones, resulting in a dramatically lower prevalence rate for cutmarks on the cranium from 17.1 percent of fragments to only 5.9 percent of zones.

139

For some elements, however, the zonation method may actually decrease the sample size. This occurs when small fragments are excluded from analysis due to their incompleteness. The zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) only records zones that are more than 50 percent complete to avoid double-counting zones represented by more than one fragment. This excludes many small fragments and may reduce the sample size for elements that are found in a highly fragmentary state. For the Point San Jose assemblage, this rule greatly impacted the quantification of sternal fragments. Most of the

29 sternal fragments represented only one zone, but nine of these fragments were less than 50 percent complete and were excluded from analysis under the zonation method.

This resulted in a smaller sample size for the sternum when reported by zone and a higher estimated prevalence rate for cut marks on the sternum: 38.1 percent of zones versus 27.6 percent of fragments.

The degree of fragmentation of the remains is another important factor that affects the quantification of skeletal assemblages. Overall, the reporting of cut mark prevalences by fragment seems more sensitive to fragmentation than the reporting of cut mark prevalences by zone. This is because the zonation method works by essentially dividing each element into standard fragments and recording those zones individually. In theory, fragmentation should not affect the number of zones recorded. For example, a complete scapula will always have the same number of zones (nine), no matter if it is recovered intact, broken into two pieces, or broken into six pieces. The exception is in the case of extreme fragmentation which results in many zones that are less than 50 percent complete, as in the case of the sternal fragments discussed above.

140

This thesis shows that reporting element representation and taphonomy using both units of analysis, fragments and zones, offers the best of both worlds. Comparisons between these units of analysis can provide important insights about the degree of fragmentation of the assemblage, as discussed above. Using both units of analysis may also reveal the degree or intensity of postmortem intervention on each fragment. Multiple cut marks on a single fragment, especially if these cut marks lie in different zones, will result in an increase to the number of units with evidence for postmortem intervention.

For example, for the Point San Jose assemblage the number of units with cut marks on the tibia increased from seven fragments to 17 zones because of the presence of multiple cut marks on several tibiae. This increase shows that the tibia was subject to the greatest intensity of postmortem intervention of all of the elements in the Point San Jose assemblage. This is in contrast to the elements such as the mandible, clavicle, sternum, os coxae, and hands and feet, which show no difference in the number of units with cut marks. These elements show only one cut mark on each fragment with evidence for postmortem intervention.

Implications for Future Studies

The zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) helps manage the recording and analysis of large datasets for commingled and fragmentary assemblages.

This thesis project shows how testable hypotheses can be constructed using the zones of

Knüsel and Outram (2004) to facilitate data searches. For example, without the zonation method, a search for evidence of craniotomy on the Point San Jose assemblage may involve reading cut mark descriptions or examining individual photographs for all cranial elements in the assemblage to locate evidence that matches the description of a

141 craniotomy saw cut. This task becomes only more cumbersome as the size and complexity of the assemblage increases. However, the diagnostic table of criteria in

Appendix B defines evidence for craniotomy as a transverse saw cut that affects cranial zones 1-5. Instead of the qualitative search process described above, I simply sorted my

Excel data sheet for elements that were marked as present for cranial zones 1, 2, 3, 4, or

5, and then searched these results for any elements coded for saw marks or cut marks.

The search procedure used in this thesis took only a couple of minutes per query, but data searches using the zonation method would be greatly optimized through the use of a software package such as CoRA (CoRA 2019). This approach can be used to construct and quickly test hypotheses for a wide variety of research questions.

Finally, the greatest advantage of the Knüsel and Outram (2004) zonation method is its potential for the standardization of data collection for human skeletal remains. There is an urgent need for standardization in physical anthropology in order to facilitate comparisons between studies and to build large data sets to improve the accuracy and precision of statistically-derived methods of skeletal analysis. The development of CoRA is just one example of recent efforts to standardize data collection in the field of forensic anthropology in particular. This literature review for this thesis revealed a lack of standardization in the reporting of findings for skeletal assemblages with evidence for autopsy and dissection. This lack of standardization significantly limited direct comparisons between these sites and hampered the development of testable hypotheses for the prevalence of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage.

This thesis independently recorded the cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage using the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004), but ultimately this

142 data was not used for comparison to other sites because the data for the comparative assemblages were reported according to fragments, not zones. A number of other comparisons would have been possible if there existed another assemblage that was recorded using the zonation method. Zone-by-zone comparisons of cut mark data may generate additional criteria or testable hypotheses for the identification of autopsy and dissection of human skeletal remains. I believe that increased standardization in data collection is the next step for the emerging subfield of autopsy and dissection studies within bioarchaeology.

Diagnostic Criteria for Anatomization

Autopsy

Cranial. The Point San Jose assemblage exhibits some modifications that are consistent with autopsy, specifically the procedures of craniotomy, thoracotomy, and defleshing of the vertebral column. Two cranial individuals show evidence for possible craniotomy. One cranial individual displays transverse saw cuts to the frontal, parietals, and occipital. The rear portion of the cranium of this individual is shown in Figure 7. A second individual, represented by a right parietal fragment, shows one transverse saw cut above the squamosal suture with three grooves parallel to the saw cut, possibly the result of the instrument “skipping” during the sawing motion.

143

Figure 7. Cranial fragment with evidence for craniotomy (GGNRA #43092). Rear lateral view of the occipital, right parietal, and right temporal, showing a transverse saw cut to the cranium.

Postcranial. Evidence for possible thoracotomy was observed in the form of sagittal saw cuts to the sternum and manubrium and one saw cut to the sternal end of the clavicle. Figure 8 shows a manubrium with a sagittal saw cut. There is no evidence for saw cuts to the sternal rib ends, which may suggest that the rib cage was opened by cutting through the costal cartilage, rather than through the bone. Defleshing of the vertebral column, which may occur in some autopsies, was observed in the form of a cut marks to the body and transverse processes of some thoracic vertebrae and cut marks to the tubercle of one rib. Cut marks observed on the mandible, pelvis, long bones, hands, and feet of the Point San Jose assemblage are not consistent with autopsy, as these cuts are rarely seen in autopsied individuals unless there is evidence of adjacent trauma or pathology.

144

Figure 8. Manubrium with evidence for thoracotomy (GGNRA #42234). Anterior view of the left half of the manubrium; this element has been bisected by a sagittal saw cut.

Other criteria. The burial context of the Point San Jose assemblage is not consistent with autopsy. The human remains at Point San Jose were discovered in a commingled and fragmentary condition, informally buried in a waste pit with discarded faunal remains and medical artifacts. Autopsied remains are more likely to be found as complete articulated skeletons in formal, individual burials in public cemeteries.

Dissection

Cranial. The craniotomy marks described above as evidence for autopsy could also be considered evidence for dissection, since craniotomy is common to both procedures. The same cranial individual depicted in Figure 7 also displays a sagittal saw cut to the calotte, the “cap” of bone severed by a transverse craniotomy. This saw cut suggests that the skull was partially bisected in addition to the transverse craniotomy.

Figure 9 depicts this calotte, which displays both transverse and sagittal saw marks.

145

Bisection of the cranium suggests dissection, rather than autopsy, as the more likely explanation for the saw cuts seen on this cranium.

Figure 9. Calotte with evidence for craniotomy and bisection of the cranium (GGNRA #42908, conjoins with #43092 in Figure 7). Superior view of the right parietal and frontal, showing a sagittal saw cut and a transverse saw cut.

Another fragment displays at least 10 small, parallel cut marks on the left parietal and the occipital squama, above and below the squamosal suture. These marks suggest defleshing of the cranium, but there is no evidence for craniotomy on this individual. Dittmar and Mitchell (2015:78) propose that cutmarks on unopened crania may be considered a diagnostic marker for distinguishing dissected remains from autopsied remains. Dittmar and Mitchell (2015:77) hypothesize that these crania were intentionally left unopened and then were subsequently defleshed for use as intact teaching specimens.

146

There are no cut marks to the facial bones or temporals that would suggest the dissection of eyes, nose, ears, or sinuses, however there are cuts to the mandible that are consistent with dissection of the oral cavity. Two fragments show evidence of bisection of the mandible in between the central incisors. One of these fragments is shown in

Figure 10. Other mandible fragments show an incomplete saw cut to the inferior margin of the body and multiple superficial cut marks to the buccal surface of the mandible.

Figure 10. Mandible with evidence for bisection (GGNRA #42828). Lingual view of the right half of the mandible, showing a sagittal saw cut at the midline.

Postcranial. The marks associated with thoracotomy and defleshing of the vertebral column described above as evidence for autopsy could also be considered evidence for dissection, since these procedures are common to both autopsy and dissection. The vertebrae of the Point San Jose assemblage display other evidence of dissection in the form of laminectomy of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae (Figure 11), hemisection of the thoracic vertebrae, and transverse saw cuts to the cervical (Figure 12)

147 and lumbar vertebrae (Figure 13). In dissection, transverse saw cuts to the vertebrae are used to divide the body into smaller portions: cervical vertebrae are severed transversely to remove the head (decapitation) and lumbar vertebrae are severed transversely to separate the lower body from the torso.

Figure 11. Thoracic vertebra with evidence for laminectomy (GGNRA #43192). Posterior view of a thoracic vertebra showing a vertical saw cut to the right lamina, just medial to the superior articular facet.

Figure 12. Superior view of a cervical vertebra, showing a transverse saw cut to the body and right superior articular facet (GGNRA #43452).

148

Figure 13. Superior view of a lumbar vertebra, showing a transverse saw cut through the neural arch and the vertebral body (GGNRA #43411).

The Point San Jose assemblage displays other evidence for sectioning and dismemberment of the body in the form of transverse cuts to the long bones, specifically: cuts to the olecranon process of the ulna (Figure 14), the neck of the femur (Figure 15), the proximal end of the tibia, and the distal shafts and distal articulations of the tibia and fibula (Figures 16-19). These saw cuts are very close to the joints of the elbow, hip, knee, and ankle and were probably executed for the purpose sectioning the limbs into smaller portions. In addition, saw cuts observed on multiple calcanei may indicate removal of the feet by sawing through the ankle joint (Figure 20).

There are no cuts to the scapula or sacrum observed in the Point San Jose assemblage, as seen in some dissections. However, there is one sagittal saw cut to the pubic symphysis (Figure 21), which is consistent with dissection of the pelvis. Finally, there is additional evidence for dissection on the Point San Jose assemblage in the form

149 of superficial cut marks throughout the skeleton, including at joint articulations and muscle attachment sites, consistent with defleshing.

Figure 14. Fragment of the olecranon process, severed by a transverse saw cut to the proximal end of the ulna (GGNRA #43022).

Figure 15. Posterior view of a proximal left femur with an oblique saw cut through the femoral neck (GGNRA #42380).

150

Figure 16. Distal shaft of the tibia with a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #41766).

Figure 17. Distal articulation of the tibia, severed from the rest of the bone by a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42711).

Figure 18. Distal shaft of the fibula with a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42674).

151

Figure 19. Distal articulation of the fibula, severed from the rest of the bone by a transverse saw cut (GGNRA #42291).

Figure 20. Proximal portion of the calcaneus (the calcaneal tuberosity), severed by a vertical saw cut though the body (GGNRA #42975).

Figure 21. Posterior view of the left pubis, showing a vertical saw cut to the pubic symphysis (GGNRA #42535).

152

Other criteria. The burial context of the Point San Jose assemblage is highly suggestive of dissection: the human remains were informally buried in a waste pit with animal bones, medical artifacts, and other discards; the skeletal elements were found in a fragmentary, disarticulated, and commingled state; and the pit was associated with a medical institution in the form of the adjacent post hospital for Point San Jose.

Surgery

Cranial. There is no evidence for surgery on the cranium: there were no circular saw cuts for trephination and no other cut marks with signs of healing that would suggest premortem surgical procedures.

Postcranial. The Point San Jose assemblage shows evidence for possible surgery in the form of saw cuts to the long bones. Transverse saw cuts impacted the midshaft of the humerus, the olecranon process of the ulna, the neck of the femur, the shaft of the femur, the proximal end of the tibia, the midshaft of the tibia, and the distal shaft and distal articulation of the tibia and fibula. Three of the tibiae and one fibula were sawn more than once. The midshaft cuts to the humerus (Figure 22), femur (Figure 23), and tibia (Figure 24) provide the strongest evidence for possible practice amputations surgeries, however only the humerus shows evidence for superficial cut marks near the saw cut as seen in other practice amputations. The other saw cuts are very close to the joints of the elbow, hip, knee, and ankle and were probably executed for the purpose of dismemberment or sectioning of the body for dissection. There were no cuts with signs of healing that would suggest premortem surgical procedures. There was no evidence of pathology or trauma near the cuts that would suggest perimortem surgery.

153

Figure 22. Right humerus with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #42422).

Figure 23. Right femur with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #41770).

Figure 24. Right tibia with a saw cut to the middle shaft (GGNRA #42845).

154

Experimentation

Cranial. None of the experimental saw cuts described in the bioarchaeology literature were observed on the crania and mandibles from Point San Jose: there were no multiple trephinations on the same skull, no multiple saw cuts to the same mandible, no trephination of the mandible, no postmortem removal of anterior dentition, no exposure of the frontal sinus, and no excision of the mastoid process. However, it could be argued that the multiple cuts to the cranium depicted in Figures 7 and 9 are “experimental” in nature. It is unclear why a calotte would be bisected if the cranium was already opened with a transverse craniotomy cut.

Postcranial. No cut marks with unusual angles or shapes were observed on the

Point San Jose assemblage that could not be explained by another anatomization activity.

However, it could be argued that the multiple sectioning of tibiae and one fibula may be

“experimental” in nature.

Specimen Preparation

The human remains in the Point San Jose assemblage show no signs of wires, pins, screws and/or drill holes that would suggest articulation of elements for use as anatomical or pathological specimens. There was no clear evidence of staining from colored wax or dye injections. Several bones in the Point San Jose assemblage exhibit reddish-brown staining but stable isotope analysis suggests that this staining derives from proximity to iron-rich materials, such as metal artifacts (Willey et al. 2018:188).

Femora and crania demonstrated lower recovery rates in the Point San Jose assemblage than expected based on their high preservation potential (Willey et al.

2018:82). Missing crania from individual burials, or under-represented crania in

155 commingled burials, may represent retention of these elements for anatomical specimens, especially if there is evidence for decapitation or dissection on the postcranial remains.

Possible evidence for decapitation is observed in the Point San Jose assemblage in the form of superficial cut marks to C1 and C2 vertebrae and transverse saw cuts to 13 cervical vertebrae. In the case of Holden Chapel, researchers hypothesized that the skeletal assemblage may represent a single “cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover elements after dissection and specimen preparation, based in part on the under- representation of cranial elements (Hodge et al. 2017:126).

Other criteria. The informal burial of the Point San Jose assemblage and the association of the human remains with medical waste is consistent with the expected burial context for anatomical specimens (and also dissected remains). However, no artifacts in the Point San Jose assemblage were identified as anatomical specimen bottles.

Interpretation of the Point San Jose Assemblage

The preponderance of evidence indicates that dissection is the best explanation for the patterning of cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage.

The skeletal remains at Point San Jose do display some cut marks that are consistent with autopsy, surgery, and experimentation but these marks also overlap with the diagnostic criteria for dissection. Furthermore, the archaeological context of the assemblage is highly suggestive of dissection over other interpretations. The relatively low recovery rates for femora and crania in the Point San Jose assemblage may suggest that these elements were retained as anatomical specimens, although there is no other evidence for specimen preparation observed for this assemblage.

156

Statistical analyses revealed that the cut mark data from Point San Jose is most similar to the data from Holden Chapel. Like the Point San Jose assemblage, the

Holden Chapel assemblage was found in an informal burial context: excavated from a well in the basement of a building which once housed the Harvard Medical School

(Hodge et al. 2017:117). The fragmentary human remains were found commingled with animal bones and medical waste, in a similar manner as the Point San Jose assemblage

(Hodge et al 2017:117). The archaeological context of the Holden Chapel assemblage suggests that the well was filled in a single depositional event. The over-representation of limb bones and the under-representation of cranial and dental elements suggests to the authors that the Holden Chapel assemblage may represent a single “cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover elements (Hodge et al. 2017:126).

A similar interpretation for the Point San Jose assemblage was suggested in the first Point San Jose report (Willey et al. 2016:2). It was hypothesized that the disposal of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage may represent a single cleaning event to get rid of “leftover” or unwanted body portions after more valuable elements were retained as anatomical or pathological specimens (Willey et al. 2016:81). The estimated date for the deposition of the Point San Jose assemblage in the early-to-mid 1870s coincides nicely with Dr. Edwin Bentley’s tenure as post surgeon at Point San Jose from 1871-1874

(Cobb 1980; Powell and Shippen 1892:35; Wilson 1998).

It is reasonable to speculate that the Point San Jose assemblage was discarded at or around the time of Dr. Bentley’s departure from the post infirmary, representing a

“cleanup” of unwanted or leftover body portions from his anatomical and pathological studies. Dr. Bentley’s involvement with pathological studies and anatomization is well

157 documented in the historical literature, but the background research for this thesis did not uncover any references to his activities at Point San Jose. This scenario for the formation of the Point San Jose assemblage, while compelling, is based solely on circumstantial evidence and is not corroborated by historical documents.

Structural Violence

Many bioarchaeologists describe the dissection of the poor and enslaved without the consent of these individuals or their families as a form of structural violence

(Nystrom 2014; Halling and Seidemann 2017:166). The death experiences of dissected individuals, namely their dismemberment and informal discard, reflects the low status of these individuals during life (Bruwelheide et al. 2017:58). To review from Chapter II, the following criteria are used in this thesis to evaluate structural violence in the context of autopsy and dissection in the bioarchaeology record:

 Osteological evidence for dissection;

 Commingling, fragmentation and disarticulation of the body;

 Informal (non-cemetery) burial context, such as a privy, midden, or well;

 Interment of human remains with other discards, such as animal bones or medical

waste;

 Public perception of dissection as an unwanted outcome (e.g. the association of

dissection with the punishment of criminals);

 Evidence that dissected individuals were disproportionately drawn from

marginalized groups in society (e.g. from an oppressed racial or ethnic group and/or

of lower socioeconomic status);

158

 Evidence that bodies were procured illicitly and/or without the consent of the

deceased individuals or their families.

The archaeological context of the Point San Jose assemblage and the patterning of cut marks on the human skeletal remains meet the criteria outlined above for structural violence. The human remains were found in a commingled, fragmentary, and disarticulated state and were buried informally in a waste pit in association with butchered animal bones and discarded medical artifacts. Furthermore, this thesis has concluded that the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage were subjected to dissection.

The other criteria for structural violence are not so clear-cut for the Point San

Jose assemblage. The background research for this thesis could not locate any specific references to the public perception of dissection in late-nineteenth century San Francisco, but there may be some clues to public opinion embedded in California’s anatomy laws.

There may have been some association of dissection with the punishment of criminals because the first anatomy law of 1864 provided for the dissection of executed criminals and deceased inmates at the State prison (Hittell 1870:62). In 1866, the law was expanded to include individuals who died in the custody of a county poorhouse, county prison, or public hospital (Hittell 1870:62). This law may have expanded the association of dissection to poor and marginalized groups who were more likely to frequent such institutions. These laws were explicitly passed to increase the supply of bodies for medical research and education and offered few protections for individuals who may be vulnerable to having their bodies claimed for dissection. From this circumstantial evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that there was a negative public perception of

159 dissection and it was inflicted upon members of society that had little or no social capital to prevent the practice of dissection on themselves or their family members.

While California’s anatomy laws became more progressively more liberal towards dissection, they also increased punishments for illegal means of procuring cadavers for medical study. Protections against grave-robbing or “body-snatching” were passed early in California’s history. In 1854, “An act to protect the bodies of deceased persons, and public grave-yards” was passed which prohibited the disinterment, mutilation, or removal of bodies after burial (Hittell 1870:486). Later, the state’s 1872

Penal Code made it a felony to disturb bodies after burial and specified a punishment of up to five years in state prison for those found guilty of removing a body for the purpose of dissection (Deering 1906:125-126). These laws may be seen as further evidence for the negative perception of dissection and a strong mandate from the public to protect bodies from unauthorized interference.

Relatively little is known about the individuals represented in the Point San

Jose skeletal assemblage. The presence of women and children in the assemblage eliminates the possibility that the assemblage was derived from the post’s population of enlisted men. Comparative analyses revealed that the demographics of the Point San Jose assemblage most closely resemble that of a nineteenth-century hospital sample (Willey et al. 2018:100). It seems unlikely that members of the public were treated at the post’s infirmary. Following the hypothesis that Dr. Edwin Bentley was the primary creator of the assemblage, it is possible that the bodies were obtained during his activities at the

City and County Hospital of San Francisco (Gavette 2018). This practice would have been legal under the 1866 expansion of the California’s Anatomy Act. There would have

160 been little incentive for a physician with Dr. Bentley’s access to legal cadavers to resort to grave-robbing or other illicit means of obtaining bodies. However, it is possible, even likely, that the dissection of the individuals in the Point San Jose assemblage went against the wishes of the individual and his or her family. After the passage of the 1866 amendment, the period of time in which family members could claim a body and prevent it from dissection was only 24hours (State of California 1870:405).

Ancestry estimations based on the crania suggest three skulls of possible

Asian or Asian-related ancestry, two skulls of possible white or Caucasoid ancestry, and five skulls of possible Hispanic ancestry (Willey et al. 2018:95-97). The relatively large proportion of possibly non-white ancestries in the Point San Jose assemblage may suggest an over-representation of lower status individuals, such as Californios, Latin

Americans, Native Americans, and / or individuals of Japanese or Chinese descent

(Willey et al. 2018:104). The Chinese in particular faced discrimination on the West

Coast. The Chinese were considered to be at the bottom of the “racial ladder” in

California, and the primary racial divide in San Francisco was between “white” and

“Chinese” rather than “white” and “black” as it was in the rest of the country (Berglund

2005:6). It is unclear whether Chinese individuals in California were targeted for anatomization as African Americans were in other regions of the United States, but this is one potential avenue for future research.

The economic status of the individuals in the Point San Jose assemblage is unclear. Stable isotope analyses revealed that a majority of sampled individuals spent their childhood years outside of Northern California, suggesting a high proportion of non- locals, possibly immigrants, represented in the Point San Jose assemblage (Willey et al.

161

2018:116). It is possible that immigrants had a lower socioeconomic standing in late- nineteenth century San Francisco; however, the city was still relatively new and the proportion of residents that were born elsewhere was likely quite high. In addition, the health of the individuals in the Point San Jose assemblage offers few clues as to their economic status. The prevalence of skeletal and dental pathologies, while significant, was found to be relatively low for a nineteenth-century skeletal sample and largely related to childhood stresses and age-related changes (Willey et al. 2018:164).

In conclusion, there is enough evidence to make a tentative argument for structural violence in the formation of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. The individuals were clearly dissected and informally buried with other discards, rather than receiving a respectful cemetery burial. In late-nineteenth century San Francisco, dissection was likely viewed in a negative light, but many families of lower socioeconomic status may have lacked the resources to prevent the dissection of their relatives who died in prisons, jails, almshouses, and public hospitals. It was unlikely that the Point San Jose remains were obtained illegally due to California’s anatomy laws that favored physicians and medical institutions and the high penalties for grave-robbing.

However, it is possible that the Point San Jose assemblage was derived from the unclaimed bodies of individuals who were dissected against their wishes. The higher representation of Asian and Hispanic ancestries in the assemblage may suggest the targeting of marginalized populations for dissection. It is important to note that these conclusions are speculative and are based only on the evidence reviewed in this thesis. It is possible that additional skeletal analyses or historical research may overturn these findings.

162

Summary

The zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) has the potential to increase the standardization of data collection and enhance the interpretation of autopsy and dissection in future bioarchaeology studies. The method should be revised slightly to reduce ambiguity and improve the ease of use. This thesis shows that important insights can be gleaned by comparing cut mark data reported by fragments to cut mark data reported by zones. This comparison overcomes the shortcomings of both methods and can reveal the degree of fragmentation of various skeletal elements as well as the intensity of postmortem intervention for each element.

The preponderance of evidence indicates that dissection is the best explanation for the patterning of cut marks observed on the Point San Jose assemblage.

Statistical analyses reveal that the cut mark data from Point San Jose is most similar to the data from Holden Chapel, which has been interpreted as a “cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover skeletal elements following dissection and specimen preparation.

The results of this thesis are consistent with a similar interpretation for the Point San Jose assemblage. It is possible that the Point San Jose assemblage was deposited at or around the time of Dr. Edwin Bentley’s departure as post surgeon at Point San Jose.

This thesis found enough evidence to make a tentative argument for structural violence in the formation of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. Dissection was likely viewed in a negative light in late-nineteenth century San Francisco, and it is possible that the Point San Jose assemblage was derived from the unclaimed bodies of individuals who were dissected against their wishes. The higher representation of Asian and Hispanic ancestries in the assemblage may suggest the targeting of marginalized populations for

163 dissection. These findings are speculative, and it is possible that additional skeletal analyses or historical research may overturn these interpretations.

164

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSIONS

This thesis identified the activities that contributed to the formation of the

Point San Jose assemblage and broadly explored the challenges for the identification of autopsy and dissection on human skeletal remains in the historical archaeological record.

The first section of this chapter revisits the four research questions that guided this project and summarizes the findings of this thesis with respect to each topic. The next section addresses the challenges that were encountered during this thesis and outlines the limitations of the research effort. The chapter concludes with suggestions and implications of this project for future research.

Research Questions Revisited

The first research question explored the criteria that bioarchaeologists use to differentiate anatomization on human skeletal remains. The literature review conducted in this thesis revealed five major anatomization activities: autopsy, dissection, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation. The diagnostic criteria for each activity are summarized in Appendix B. Autopsy is primarily identified through evidence of craniotomy and thoracotomy. Autopsied remains are usually buried as individuals in a formal cemetery context. Dissection is identified by thoracotomy and craniotomy in addition to cut marks and saw marks on the postcranial skeleton in association with organs, joint articulations, and muscle attachment sites. Dissected individuals are more likely to be found as fragmentary and commingled burials in informal contexts such as

165 wells and middens. Surgery and surgical practice are primarily identified by signs of trephination on the cranium and amputation of limb bones. “Experimentation” is identified by cuts that lie outside the descriptions for the other four anatomization activities. Finally, specimen preparation is identified primarily through the presence of pins, screws, drill holes, or wires for the articulation of skeletal elements or the presence of staining from the injection of colored waxes or dyes.

There are several interpretive challenges for the differentiation of these activities on human skeletal remains. The diagnostic criteria overlap for several activities; notably, craniotomy and thoracotomy are characteristic of both autopsy and dissection.

Furthermore, some individuals may have been subjected to multiple anatomization activities after death. Contextual information can often aid interpretation of the osteological evidence.

The second research question aimed to identify which postmortem interventions are the best fit for the patterning of cut marks observed on the Point San

Jose assemblage. The preponderance of evidence weighed in this thesis indicates that dissection is the best explanation for the cut and saw marks on the human skeletal remains from Point San Jose. Statistical analyses reveal that the cut mark data from Point

San Jose is most similar to the data from Holden Chapel, which has been interpreted as a

“cleanup” event of unwanted or leftover skeletal elements following dissection and specimen preparation. The results of this thesis are consistent with a similar interpretation for the Point San Jose assemblage. It is possible that the Point San Jose assemblage was deposited at or around the time of Dr. Edwin Bentley’s departure as post surgeon at Point

San Jose.

166

The third research question weighed the advantages and disadvantages of the zonation recording method of Knüsel and Outram (2004) and evaluated the method’s potential to enhance the recording, analysis, and interpretation of the Point San Jose assemblage and others like it. This thesis found that the zonation method of Knüsel and

Outram (2004) has the potential to increase the standardization of data collection and enhance the interpretation of autopsy and dissection in future bioarchaeology studies. The method should be revised slightly to reduce ambiguity and improve the ease of use. This thesis shows that important insights can be gleaned by comparing cut mark data reported by fragments to cut mark data reported by zones. This comparison overcomes the shortcomings of both methods and can reveal the degree of fragmentation of various skeletal elements as well as the intensity of postmortem intervention for each element.

Finally, the fourth research question addressed the theoretical perspective for this thesis and considered what the results of this study may suggest about the lived experiences and death experiences of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage. This thesis found enough evidence to make a tentative argument for structural violence in the formation of the Point San Jose skeletal assemblage. Dissection was likely viewed in a negative light in late-nineteenth century San Francisco, and it is possible that the Point San Jose assemblage was derived from the unclaimed bodies of individuals who were dissected against their wishes. The higher representation of Asian and Hispanic ancestries in the assemblage may suggest the targeting of marginalized populations for dissection. The economic status and health status of the individuals represented in the Point San Jose assemblage are unclear based on the current evidence.

167

These findings are speculative, and it is possible that additional skeletal analyses or historical research may overturn these interpretations.

Challenges and Limitations

Several methodological and interpretive challenges were anticipated for this project: the commingled and fragmentary nature of the skeletal remains, the lack of documentary information about the Point San Jose assemblage, the unprecedented context of the Point San Jose site at a West Coast military outpost, the lack of formal osteological criteria for anatomization, and numerous barriers to robust statistical analysis. Two of these challenges were directly addressed by the efforts of this thesis project: the Knüsel and Outram (2004) zonation recording method proved to be an appropriate method of data collection for the commingled, fragmentary assemblage; and the comprehensive literature review undertaken in this thesis laid important groundwork for the development of osteological criteria for various anatomization activities.

However, several interpretive challenges were uncovered for the differentiation of anatomization activities on human skeletal remains. These criteria should be refined and expanded through additional documentary research on historical autopsy and dissection practices. It would also be helpful to conduct baseline studies of the osteological evidence left on skeletal remains following autopsy and dissection, similar to Dittmar and Mitchell

(2015) and McFarlin and Wineski (1997).

The biggest challenge encountered in this project was the lack of appropriate data for robust statistical comparisons between sites with evidence for anatomization.

This barrier is due to the relatively small number of sites, large variances in sample sizes

168

(from a single individual to more than a thousand), different units of analysis

(independent skeletal elements vs. burial units vs. individual skeletons), and different methods of data recording and reporting. The literature review was also limited to the data reported in published studies. Skeletal assemblages that are referenced only in gray literature were not included in this thesis.

The original research design for this thesis assumed that there would be a clear difference in the prevalence of cut marks for autopsied and dissected remains. I hypothesized that the overall prevalence of cut marks on the Point San Jose assemblage would overlap with the prevalence rates for either autopsied remains or dissected remains, which would help inform the interpretation of the Point San Jose site. However, the bioarchaeology literature review revealed no such clear differences in cut mark prevalences between these anatomization activities. Furthermore, many sites show evidence of multiple anatomization activities, in some cases on a single individual.

Finally, the different methods for reporting cut mark prevalences make it nearly impossible to draw general conclusions between sites, even those from similar contexts. In light of these challenges, the attempt to define and identify anatomization activities using cut mark prevalences was abandoned in favor of comparing the Point San

Jose data to the data from a selection of comparative assemblages. Ultimately, there was enough comparative data to perform a series of nonparametric tests to compare the Point

San Jose assemblage to four other sites, but these tests were limited in their statistical power.

The scarcity of contextual information and documentary records for the Point

San Jose assemblage was partially addressed in this thesis. The background research for

169 this project uncovered more information than expected about anatomy practices in late- nineteenth century San Francisco, Dr. Edwin Bentley’s activities while stationed at Point

San Jose, and the social context of race and ethnicity in post-Gold Rush era California.

These elements were enough to construct a possible scenario for the formation of the

Point San Jose assemblage and to make a tentative argument for structural violence at the site. However, there is much about the assemblage that remains unknown, and it is possible that additional skeletal analyses or historical research may overturn these interpretations. Ultimately, this thesis found no direct references to anatomization activities at the post infirmary, no direct references to the creation of the pit and the deposition of human remains at the site, and no direct references to Dr. Bentley conducting dissections or housing anatomical specimens at Point San Jose.

Suggestions for Future Research

More archival and bioarchaeology research is needed to refine and expand the osteological criteria used to differentiate various anatomization activities on human skeletal remains. More data is needed to perform robust statistical comparisons between sites with the goal of developing statistical methods for differentiating skeletal assemblages subjected to autopsy and dissection. This data could be derived from new sites, from the release of additional data from previously published sites, or from sites in the gray literature. This thesis recommends that the Point San Jose assemblage be published in a book, edited volume, or journal to make the data more accessible to other researchers. A precise, standardized method for recording cut mark data, such as the

Knüsel and Outram (2004) zonation recording method, has the potential to greatly

170 expand the possible avenues for analysis and comparison between sites. In addition, the study of tool types and cut mark directionality has the potential for additional insights into anatomization practices.

Future studies of autopsy and dissection in the archaeological record should further existing efforts to incorporate critical social theory into bioarchaeological research. Structural violence is one theoretical framework that has implications for the lived experiences and death experiences of individuals subjected to dissection. This thesis advances a tentative argument for structural violence in the formation of the Point San

Jose assemblage, but more documentary and osteological research is needed to strengthen this argument. Additional skeletal research should be conducted to develop a better picture of the individuals represented in the assemblage. DNA testing could confirm the ancestries of the individuals, and additional paleopathological research could enhance our understanding of their health and economic status. Additional research on the social context of late-nineteenth century San Francisco could provide important insight about the treatment of Hispanic individuals and immigrants, as well as the public perception of dissection.

The discussion of structural violence presented in this thesis has implications for the field of physical anthropology as a whole. Curated skeletal collections such as the

Robert J. Terry Anatomical Collection and the Hamann-Todd Osteological Collection have been instrumental for physical anthropology education and research, especially for the development of our most frequently used standards and methods for data analysis.

However, many of these well-known skeletal collections were disproportionately derived from the same structurally vulnerable populations that were the victims of nineteenth-

171 century anatomists and body snatchers (Muller et al. 2017). Acknowledging the role of structural violence in anatomical study is the first step for physical anthropologists to understand and critique the power dynamics and implications of our research today.

REFERENCES CITED

173

REFERENCES CITED

Agarwal, Sabrina C., and Bonnie A. Glencross, eds. 2011 Social Bioarchaeology. Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell.

Andrushko, Valerie A., Kate A.S. Latham, Diane L. Grady, Allen G. Pastron, Phillip L. Walker 2005 Bioarchaeological evidence for trophy-taking in prehistoric Central California. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 127(4):375-384.

Angel, J. Lawrence, Jennifer Olsen Kelley, Michael Parrington, and Stephanie Pinter 1987 Life stresses of the free black community as represented by the First African Baptist Church, Philadelphia, 1823–1841. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 74(2):213–229.

Beavers, Richard C., Teresia R. Lamb, and John R. Greene 1993 Burial Archaeology and Osteology of Charity Hospital/Cypress Grove II Cemetery, New Orleans, Louisiana, Volume I: Archaeology and History. New Orleans, LA: Archaeology and Cultural Research Program, Department of Anthropology, University of New Orleans.

Bentley, Edwin 1870 Pathological Specimens, With Remarks. Pacific Medical and Surgical Journal IV:110-113.

Berglund, Barbara 2005 Chinatown’s Tourist Terrain: Representation and Racialization in Nineteenth- Century San Francisco. American Studies 46(2):5-36.

Binford, Lewis R. 1981 Bones: Ancient Man and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press.

Blakey, Michael L. 2004 Introduction. In The New York African Burial Ground Skeletal Biology Final Report, Vol. 1. M. L. Blakey and L. M. Rankin-Hill, editors. Pp. 2–37. Washington, DC: Howard University.

Blakely, Robert L. 1997 A Clandestine Past: Discovery at the Medical College of Georgia and Theoretical Foundations. In Bones in the Basement: Postmortem Racism in Nineteenth- Century Medical Training. Robert L. Blakely and Judith M. Harrington, editors. Pp. 3-17. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

174

Blakely, Robert L. and Judith M. Harrington 1997 Grave Consequences: The Opportunistic Procurement of Cadavers at the Medical College of Georgia. In Bones in the Basement: Postmortem Racism in Nineteenth-Century Medical Training. Robert L. Blakely and Judith M. Harrington, editors. Pp. 162-183. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press

Blakely, Robert L. and Judith M. Harrington, eds. 1997 Bones in the Basement: Postmortem Racism in Nineteenth-Century Medical Training. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Boston, Ceridwen, and Helen Webb 2012 Early Medical Training and Treatment in Oxford: A Consideration of the Archaeological and Historical Evidence. In Anatomical Dissection and Enlightenment England and Beyond. Piers Mitchell, editor. Pp. 43-68. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Box, Charles R. 1910 Post-mortem Manual: A Handbook of Morbid Anatomy and Post-Mortem Technique. London: J. & A. Churchill.

Brown, Carrie 2017 Segregating and Associating Commingled Human Remains: The USS Oklahoma Identification Project. Presented at the 14th Chico Forensic Conference, California State University, Chico, November 4.

Bruwelheide, Karin S., Douglas W. Owsley, Beverly A. Straube, and Jamie E. May 2017 Evidence for Early Seventeenth-Century Surgery and Dissection at Fort James, Virginia. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 41-60. New York: Springer.

Burton, Julian L. 2005 A Bite into the History of the Autopsy: From Ancient Roots to Modern Decay. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology 1(4):277-284.

Chamberlain, Andrew T. 2012 Morbid Osteology: Evidence for Autopsies, Dissection and Surgical Training from the Newcastle Infirmary Burial Ground (1753–1845). In Anatomical Dissection in Enlightenment England and Beyond. Piers Mitchell, editor. Pp. 11- 22. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Chapman, Ellen, and Mark Kostro 2017 A Dissection at the Coffeehouse? The Performance of Anatomical Expertise in Colonial America. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 61-76. New York: Springer.

175

Cobb, W. Montague 1980 Edwin Bentley, MD, 1824-1917: Connecticut Yankee in Washington and Little Rock. Journal of the National Medical Association, 72(10):1013-1014.

CoRA 2019 Welcome to CoRA – Commingled Remains Analytics. Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency – University of Nebraska, Omaha. https://cora- prod.herokuapp.com/, accessed March 9, 2019.

Crader, Diana C. 1990 Slave Diet at Monticello. American Antiquity 55:690-717.

Crandall, John J., and Debra L. Martin 2014 The Bioarchaeology of Postmortem Agency: Integrating Archaeological Theory with Human Skeletal Remains. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24(3):429-435.

Crist, Thomas A., and Molly H. Crist 2011 Skeletal Evidence for the Dissection of Children at the Philadelphia Almshouse, 1732–1834. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 144(S52):117.

Crist, Thomas A., Douglas B. Mooney, and Kimberley A. Morrell 2017 “The Mangled Remains of What Had Been Humanity”: Evidence of Autopsy and Dissection at Philadelphia’s Blockley Almshouse, 1835-1895. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 259-278. New York: Springer.

Crist, Thomas A., Marcella H. Sorg, Robert Larocque, and Molly H. Crist 2004 Champlain’s cemetery: Skeletal analysis of the first Acadians, St. Croix Island International Historic Site, Calais, Maine. Report to United States National Park Service, Acadia National Park, Bar Harbor, ME.

Crist, Thomas A., and Marcella H. Sorg 2017 Renaissance Anatomy in the Americas: A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the Earliest Skeletal Evidence of Autopsy in the New World. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 25-40. New York: Springer.

Daily Alta California 1872 Medical College Commencement. Daily Alta California, April 15, XXIV(8255):1.

Davidson, James M. 2007 “Resurrection Men” in Dallas: The Illegal Use of Black Bodies as Medical Cadavers (1900-1907). International Journal of Historical Archaeology 11(3):193- 220.

176

Deering, James 1906 The Penal Code of California. Enacted in 1872; as Amended up to and including 1905, with Statutory History and Citation Digest up to and including Volume 147, California Reports. San Francisco: Bancroft-Whitney Company.

Degusta, David 1999 Fijian cannibalism: Osteological evidence from Navatu. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 110(2):215-241.

Devine, Shauna 2017 The Civil War and the Army Medical Museum. National Museum of Civil War Medicine. http://www.civilwarmed.org/army-medical-museum/, accessed January 27, 2019.

Dittmar, Jenna M., and Piers D. Mitchell 2015 A new method for identifying and differentiating human dissection and autopsy in archaeological human skeletal remains. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 3:73-79.

Dobney, Keith, and Kevin Rielly 1988 A Method for Recording Archaeological Animal Bones: The Use of Diagnostic Zones. Circaea 5(2):79-96.

Dougherty, Sean P., and Norman C. Sullivan 2017 Autopsy, Dissection, and Anatomical Exploration: The Postmortem Fate of the Underclass and Institutionalized in Old Milwaukee. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 205-235. New York: Springer.

Duncan, William N., Kevin R. Schwarz 2014 Partible, Permeable, and Relational Bodies in a Maya Mass Grave. In Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains. Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn A. Baustian, and Debra L. Martin, editors. Pp. 149-170. New York: Springer.

Elizondo-Omaña, Rodrigo E., Santos Guzmán-López, María de Los Angeles García- Rodríguez 2005 Dissection as a Teaching Tool: Past, Present, and Future. The Anatomical Record (Part B: The New Anatomist) 285B(1):11-15.

Fagan, Kevin 2010 Fort Mason Yields Surprise Historical Treasure. San Francisco Chronicle, November 3:C1 and C8.

Farmer, Paul E., Bruce Nizeye, Sara Stulac, and Salmaan Keshvjee 2006 Structural Violence and Clinical Medicine. PLoS Medicine 3(10):1686–1691.

177

Fisher, John W., Jr. 1995 Bone Surface Modifications in Zooarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2(1):7-68.

Fowler, Louise, and Natasha Powers 2012a Doctors, dissection, and resurrection men: excavations in the 19th century burial ground of the London Hospital, 2006. Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) Monograph 62.

2012b Patients, Anatomists, and Resurrection Men: Archaeological Evidence for Anatomy Teaching at the London Hospital in the Early Nineteenth Century. In Anatomical Dissection in Enlightenment England and Beyond. Piers Mitchell, editor. Pp. 77-94. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Gavette, Peter 2018 Resurrecting Bentley: Etiology of a Surgeon’s Detritus. Presented at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C., April 13.

Ghosh, Sanjib Kumar 2015 Human cadaveric dissection: a historical account from Ancient Greece to the modern era. Anatomy & Cell Biology 48(3):153-169.

Gibbons, Henry, and Henry Gibbons, Jr. 1872 Editorial. Pacific Medical and Surgical Journal V:222-229.

Gibson, Campbell, and Kay Jung 2005 Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990, for Large Cities and other Urban Places in the United States. Population Division Working Paper No. 76. https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.pdf, accessed February 3, 2019.

Goff, Alaina K. 2009 Report of Skeletal Remains Excavated at Fort Craig Post Cemetery. Manuscript on File with the U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, Albuquerque Office, New Mexico.

Grauer, Anne L., Vanessa Lathrop, and Taylor Timoteo 2017 Exploring Evidence of Nineteenth Century Dissection in the Dunning Poorhouse Cemetery. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 301-313. New York: Springer.

178

Halling, Christine L., and Ryan M. Seidemann 2017 Structural Violence in New Orleans: Skeletal Evidence from Charity Hospital’s Cemeteries, 1847-1929. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 165-184. New York: Springer.

Harrington, Judith M., and Robert L. Blakely 1995a Bones in the Basement: Bioarchaeology of Historic Remains in Nonmortuary Contexts. In Bodies of Evidence: Reconstructing History through Skeletal Analysis. Anne L. Grauer, editor. Pp 105-120. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss, Inc.

1995b Rich Man, Poor Man, Beggar Man, Thief: The Selectivity Exercised by Graverobbers at the Medical College of Georgia, 1837-1887. In Grave Reflections: Portraying the Past through Cemetery Studies. Shelley R. Saunders and Ann Herring, editors. Pp 153-178. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars Press.

Hart, Herbert M. 2009 Historic California Posts: The Posts at San Francisco’s Point San Jose (Bateria San Jose, Bateria Yerba Buena, Point San Jose Military Reservation, Post at Point San Jose, Fort Mason). California State Military Museum. http://www.militarymuseum.org/Pt%20San%20Jose.html, accessed January 27, 2019.

Heilen, Michael P., Joseph T. Hefner, and Mitchell A. Keur 2012 Life, Death, and Dying in Southeastern Arizona, 1860–1880: Historical Accounts and Bioarchaeological Evidence. In Uncovering Identity in Mortuary Analysis: Community-Sensitive Methods for Identifying Group Affiliation in Historical Cemeteries. Michael P. Heilen, editor. Pp. 105-164. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

Henker, Fred O. 2019 Edwin Bentley, M.D. College of Medicine: University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. https://medicine.uams.edu/about-the-college/college-of-medicine- history/founders/edwin-bentley-m-d/, accessed January 27, 2019.

Hittell, Theodore H. 1870 The General Laws of the State of California, from 1850 to 1864, Inclusive: Being a Compilation of All Acts of a General Nature Now in Force with Full References to Repealed Acts, Special and Local Legislation, and Statutory Constructions of the Supreme Court. San Francisco: H.H. Bancroft and Company.

Hodge, Christina J. 2013 Non-Bodies of Knowledge: Anatomized Remains from the Holden Chapel Collection, Harvard. Journal of Social Archaeology 13(1):122-149.

179

Hodge, Christina J., Jane Lyden Rousseau, and Michèle E. Morgan 2017 Teachings of the Dead: The Archaeology of Anatomized Remains from Holden Chapel, Harvard University. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 115-142. New York: Springer.

Kanazawa, Mark 2005 Immigration, Exclusion, and Taxation: Anti-Chinese Legislation in Gold Rush California. Carleton College Department of Economics Working Paper Series No. 2005-01. Northfield, MN: Carleton College.

Kausmally, Tania 2012 William Hewson and the Craven Street Anatomy School. In Anatomical Dissection on Enlightenment England and Beyond. Piers Mitchell, editor. Pp. 69- 76. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

King, Lester S., and Marjorie C. Meehan 1973 A History of the Autopsy. American Journal of Pathology 73(2):514-544.

Knüsel, Christopher J., and Alan K. Outram 2004 Fragmentation: The Zonation Method Applied to Fragmented Human Remains from Archaeological and Forensic Contexts. Environmental Archaeology 9(1):85- 98.

2006 Fragmentation of the Body: Comestibles, Compost, or Customary Rite? In The Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains. Christopher J. Knüsel and Rebecca Gowland, editors. Pp. 253-278. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Lamb, Daniel Smith 1900 Howard University Medical Department: A Historical, Biographical and Statistical Souvenir. College of Medicine Publications, Paper 1. https://dh.howard.edu/med_pub/1/, accessed February 2, 2019.

1917 A History of the United States Army Medical Museum, 1862-1917. U.S. National Library of Medicine Digital Collections. https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-12710920R-bk, accessed February 2, 2019.

Lambert, Patricia M., Banks L. Leonard, Brian R. Billman, Richard A. Marlar, Margaret E. Newman, and Karl J. Reinhard 2000 Response to Critique of the Claim of Cannibalism at Cowboy Wash. Karl Reinhard Papers / Publications. Paper 34.

Landon, David B. 1996 Feeding Colonial Boston: A Zooarchaeological Study. Historical Archaeology 30(1):i-vii, 1-153.

180

Lockau, Laura, Ana-Maria Dragomir, Rebecca Gilmour, Madeleine Mant, and Megan Brickley 2013 Bioarchaeological Investigation of Sharp Force Injuries to the Ribs and Lower Leg from the Battle of Stoney Creek in the War of 1812. Anthropological Science 121(3):217-227.

Locke Barton, Angela 2018 Shards of Medical History: Artifacts from the Point San Jose Medical Waste Pit. Presented at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Washington, D.C., April 13.

Lovejoy, Bess 2017 A Brief History of American Anatomy Riots. National Museum of Civil War Medicine. http://www.civilwarmed.org/anatomy-riots/, accessed February 6, 2019.

Lowe, Kim Lusignan 2017 A Historical and Osteological Analysis of Postmortem Medical Practices from the Albany County Almshouse Cemetery Skeletal Sample in Albany, New York. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 315-334. New York: Springer.

Lusignan, Kimberly A. 2004 A Historical and Osteological Analysis of Postmortem Medical Practices from the Albany County Almshouse Cemetery Skeletal Sample. Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Albany.

Lyman, George D. 1925 The Beginnings of California’s Medical History. California and Western Medicine XXIII(5):561-576.

Lyman, R. Lee 1987 Archaeofaunas and butchery studies: A taphonomic perspective. Advances in Archeological Method and Theory 10:249-337.

Mann, Robert W., Douglas W. Owsley, and Paul A. Shackel 1991 A Reconstruction of 19th-Century Surgical Techniques: Bones in Dr. Thompson's Privy. Historical Archaeology 25:106-112.

Martin, Debra L. 2017 Foreword. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. v-vi. New York: Springer.

181

McFarlin, Shannon C., and Lawrence E. Wineski 1997 The Cutting Edge: Experimental Anatomy and the Reconstruction of Nineteenth- Century Dissection Techniques. In Bones in the Basement: Postmortem Racism in Nineteenth-Century Medical Training. Robert L. Blakely and Judith M. Harrington, editors. Pp. 107-161. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Michael, Paul 1955 History of Pathology in California. California Medicine 83(6):427-432.

Mitchell, Piers, editor 2012 Anatomical Dissection on Enlightenment England and Beyond. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Muller, Jennifer L., Kristen E. Pearlstein, and Carlina de la Cova 2017 Dissection and Documented Skeletal Collections: Embodiments of Legalized Inequality. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 185-201. New York: Springer.

National Park Service 2016 Fort Mason. https://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/historyculture/fort-mason.htm, accessed January 27, 2019.

Novak, Shannon M. 2017 Partible Persons or Persons Apart: Postmortem Interventions at the Spring Street Presbyterian Church, Manhattan. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 87-111. New York: Springer.

Novak, Shannon M., and Wesley Willoughby 2010 Resurrectionists’ Excursions: Evidence of Postmortem Dissection from the Spring Street Presbyterian Church. Northeast Historical Archaeology 39(1):134-152.

Nystrom, Kenneth C. 2011 Postmortem Examinations and the Embodiment of Inequality in 19th century United States. International Journal of Paleopathology 1 (3–4):164–172.

2014 The Bioarchaeology of Structural Violence and Dissection in the 19th Century United States. American Anthropologist 116(4):765-779.

2017a Introduction. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 1-22. New York: Springer.

2017b Conclusion. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 335-344. New York: Springer.

182

Nystrom, Kenneth C., ed. 2017 The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. New York: Springer.

Nystrom, Kenneth C., Joyce Sirianni, Roseanne Higgins, Douglas Perrelli, and Jennifer L. Liber Raines 2017 Structural Inequality and Postmortem Examination at the Erie County Poorhouse. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 279-300. New York: Springer.

Olsen, Sandra L., and Pat Shipman 1988 Surface modification on bone: Trampling versus butchery. Journal of Archaeological Science 15:535-553.

Orser, Charles E. Jr. 2010 Twenty-First-Century Historical Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 18:111-150.

Osterholtz, Anna J. 2012 The Social Role of Hobbling and Torture: Violence in the Prehistoric Southwest. International Journal of Paleopathology 2:148-155.

Osterholtz, Anna J., Kathryn M. Baustian, Debra L. Martin, and Daniel L. Potts 2014 Commingled Human Skeletal Assemblages: Integrative Techniques in Determination of the MNI/MNE. In Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains: Working Toward Improved Theory, Method, and Data. Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Debra L. Martin, editors. Pp. 35-50. New York: Springer.

Outram, Alan K., Christopher J. Knüsel, Stephanie Knight, and Anthony F. Harding 2005 Understanding Complex Fragmented Assemblages of Human and Animal Remains: A Fully Integrated Approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 32(12):1699-1710.

Owsley, Douglas W. 1995 Contributions of Bioarchaeological Research to Knowledge of Nineteenth- Century Surgery. In Grave Reflections: Portraying the Past Through Cemetery Studies. Shelley Rae Saunders and Ann Herring, editors. Pp. 119-151. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars’ Press Inc.

Owsley, Douglas W., Hugh E. Berryman, and William M. Bass 1977 Demographic and Osteological Evidence for Warfare at the Larson Site, South Dakota. Plains Anthropologist 22(78):119-131.

183

Owsley, Douglas W., Karin S. Bruwelheide, Richard L. Jantz, Jodi L. Koste, and Merry Outlaw 2017 Skeletal Evidence of Anatomical and Surgical Training in Nineteenth-Century Richmond. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. New York: Springer.

Owsley, Douglas W., Robert W. Mann, and Kim M. Lanphear 1990 Osteological Examination of Human Remains from the Charity Hospital/Cypress Grove II Cemetery, New Orleans, Louisiana. Final Report of Investigations, Volume 2. Washington, DC: Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.

Owsley, Douglas W., Robert W. Mann and Sean P. Murphy 1991 Injuries, Surgical Care and Disease. In Snake Hill: An Investigation of a Military Cemetery from the War of 1812. Susan Pfeiffer and Ronald F. Williamson, editors. Pp. 198-226. Toronto, ON: Dundurn Press.

Palmiotto, Andrea, Carrie Ann Brown, and Carrie B. LeGarde 2019 Estimating the Number of Individuals in a Large Commingled Assemblage. Forensic Anthropology 2(2) [Early View].

Pfeiffer, Susan 1991 Estimation of Age at Death. In Snake Hill: An Investigation of a Military Cemetery from the War of 1812. Susan Pfeiffer and Ronald F. Williamson, editors. Pp. 167-175. Toronto, ON: Dundurn Press.

Pilloud, Marin A., Scott D. Haddow, Christopher J. Knüsel, and Clark Spencer Larsen 2016 A bioarchaeological and forensic re-assessment of vulture defleshing and mortuary practices at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports.

Pollack, David, A. Gwynn Henderson, and Peter E. Killoran 2009 Frankfort’s Forgotten Cemetery, Educational Series Number 10. Lexington, KY: Kentucky Archaeological Survey.

Potts, Richard, and Pat Shipman 1981 Cutmarks made by stone tools on bones from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Nature 291(18):577-580.

Powell, William H., and Edward Shippen, editors 1892 Officers of the Army and Navy (Regular) Who Served in the Civil War. Philadelphia, PA: L.R. Hamersly & Co.

184

Reitz, Elizabeth 1987 Vertebrate Fauna and Socioeconomic Status. In Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology. Suzanne M. Spencer-Wood, editor. Boston: Springer.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn 2016 Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice, Seventh Edition. London, UK: Thames & Hudson.

Richards, Patricia B., Catherine R. Jones, Emily Mueller Epstein, Nicholas W. Richards, Brooke L. Drew, and Thomas J. Zych 2017 “You Couldn’t Identify Your Grandmother If She Were in that Party”: The Bioarchaeology of Postmortem Investigation at the Milwaukee County Poor Farm Cemetery. In The Bioarchaeology of Dissection and Autopsy in the United States. Kenneth C. Nystrom, editor. Pp. 237-258. New York: Springer.

Sacramento Daily Union 1869 A Lively Sensation in Norwich (Conn.) [From the Norwich Bulletin, March 22d.] Sacramento Daily Union, April 15, 37(5632):1.

Saunders, Shelley R. 1991 Sex Determination, Stature and Size and Shape Variation of the Limb Bones. In Snake Hill: An Investigation of a Military Cemetery from the War of 1812. Susan Pfeiffer and Ronald F. Williamson, editors. Pp. 176-197. Toronto, ON: Dundurn Press.

Scheper-Hughes, Nancy 2011 The Body in Tatters: Dismemberment, Dissection, and the Return of the Repressed. In A Companion to the Anthropology of the Body and Embodiment. Frances E. Mascia-Lees, editor. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Schiffer, Michael 1983 Toward the Identification of Site Formation Processes. America Antiquity 48(4):675-706.

Sebby, Dan 2009 History of Fort Mason. The California State Military Museum. http://www.militarymuseum.org/Pt%20San%20Jose.html, accessed January 27, 2019.

Seidemann, Ryan M. 2008 Descriptive Bioarchaeological Analysis of Human Remains Excavated from the Charity Hospital Cemetery (16OR175) for the Hurricane Katrina Memorial. New Orleans, LA: Report prepared for the Katrina Memorial Corporation.

185

2011 Descriptive Bioarchaeological Analysis of Human Remains Excavated from the Charity Hospital Cemetery (16OR175) for the Hurricane Katrina Memorial. New Orleans, LA: Supplemental report prepared for the Katrina Memorial Corporation.

State of California 1866 Statutes of California, Passed at the Sixteenth Session of the Legislature, 1865-6, Began on Monday, the Fourth Day of December, Eighteen Hundred and Sixty- Five, and Ended on Monday, the Second Day of April, Eighteen Hundred and Sixty-Six. Sacramento, CA: O.M. Clayes, State Printer.

1870 Statutes of California, Passed at the Eighteenth Session of the Legislature, 1869- 70, Began on Monday, the Sixth Day of December, Eighteen Hundred and Sixty- Nine, and Ended on Monday, the Fourth Day of April, Eighteen Hundred and Seventy. Sacramento, CA: D.W. Gelwicks, State Printer.

Stodder, Ann L.W., and Anna J. Osterholtz 2010 Analysis of the Processed Human Remains from the Sacred Ridge Site: Methods and Data Collection Protocol. In Animas-La Plata Project: XV-Bioarchaeology. Elizabeth M. Perry, Ann L.W. Stodder, and Charles A. Bollong, editors. Pp. 243- 278. Phoenix, AZ: SWCA Environmental Consultants.

Symes, Steven A., John A. Williams, Elizabeth A. Murray, J. Michael Hoffman, Thomas D. Holland, Julie M. Saul, Frank P. Saul, and Elayne J. Pope 2002 Taphonomic Context of Sharp-Force Trauma in Suspected Cases of Human Mutilation and Dismemberment. In Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. William D. Haglund and Marcella H. Sorg, editors. Pp. 403-434. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Turner, Christy G., II 1983 Taphonomic Reconstructions of Human Violence and Cannibalism Based on Mass Burials in the American Southwest. In Carnivores, Human Scavengers, and Human Predators: A Question of Bone Technology. Genevieve M. LeMoine and A. Scott MacEachern, editors. Pp. 219-240. Calgary: University of Calgary, Archaeological Association.

Turner, Christy G., II, and Jacqueline A. Turner 1999 Man Corn: Cannibalism and Violence in the Prehistoric American Southwest. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.

Ubelaker, Douglas H. 2002 Approaches to the Study of Commingling in Human Skeletal Biology. In Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. William D. Haglund and Marcella H. Sorg, editors. Pp. 331-354. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

186

University of California San Francisco (UCSF) 2019 UCSF History: Gaining Autonomy. https://www.ucsf.edu/about/history-2, accessed February 3, 2019.

Villa, Paolo, Claude Bouville, Jean Courtin, Daniel Helmer, Eric Mahieu, Pat Shipman, Giorgio Belluomini and Marilí Branca 1986 Cannibalism in the Neolithic. Science 233(4762):431-437. Walker, Don, Natasha Powers, and Louise Fowler 2014 Resurrection: who is it good for? The price of achievement at the London Hospital. Post-Medieval Archaeology 48(2):388-397.

Weiss-Krejci, Estella 2005 Excarnation, Evisceration, and Exhumation in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. In Interacting with the Dead: Perspectives on Mortuary Archaeology for the New Millennium. G. F. M. Rakita, J. E. Buikstra, L. A. Beck, and S. R. Williams, eds. Pp. 155 – 172. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida.

2006 The Maya Corpse: Body Processing from Preclassic to Postclassic Times in the Maya Highlands and Lowlands. In Jaws of the Underworld: Life, Death, and Rebirth Among the Ancient Maya. P. R. Colas, G. LeFort, and B. L. Persson, eds. Pp. 71 – 86, Acta Mesoamericana, 16. Markt Schwaben: Verlag Anton Saurwein.

Wesolowsky, Al B. 1991 The Osteology of the Uxbridge Paupers. In Archaeological Excavations at the Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground in Uxbridge, Massachusetts. Ricardo J. Elia and Al B. Wesolowsky, editors. Pp. 230-253. Oxford, UK: British Archaeological Reports.

Western, A. Gaynor 2012 A Star of the First Magnitude: Osteological and Historical Evidence for the Challenge of Provincial Medicine at the Worcester Royal Infirmary in the Nineteenth Century. In Anatomical Dissection on Enlightenment England and Beyond. Piers Mitchell, editor. Pp. 69-76. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

White, Tim D. 1986 Cut marks on the Bodo cranium: A case of prehistoric defleshing. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 69:503-509.

1992 Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

White, Tim D., Michael T. Black, and Pieter A. Folkens 2012 Human Osteology. Third Edition. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press.

187

Willey, P., Eric Bartelink, Colleen Milligan, Maria Cox, Mallory Peters, Kasey Cole, Jessica Curry, Sarah Hall, Kelsie Hart, Sam Mijal, Julia Prince Buitenhuys, and Valerie Sgheiza 2018 Osteological Analyses of Medical Waste Pit from Point San Jose (Fort Mason), Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Phase II Contract Report for Golden Gate National Recreation Conservancy. Proposal 16-131. Willey, P., Colleen Milligan, Eric Bartelink, Maria Cox, Kristen Broehl, Jessica Curry, and Valerie Sgheiza with Matt Bond, Martha Diaz, Sarah Hall, Kelsie Mae Hart, Heather MacInnes, and Alex Perrone 2016 Descriptive Analysis of Human Skeletal Material from Point San Jose (Fort Mason), Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Contract Report for Golden Gate National Recreation Conservancy. Proposal 16-13.

Wilson, John 1998 Stanford University School of Medicine and the Predecessor Schools: An Historical Perspective. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Medical History Center. https://lane.stanford.edu/med-history/wilson/chap23.html, accessed January 27, 2019.

APPENDIX A

Summary table of bioarchaeology literature review. Thirty archaeological assemblages in the United States and United Kingdom with evidence for anatomization.

Site information Interpretation(s) and Osteological Evidence % of remains showing evidence of postmortem Demographic information examination (PME) PRIMARILY AUTOPSY 1. Champlain’s Cemetery Autopsy - with documentary evidence 1 out of 25 individuals show signs of autopsy Male, young adult, European St. Croix Island, Maine Associated with scurvy 1604-1605  Transverse saw cuts on cranium PME = 4% of individuals Crist et al. (2004)  Transverse incision marks on occipital (removal Crist and Sorg (2017) of scalp) Formal burial – cemetery Surgery Type: Early Colonial Site  Premortem - removal of anterior teeth and palate with evidence of healing 2. New York African Burial Ground Autopsy 1 out of 419 individuals Male, young adult, African American New York City, New York  Craniotomy – transverse saw cuts to the cranium 1712-1794 PME = 0.2% Blakey (2004) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Public Cemetery 3. Old Frankfort Cemetery Autopsy 242 individuals African American, European, and Frankfort, Kentucky  Craniotomy – transverse saw cuts to the cranium 3 individuals with evidence of autopsy mixed ancestries ca. 1804-1848 Pollack et al. (2009) PME = 1.2% of individuals Formal burial – cemetery Type: Public Cemetery 4. 8th St. First African Baptist Church Autopsy 1 out of 89 individuals excavated Adult female, African American Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Associated with hyperostosis frontalis interna 1824-1842  Craniotomy – transverse saw cuts to the cranium PME = 1.1% of individuals Angel et al. (1987) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Public Cemetery 5. Newburgh Colored Burial Ground Autopsy 1 out of 99 individuals recovered Young adult female, possibly New York City, New York  Craniotomy – transverse saw cuts to the cranium African American 1830-1870 PME = 1% of individuals Nystrom (2011) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Public Cemetery 6. Uxbridge Almshouse Autopsy 1 out of 32 individuals Adult male Uxbridge, Massachusetts  Craniotomy – transverse saw cuts to the cranium 1831-1872 PME = 3.1% of individuals Wesolowsky (1991) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Almshouse Cemetery

189

7. Fort Craig post cemetery Autopsy 5 out of 64 individuals show signs of autopsy Military and civilian burials Rio Grande, New Mexico Related to pathology or trauma European and African American, 1854-1885  Craniotomy – transverse cuts to the cranium PME = 7.8% of individuals some Hispanic or Native American Goff (2009)  Spine – cuts to posterior ribs, transverse cut to Males and females Formal burial – cemetery lumbar vertebra; removal of thoracic spine 34% infants, 6% child, 11% Type: Public Cemetery  Pelvis – sagittal cuts to both pubes (excision of adolescent, 26.6% young adult, the pubic symphysis) 20.3% middle adult, 1.6% older adult  Cuts to sternum (irregular cuts around the superior margin) and upper ribs Surgery Amputations, some near gunshot wounds  Transverse saw cuts to humerus and femur  Two individuals + 4 amputated lower limbs and 2 amputated upper limbs 8. Alameda-Stone Cemetery Autopsy 3 out of 1386 individuals recovered Military and civilian burials Tucson, Arizona  Craniotomy – transverse cuts to the cranium At least one Euro-American male ca. 1860-1881 Surgery PME = 0.2% and one Hispanic male Heilen et al. (2012)  Amputation - two legs and one forearm missing Formal burial – cemetery (transected) Type: Public Cemetery PRIMARILY DISSECTION 9. Oxford Castle Dissection Castle: 62 burials Most 18-35 years, predominantly Oxford, United Kingdom  Two horizontal craniotomies 5 have evidence of PME (dating to 17th century) male (79%), probably executed 16th-18th century  Decapitation at 4th cervical vertebrae (fine cut criminals and prisoners Boston and Webb (2012) marks for cutting through ligaments) PME = 8.1% of individuals Formal burial – coffins  Cut mark on the glenoid fossa- removal of the Informal burial – some deposited in moat mandible Type: Other (executed criminals)  Vertical cuts to the temporal for examinations of the inner ear  Cut marks at muscle insertion sites on the cranium  Cut marks on scapula for defleshing  Wet bone breakage (after partial transection of long bone) 10. James Fort Surgery 100+ formal graves, none have evidence of Male, middle-aged adult, European Jamestown, Virginia Failed trephination – perimortem (n =1) surgery 1611-1617  Circular saw marks on occipital (no evidence of 3 cranial fragments found in fill may represent Bruwelheide et al. (2017) healing) retention of anatomical specimens Informal burial – midden deposits later Dissection and specimen preparation reused as fill After individuals were subject to cannibalism PME = less than 3% of individuals Type: Early Colonial Site  Saw cuts on cranium (two different angles) 11. Charlton’s Coffeehouse Dissection 7 human fragments recovered: 3 vertebrae with Subadult, 14-18 years Williamsburg, Virginia  Vertically-oriented incisions to 3 articulating cut marks, 3 without, 1 modified phalanx for 1760s thoracic vertebrae articulated skeleton Chapman and Kostro (2017) PME = 50% of vertebral fragments 190

11. Charlton’s Coffeehouse (continued) Specimen Informal burial – midden deposit  Modified phalanx for articulation (modifications Type: Early Colonial Site not specified) 12. William Hewson’s Anatomy School Surgery 3,000 specimens (human and faunal) Human MNI of 24 (Craven Street) Postmortem surgery practice Overall PME = 14% of human elements Half subadults (mostly perinatal and London, United Kingdom  Multiple trephinations on the same skull Cranial PME = 51% of skulls neonatal) 1772-1778  Practice amputation - circumferential knife cuts 2:1 male:female Kausmally (2012) near saw mark on long bone Informal burial – pit with commingled Dissection human and faunal remains  Dismemberment of bodies for sharing Type: Medical Institution  Crania with calvarium and sagittal cuts  Cuts for opening of the thorax and exposure of the spinal cord 13. Holden Chapel Surgery 907 fragments of human remains, 51 elements MNI of 16: 12 adults, 1 fetus, 2 Cambridge, Massachusetts Surgical practice (amputation) - postmortem display cut marks infants, and 1 child 1801-1850  Transverse cut marks on long bones Hodge (2013) Dissection – with documentary evidence PME = 5.6% overall Hodge et al. (2017)  Transverse cuts through femora and tibiae 11.4 % of cranial elements Informal burial – well deposit  Lack of cuts on humerus (cartilaginous 50% of sternal elements (all sagittal) Type: Medical Institution disarticulation of shoulder) 16.2 % of rib elements  Sagittal cuts to ribs (proximal and distal) and 1.0 % of vertebral fragments (all transverse) sternum 8.3% of rib fragments (39% proximal, 61%  Sagittal cut to clavicle distal)  Sagittal cuts to pubis and sacroiliac joint 28.6% of pubis fragments (all sagittal) 50% of femur fragments (31% proximal, 31%  Coronal cut to cranium with pathology Specimens midshaft, 38% distal) 50% of tibia fragments (60% proximal, 40%  Vertebrae on iron pins distal)  Missing crania (highly prized) 33.3% of fibula fragments (12.5% proximal, 75% midshaft, 12.5% distal) 14. Albany County Almshouse Surgery 903 individuals, 51 individuals show postmortem 441 males Albany, New York  Premortem amputation - transverse cut to long cuts 283 females 1826-1926 bones with evidence of healing Overall PME = 5.65% of individuals 179 indeterminate sex Lusignan (2004)  Premortem(?) trephination - two circular cuts on Cranial PME = 4.65% of individuals (mostly Lowe (2017) parietal, one with signs of healing circumferential cranial cuts) Formal burial – cemetery Dissection – with documentary evidence Postcranial PME = 1.4% of individuals (mostly Type: Almshouse Cemetery  Removal of skull cap and occipital wedge transverse cuts through long bones)  Sectioning of long bones (transverse cuts to shaft) Specimen PME = 0.4% of individuals have drill  Two cuts to clavicle (lateral and medial) holes  Sacrum removed with oblique cuts  Horizontal cut through lumbar vertebrae Specimens Associated with pathology (congenital syphilis) or trauma (gunshot wound)  Drilled holes on crania, some with wire

191

15. Medical College of Georgia Surgical practice 9,808 bones recovered MNI of 22 Augusta, Georgia  Trephination (n=1) 13 black males, 4 black females, 4 1835-1912  Midline cuts to sternum and sagittal cuts to PME = 4% overall white males, 1 white female Harrington and Blakely (1995a,b) sternal rib ends 15.5% of cranial elements 90% adult, 10% subadult Blakely and Harrington (1997)  Higher frequency of sectioned limb bones that is 4.0% of vertebrae McFarlin and Wineski (1997) seen in modern dissections 4.1% of ribs Informal burial - basement deposit Dissection – with documentary evidence 12.3% of sterna Type: Medical Institution  Craniotomy – removal of calvarium and occipital 5.8% of clavicles wedge 6.1% of humeri  Longitudinal cuts to the occipital 3.4% of radii  Transverse or longitudinal sections of the 5.2% of ulnae temporals 0.1% of hand bones 1.1% of pelvis fragments  Cuts to the facial bones 7.6% of femora  Vertical sections of the mandible 6.0% of tibiae  False starts and multiple sections of the same 1.8% of fibulae bone 1.2% of foot bones  Cervical vertebrae: transverse and longitudinal cuts  Thoracic vertebrae: laminectomy  Lumbar vertebrae: oblique cuts  Clavicle severed in half at midshaft  Cut and saw marks to hands and feet 16. Medical College of Virginia Surgery and autopsy PME = 17.9 % of cranial bones MNI of 44 adults and 9 children Richmond, Virginia One individual (1.9%) 26.1% of frontals (under 14 years) 1800-1860  Trephination adjacent to projectile injury (also 20.8% of parietals Owsley et al. (2017) autopsied) 14.3% of occipitals Crania (n = 26) Informal burial – well deposit Dissection and Surgical Training – with documentary 18.4% of temporals 17 males, 8 female, 1 indeterminate Type: Medical Institution evidence 4.5% of zygomatics sex  Saw cuts to parietals and frontals, varying 0% of maxillae 2 European, 18 African, 6 techniques and experience levels (different 44.4% of mandibles indeterminate ancestry angles, hesitation marks)  Chipped endocranial margins to cuts indicate a PME = 7.5% of postcranial bones prying tool 1.1% of humeri  Cuts to zygomatic process of temporal and 8.2% of radii ascending ramus of mandible 5.7% of ulnae  Midline sectioning of mandible 2.4% of scapulae  Transverse cuts through limb bone shaft, 4% of clavicles sometimes multiple 2.3% of ossa coxae 4.7% of sacra  Cuts to rib shaft (various) 15.9% of femora  Vertical cuts to neural arch 11.6% of tibiae  Horizontal sectioning through vertebral body and 9% of fibulae articular facets Anatomical specimen Metal hook in glenoid fossa of scapula

192

17. University of Cambridge Dissection 140 dissected individuals (cranial only) Cambridge, United Kingdom  Craniotomy 80% with tool marks 1849- ca. 1913  Unopened crania with tool marks from defleshing 55% with craniotomy Dittmar and Mitchell (2015)  Bisected crania 59% of unopened crania has superficial knife cuts Specimens retained from anatomical  Division of corpse into sections for defleshing dissection  Staining from colored dyes and wax injections Type: Anatomical Collection 18. Dunning Poorhouse Surgery (Experimentation?) 114 burial features 56% female, 44% male Chicago, Illinois  Practice trephination - mandible with 3 incised 120 individuals 35% under age 15, 30% 15-15 years, ca. 1851-1870 circular lesions, no evidence of healing 5 elements show PME (belonging to four 36% over 25 years (women and Grauer et al. (2017) Dissection individuals / burial features) children overrepresented) Formal burial – cemetery  Transverse cuts of femurs and tibia Type: Almshouse Cemetery  Transverse cut through R and L temporals PME = 3.3% of individuals Anatomized remains are: one adult, one adult male, one middle-aged adult male, and one middle-aged adult female 19. Freedman’s Cemetery Dissection 2 out of 1157 individuals recovered 1 middle aged adult male, the other Dallas, Texas  Craniotomy unknown 1869-1907  Bisection of the femora PME = 0.2% of individuals Possibly African American Davidson (2007)  Missing elements (grave robbing?) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Public Cemetery BOTH AUTOPSY & DISSECTION 20. Worcester Royal Infirmary Autopsy / Dissection 1458 skeletal fragments Primarily adults, mostly males Worcester, United Kingdom  Craniotomy High prevalence of pathology, esp. 19th century Surgery Autopsy PME = 1/3 of all cranial fragments show inflammatory lesions Western (2012) Premortem and postmortem(?) amputations evidence of craniotomy (craniotomy more Perimortem trauma and bias for adult Informal burial – medical waste pits  Bisection of limb bones common than thoracotomy) males is noted in other hospitals at Type: Medical Institution Dissection the time  Cuts with no medical value Amputation PME = 1/4 of tibia and femoral  Sagittal cuts to pelvic region with false starts fragments were bisected (a majority were distal  Sagittal cuts to vertebrae for studying spinal cord portions and showed evidence of pathology)  Transverse cuts to vertebrae for disarticulation ~10% of upper limb bones were bisected  Sectioning of mandible  Non-craniotomy cuts to cranium  Superficial incision marks on limb bones at muscle origin sites (defleshing) Specimens  Drilling, dyes, wires, pins 21. Newcastle Infirmary Burial Ground Autopsy 210 articulated burials + four charnel pit deposits Mostly adults, 2/3 male Newcastle, United Kingdom  Craniotomy (14% of individuals) with MNI of 407 <10% were subadults (under 18) 1753-1845  Transverse cuts through midshaft of clavicles + 312 bones show PME from charnel pits and 32 Chamberlain (2012) saw cuts to ribs (thoracotomy) bones from articulated burials Formal burial – hospital cemetery Surgery / Surgery Practice 200 bones show evidence of amputation, mostly Type: Medical Institution  Amputation – bisected limbs tibia / fibula (80.5%), followed by femur (12.5%)

193

21. Newcastle Infirmary Burial Ground Surgery / Surgery Practice (continued) 25 bones show signs of dissection (continued)  Trephinations  Premortem amputations - high proportion of Craniotomy PME = 14% of individuals distal elements indicates waste from successful amputations Dissection  Saw cuts to vertebrae, sacrum, os coxae, and frontal (eye orbit) 22. Royal London Hospital Autopsy 173 primary burials, 463 body portions, and 2.7:1 male to female ratio London, United Kingdom  Craniotomy 7,571 elements of disarticulated bone (MNI of 79 Females and children were also ca. 1825-1841  Saw cuts to anterior ribs for disarticulated bone) dissected Fowler and Powers (2012a,b)  Occasional involvement of clavicles and sternum Walker et al. (2014) Surgery Primary burials Formal burial – all were in coffins, but  Drilling holes (experimentation?) Autopsy PME = 27.7% of primary burials had many contained partial and / or  Long bone amputations (peri-mortem and post- signs of autopsy commingled remains mortem) Type: Medical Institution Dissection Disarticulated bone  Saw marks associated with dismemberment PME = 56.25% of disarticulated vertebrae (portioning of the body for cadaver sharing) PME = 37.7% of ribs were sawn, 12 also showed o Transverse saw cut to cervical vertebrae for cut marks removal of the head o Sagittal section of the clavicle and transverse saw cut to the shaft of the humerus for removal of the shoulder o Transverse saw cut to distal humerus and proximal radius / ulna for removal of the elbow o Transverse saw cut to the distal radius / ulna for removal of the wrist and hand o Sagittal section through the pelvis (sacrum and pubis) and transverse section to the proximal femur shaft for removal of the hip o Transverse saw cuts to the lumbar vertebrae for removal of the lower half of the body o Transverse saw cut to the distal femur shaft and the proximal tibia / fibula for removal of the knee o Transverse saw cut to the distal tibia / fibula for removal of the ankle and foot  Saw cuts to mandible (mostly vertical)

 Saw cuts to temporal for dissecting the inner ear

 Saw cuts to frontal and other facial bones for

examining internal facial anatomy (e.g. eyes,

nose, and sinuses)

 Bisection of the sternum

194

22. Royal London Hospital (continued) Specimens  Wires, screws, red or yellow dyes 23. Spring Street Presbyterian Church Autopsy MNI of 193 1 infant Manhattan, New York  Craniotomy 3 individuals with signs of autopsy or dissection 1 adolescent, probably European 1820-1846 Dissection and Specimens male w/ possible congenital syphilis Novak and Willoughby (2010)  Craniotomy of amateurish quality with kerfs and PME = 1.6% of individuals 1 adult male, non-European, middle Novak (2017) chipping Autopsy PME = 1% of individuals adult Formal burial – cemetery (some  Marks from defleshing of the cranium Dissection PME = 0.5% of individuals commingled due to coffin deterioration)  Pins in frontal and occipital 1/3 subadults, mostly infants and Type: Public Cemetery young children 24. Charity Hospital Cemetery Autopsy Charity #2 Sample (Owsley 1995) MNI = 350 individuals New Orleans, Louisiana  Saw cuts on crania 140 coffins, 271 individuals 92% adults 1847-1929  Saw cuts on anterior ribs, clavicles, or sternum 233 cranial bones and 113 postcranial bones with 3 times as many black individuals as Owsley et al. (1990) Surgery and amputation cut marks (total # of bones unknown) white (of the 25% of the series for Beavers et al. (1993)  Transverse saw marks on limb shafts PME = 35-40% of crania which ancestry could be estimated) Owsley (1995)  Saw marks in areas with pathology or trauma Seidemann (2008, 2011) Dissection University of New Orleans Sample Halling and Seidemann (2017)  Removal of calotte and ribs 938 fragments, 46 bones with cut marks Formal cemetery – most were single  Marks at muscle origin/insertion sites PME = 4.9% of fragments interments, some with multiple  Transverse cuts on long bones, esp. elbow or knee individuals, others with commingled Charity #1 Sample  Dissection of mandibular ramus discarded limbs 444 skeletal elements, 10 with cut marks Type: Medical Institution  Dissection of fourth ventricle and middle ear PME = 2.25% of elements Experimentation

 Multiple cuts on a single bone  Sagittal or coronal cuts on long bones  Removal of anterior dentition with a transverse cut  Mandible cuts (between second and third molar)  Vertebrae, clavicle, manubrium, and talus with saw marks at odd angles 25. Erie County Poorhouse Autopsy 376 individuals 58 infants Buffalo, New York  Craniotomy 20 have evidence of autopsy or dissection 8 juveniles 1850-1920  Thoracotomy: Cuts to sternal rib ends, sternum 10 have craniotomies only (12 total have 310 adults Nystrom (2014) transected just below 5th costal notch craniotomies) Autopsied/dissected individuals are Nystrom et al. (2017) Surgery mostly adult (1 juvenile), middle- Formal cemetery  Antemortem amputation of femur (with healing) Overall PME = 5.3% of individuals aged males Type: Almshouse Cemetery Dissection Craniotomy PME = 3.2% of individuals  Laminectomy (cuts on either side of spinous process)  Sectioned or transected long bones Specimen  Elbow retained as teaching specimen 26. Blockley Almshouse Autopsy / Dissection 2534 bone fragments from 3 sample clusters MNI = 690 individuals total, 248 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Authors do not distinguish between autopsy and individuals represented by crania ca. 1865-1895 dissection activities PME = 5.8% overall Mostly older European males 195

26. Blockley Almshouse (continued) Autopsy / Dissection (continued) 82.1% of crania Crist and Crist (2011)  Transverse cut marks to the cranium 45.5% of mandibles Crist et al. (2017)  Bisection of mandibles 13.2% of vertebrae Formal burial – individual coffins but most  Bisection of sterna 26% of humeri graves contained multiple stacked coffins Surgery / Specimen 37% of radii or coffins in pits Practice amputations and / or retention of hands and 40% of ulnae Informal burial – 11 “clusters” of feet for specimens 40% of femora anatomized remains  Transverse saw cuts through the long bones 39% of tibiae Type: Almshouse Cemetery Surgery 39% of fibulae  Trephination (n = 20) 7.1% of sterna Specimens No changes to ribs, scapula, sacrum, os coxae  Elements articulated with copper wire 27. Milwaukee County Poorhouse Autopsy Dougherty and Sullivan (2017) Dougherty and Sullivan (2017) Wauwatosa, Wisconsin  Craniotomy: both circumferential and wedge- Overall PME = 12.2% of individuals 985 adult, 363 non-adult = 1348 total 1878-1925 shaped Cranial PME = 9.4% of individuals Of adults: Dougherty and Sullivan (2017)  Thoracotomy (sternum, ribs)- low rate may Postcranial PME = 3.6% of individuals 75.6% male or probable male Richards et al. (2017) indicate cuts to cartilage instead of bone 12.7% female or probable female Formal burial – cemetery, some  Sagittal section of clavicle and scapula – may be Sternum PME = 0.4% (n = 6) 11.7% indeterminate sex commingled associated with thoracotomy Ribs PME = 0.3% (n = 4) Type: Almshouse Cemetery Richards et al. 2017: Vertebrae PME = 0.4% (n = 5) Richards et al. (2017)  Oblique cuts to the vertebral column 665 individuals, 381 adults, 284  Single burial with no medical waste Richards et al. (2017) subadults Surgery practice (postmortem) 176 of 381 adult burial lots have cut marks  Trephination (n = 4) PME = 46.2% of burial lots  Linear osteotomy (transection) of long bones Dissection Cervical PME = 14.4% of burial lots Clavicle PME = 13.6% of burial lots  Laminectomy, hemisection, and transverse cuts of

the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae Autopsy PME = 13.4% of burial lots (craniotomy  Sagittal section of sacrum + cuts to the ribs and vertebrae)  Bisection of the mandible Richards et al. 2017: Dissection PME = 32.8% of burial lots (24.9%  Cross-section cuts of long bones dismemberment, 7.9% craniotomy + postcranial  Non-craniotomy cuts on the cranium cuts)  Commingled burial, often with medical waste Specimens Specimen PME = 23.4% of burial lots (14.2%  Decapitation: missing skulls; transverse / oblique missing skull + postcranial cut marks, 8.7% cut through cervical vertebrae missing skull + cervical cut marks, 0.5% Richards et al. 2017: preserved subadults in a jar) – overlaps with  Staining dissection category  Lots of medical waste associated Experimentation 284 subadult remains, 33 with evidence of  Exposing of frontal sinuses, excision of mastoid craniotomy, none with postcranial cut marks processes  Multiple sections of the mandible PME = 11.3% of subadult burial lots  Long bone (diaphyseal) excision

196

OTHER ACTIVITIES 28. Oxford: Old Ashmolean Museum Surgery 2050 elements Not an overabundance of pathology Oxford, United Kingdom Trephination – premortem MNI 17-18 individuals Fetal to adult in age Late 17th to early 18th century  Circular saw cut on parietal with evidence of Slight preference for long bones and Boston and Webb (2012) healing skulls Informal burial – basement deposits Dissection – with documentary evidence Type: Medical Institution (anatomy school [No evidence described] and dissection rooms on site) Specimen  Drilled holes with copper wire for articulation (securing skull to mandible and cervical vertebrae) 29. Snake Hill Cemetery Amputation At least 30 individuals All males (military sample) Fort Erie, Ontario  Transverse saw cuts to the femur, humerus, radius 7 had evidence of amputation, 2 had double Mostly young adults, some Associated with War of 1812 and ulna amputations (23.3% of individuals) adolescents and middle adults Saunders (1991) Pfeiffer (1991) Owsley et al. (1991) Formal burial – cemetery Type: Military Cemetery 30. Physician’s privy Experimentation / Surgical practice Single individual with PME Young or middle-aged adult, Annapolis, Maryland  Two sawed femoral sections possibly female Late 19th century Subadult metacarpal (no Mann et al. (1991) modifications) Informal burial – privy deposit Type: Other

197

APPENDIX B

Diagnostic table of criteria for various anatomization activities: autopsy, dissection, surgery, experimentation, and specimen preparation. The table provides written descriptions of each criterion, the corresponding osteological zones from Knüsel and Outram (2004), and a description of the tool type.

AUTOPSY DISSECTION SURGERY EXPERIMENTATION SPECIMEN PREPARATION Cranium Craniotomy Craniotomy Trephination Multiple trephinations to Missing cranium from Transverse or oblique cuts to Transverse or oblique cuts to Circular saw cut to the same skull - no otherwise complete the frontal, parietal, and the frontal, parietal, and cranial vault bones evidence of pathology, skeleton - especially if occipital for removal of the occipital for removal of the CRA 1-5 (circular saw) trauma or healing postcrania are skull cap - circumferential or skull cap - circumferential or CRA 1-5 (circular saw) dissected and / or there wedge craniotomy wedge craniotomy Any other cuts with is evidence of CRA 1-5 (saw) CRA 1-5 (saw) signs of healing Removal of anterior decapitation dentition - postmortem Possibly incised cut marks Possibly incised cut marks Wires, pins, screws, for removal of scalp for removal of scalp Exposure of frontal sinus and / or drill holes – CRA 1-5 (blade) CRA 1-5 (blade) CRA 1-2 for articulating calotte, mandible, or cervical Possibly endocranial Possibly endocranial Excision of mastoid vertebrae chipping to cut margins due chipping to cut margins due process to prying tool to prying tool CRA 6-7 Staining from colored CRA 1-5 (tool) CRA 1-5 (tool) wax or dye injections

Missing calotte

Non-craniotomy Superficial cuts for defleshing CRA 1-15 (blade)

Sagittal bisection of cranium CRA 1-5 (saw)

Dissection of eyes, mouth, nose, ears, or sinuses CRA 1-2, 6-15 (saw)

199

AUTOPSY DISSECTION SURGERY EXPERIMENTATION SPECIMEN Mandible Usually no cuts to mandible Sagittal sectioning of Usually none Trephination / circular Wires, pins, screws, or facial bones unless mandible saw cuts to the mandible and / or drill holes pathology is present MAN 1-7 (saw) MAN 1-7 (circular saw) Staining from colored Multiple saw cuts to the wax or dye injections same mandible MAN 1-7 (saw)

Removal of anterior dentition - postmortem Vertebrae Defleshing of vertebral Defleshing of vertebral Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Missing cranium and column column or shapes evidence for T. VERT 1-3 (blade) T. VERT 2-4 (blade) decapitation – transverse cut to Laminectomy cervical vertebra VERT 2,3 (saw) C. VERT 1-4 (saw)

Hemisection: sagittal cuts Wires, pins, screws, T. VERT 1-4 (saw) and / or drill holes

Disarticulation: transverse Staining from colored cuts wax or dye injections C. or L. VERT 1-4 (saw) Clavicle Thoracotomy Thoracotomy Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, Sagittal saw cuts to midshaft Sagittal saw cuts to midshaft or shapes and / or drill holes or sternal end or sternal end CLA 1,3 (saw) CLA 1,3 (saw) Staining from colored wax or dye injections Sternum Thoracotomy Thoracotomy Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, Saw cuts - oblique, sagittal, Saw cuts - oblique, sagittal, or shapes and / or drill holes or transverse or transverse STR 1-3 (saw) STR 1-3 (saw) Staining from colored wax or dye injections Ribs Thoracotomy Thoracotomy Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, Sagittal saw cuts to sternal Sagittal saw cuts to sternal or shapes and / or drill holes ends - RIB 3 (saw) ends - RIB 3 (saw) 200

AUTOPSY DISSECTION SURGERY EXPERIMENTATION SPECIMEN Ribs Defleshing of vertebral Defleshing of vertebral Staining from colored (cont.) column column wax or dye injections Cuts to vertebral ends of ribs Cuts to vertebral ends of ribs RIB 1,2 (blade) RIB 1,2 (blade) Scapula Usually none Cut marks for defleshing Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, SCA 1-9 (blade) or shapes and / or drill holes

Staining from colored wax or dye injections Sacrum Usually none Oblique or sagittal cuts Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, SAC 1-4 (saw) or shapes and / or drill holes

Staining from colored wax or dye injections Os Coxae Usually none Sagittal cut to pubis or Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, sacroiliac joint or shapes and / or drill holes (COX 7.9) Staining from colored wax or dye injections Long Usually none Disarticulation Amputation Multiple cuts to the same Wires, pins, screws, Bones Transverse cuts to diaphysis Transverse cuts to long bone and / or drill holes of long bones diaphysis of long bones HUM 7-11; RAD 5-10; ULN HUM 7-11; RAD 5-10; Longitudinal sections of Staining from colored E-H; FEM 2-8; TIB 7-10; ULN E-H; FEM 2-8; long bones wax or dye injections FIB 3-6 (saw) TIB 7-10; FIB 3-6 (saw) Excision of cortical bone Any other missing Cuts to joint surfaces and Missing distal portion(s) from long bone shafts portions (e.g. a joint muscle attachment sites articulation) HUM 1-6; RAD 1-4, J; ULN Cuts or drill holes with A-D, J; FEM 1-5, 9-11; TIB unusual angles, shapes, 1-6; FIB 1,2 (blade) or patterns Hands Usually none Infrequently observed- Usually none Cuts with unusual angles Wires, pins, screws, and Feet mostly superficial cuts from or shapes and / or drill holes bladed instruments Staining from colored wax or dye injections 201

AUTOPSY DISSECTION SURGERY EXPERIMENTATION SPECIMEN Burial Public cemetery Medical institution or Premortem Any other cuts that do Informal burial Context almshouse cemetery Evidence of healing not fit the typical pattern and other Complete, articulated May be associated with for autopsy, dissection, Associated with notes skeleton Fragmented, disarticulated visible pathology surgery, or specimen medical waste, remains preparation especially specimen Individual burial Perimortem bottles Commingled burial No evidence of healing Often associated with Formal burial May be associated with dissection and / or Informal burial (midden, visible pathology surgery well, basement, or latrine) Postmortem *These cuts may actually Associated with animal bones Associated with be part of a normal and medical waste dissection autopsy or dissection – No evidence of see “Interpretive pathology or healing Challenges” section in Multiple interventions on Chapter III the same bone Poor skill of cuts Wet bone breakage

202

APPENDIX C

204

Illustrations of the zonation method of Knüsel and Outram (2004). Reprinted with permission from the publisher.

Osteological zones of the cranium (CRA) and mandible (MAN) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:93-95). Clockwise from top left: anterior view, posterior view, right lateral view, superior view, inferior view, and left lateral view.

205

Osteological zones of the vertebral column (VERT), shown on a thoracic vertebra (Knüsel and Outram 2004:88). Left: superior view of the vertebra. Right: right lateral view of the vertebra.

Osteological zones of the vertebral column, shown on the sacrum (SAC) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:88). Left: anterior view. Right: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the clavicle (CLA) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:96). Top: superior view. Bottom: inferior view.

206

Osteological zones of the sternum (STR) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:95). Left: anterior view. Right: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the rib (RIB) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:89). Clockwise from top left: superior view of first rib, superior view of seventh rib, inferior view of seventh rib, and inferior view of first rib.

207

Osteological zones of the scapula (SCA) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:89). Left: anterior view. Right: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the humerus (HUM) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:90). Top: anterior view. Bottom: posterior view.

208

Osteological zones of the radius (RAD) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:90). Top: anterior view. Bottom: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the ulna (ULN) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:91). Top: anterior view. Bottom: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the metacarpals (MC) and hand phalanges (Knüsel and Outram 2004:93). Left: dorsal view of a right hand. Right: palmar view of a left hand.

209

Osteological zones of the os coxae (COX) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:91). Left: medial view of left os coxae. Right: lateral view of the left os coxae.

Osteological zones of the femur (FEM) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:92). Top: anterior view. Bottom: posterior view.

210

Osteological zones of the tibia (TIB) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:92). Top: anterior view. Bottom: posterior view.

Osteological zones of the fibula (FIB) (Knüsel and Outram 2004:96). Top: posterior view. Bottom: anterior view.

211

Osteological zones of the foot: calcaneus (CAL), talus (TAL), metatarsals (MT), and foot phalanges (Knüsel and Outram 2004:90). Left: dorsal view of the right foot. Right: plantar view of right foot.

APPENDIX D

213

Glossary of Terms

This thesis uses standard osteological and anatomical terminology as defined by White and colleagues (2012). Less common and non-standard terms are defined below.

Anatomization

“Anatomization” refers to the range of activities that fall under the umbrella of anatomical study, including (but not limited to): autopsy, dissection, medical experimentation, surgery or amputation practice / demonstration / training, and specimen preparation. This thesis treats the following terms and phrases as synonyms of anatomization: postmortem intervention / examination / alteration, medical intervention, anatomical study, anatomical interventions (Nystrom 2017a:4). “Autopsy and dissection” are generally used in an inclusive manner in this thesis, serving as shorthand for the wide range of anatomization practices. The identification and definition of these practices will be explored in depth in this thesis.

Ante-, Peri-, and Postmortem

“Antemortem” refers to processes that affect the body before death (White et al. 2012:578). “Perimortem” refers to processes that affect the body at or near the time of death (White et al. 2012:587). For examinations of the skeleton, perimortem refers to changes that occurred to living or fresh bone that exhibit no signs of healing (White et al.

2012:460). “Postmortem” refers to processes that affect the body after death (White et al.

2012:588).

214

Articulated / Disarticulated

“Articulated” refers to bones that are found in their anatomically correct location and orientation relative to one another, suggesting that the remains decomposed in the same location and position in which they were found (White et al. 2012:578).

“Disarticulated” refers to bones which are not in an anatomically correct location or orientation to one another, suggesting that the remains were relocated or manipulated, either by natural or cultural agents, since the time of decomposition (White et al.

2012:581)

Assemblage

An archaeological assemblage is a collection of artifacts found in relation to one another in the same context (Renfrew and Bahn 2016:596). In this thesis,

“assemblage” most often refers to a skeletal assemblage, or a collection of human skeletal remains found in association with one another. These remains may include isolated skeletal elements or fully articulated skeletons.

Autopsy

Autopsy is the examination of the body to determine the cause of death

(Nystrom 2017a:7).

Bioarchaeology

Bioarchaeology is the study of human skeletal remains from archaeological contexts (White et al. 2012:1).

215

Commingled

“Commingled” refers to an assemblage in which the skeletal remains of two or more individuals are mixed together in a single context (Ubelaker 2002:332).

Commingled remains are often incomplete and fragmentary (White et al. 2012:579).

Cutmarks

In this thesis, a cutmark is considered to be a linear alteration or depression on a bone produced by a tool using a slicing, chopping, or sawing motion. These marks are generally inflicted perimortem or postmortem and exhibit no signs of healing. In archaeological contexts, tools are generally made of stone, bone, or antler. In historic and modern contexts, tools are usually metal saws or incised blades.

Dissection

Dissection is the postmortem examination of the body for anatomical study and / or research (Nystrom 2017a:7). This examination usually involves cutting open the body to reveal its internal structures.

Element

An element is a bone of the skeleton. In this thesis, “element” is occasionally used to refer to a fragment or portion of a bone, when that is the only fragment or portion of that bone that is present.

Medicolegal

“Medicolegal” refers to a concept or thing that has associations with both medicine and law. The term “medicolegal” is more general than the term “forensic,” which specifically refers to matters pertaining to the investigation of a crime.

216

Pathology

Pathology is the branch of medicine that deals with the study of diseases, including their cause, effects, and diagnosis. Pathology also refers to the analysis of body tissues for research or diagnosis of diseases. Paleopathology is the study of disease in ancient populations, through the analysis of skeletal remains and other preserved tissues

(White et al. 2012:587).

Preparation / Specimen

A “preparation” or “specimen” is a portion of the body that is excised during autopsy or dissection and preserved for later use in teaching, research, or pathological study (Nystrom 2017a:5).

Taphonomy

The study of processes that affect the skeleton between the time of death and curation (White et al. 2012:459). These processes may be natural, such as weathering and scavenging, or cultural, such as autopsy and dissection.