AN INVESTIGATION OF VIOLENCE-RELATED TRAUMA AT TWO SITES IN THE PICKWICK BASIN: DUST CAVE (1LU496) AND THE O’NEAL SITE (1LU61)
By
James Harvey Turner, II
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Applied Anthropology in the Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work
Mississippi State, Mississippi
May 2006
AN INVESTIGATION OF VIOLENCE-RELATED TRAUMA AT TWO SITES IN THE PICKWICK BASIN: DUST CAVE (1LU496) AND THE O’NEAL SITE (1LU61)
By
James Harvey Turner, II
Approved:
______S. Homes Hogue Janet Rafferty Associate Professor of Anthropology Professor of Anthropology (Director of Thesis) Graduate Coordinator for Anthropology (Committee Member)
______Evan Peacock Philip B. Oldham Associate Professor of Anthropology Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences (Committee Member)
Name: James Harvey Turner, II
Date of Degree: May 13, 2006
Institution: Mississippi State University
Major Field: Applied Anthropology
Major Professor: Dr. S. Homes Hogue
Title of Study: AN INVESTIGATION OF VIOLENCE-RELATED TRAUMA AT TWO SITES IN THE PICKWICK BASIN: DUST CAVE (1LU496) AND THE O’NEAL SITE (1LU61)
Pages in Study: 137
Candidate for Degree of Master of Arts
Osteological evidence for violence has only in recent times been thoroughly investigated. Several kinds of traumas indicative of violence have been identified in human skeletal remains worldwide. Such traumas include scalping, embedded and/or associated projectile points, cranial fractures, parry fractures and defensive injuries, decapitation and dismemberment, and evidence of cannibalism. Analysis of traumas at
Dust Cave (1LU496) and the O’Neal site (1LU61), two sites in northwestern Alabama with Middle and Late Archaic occupations, was undertaken. Violence-related traumas were observed at both sites. A highly significant difference exists in trauma patterns between the sites. Results were compared to research done on other populations in an attempt to gain a better understanding of violence in prehistory and to place these sites in a wider regional context.
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this research to the memory of my father and mother, James and
Jean Turner, and to my grandmother, Mamie Burnett, whose love and sacrifice has made all of this possible.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author expresses his sincere gratitude to everyone who offered kindness and support and made completion of this thesis possible. First and foremost I wish to thank
Dr. S. Homes Hogue for her instruction, support, and guidance throughout my academic career. Her mentorship and friendship will never be forgotten. I would also like to thank the other committee members, Drs. Janet Rafferty and Evan Peacock. Over the past seven years, these three individuals played invaluable roles in my academic development and I truly am a better person for having known them.
I would also like to express gratitude to Dr. Keith Jacobi, the Laboratory for
Human Osteology, and the Alabama Museum of Natural History at the University of
Alabama for providing access to research materials, photographs, comparative materials, and thesis guidance. I would like to thank John O’Hear, of the Cobb Institute of
Archaeology, for aiding in ceramic identification and providing general information about
Tennessee River Valley archaeology. I would like to thank Sam McGahey, of the
Mississippi Department of Archives and History, for aiding in projectile point identification. M.C. Hill, of Jacksonville State University, provided skeletal information for comparative purposes. Aaron Deter-Wolf, of TRC, Inc., also provided useful comparative information. David Dye, of the University of Memphis, provided insights into trauma data. I must also thank everyone at the Cobb Institute of Archaeology for their support over the years. Special thanks are extended to Joe Seger, James Hardin, iii
Paul Jacobs, and Ron Loewe for all of their guidance. I would also like to thank John
Underwood, who served as an informal reviewer of this thesis. Lastly, I would like to thank my wife, Tere, for all of her assistance and support. Thanks again to all those mentioned above and to all my friends and family who have aided in making this possible.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION ...... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii
LISTS OF TABLES ...... vii
LISTS OF FIGURE...... ix
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
II. PROBLEM STATEMENT...... 3
III. SITE INFORMATION ...... 6 Dust Cave (1LU496) ...... 6 O’Neal Site (1LU61) ...... 10
IV. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD IN REGIONAL CONTEXT...... 16 Early Archaic...... 17 Middle Archaic...... 17 Late Archaic ...... 19
V. PREVIOUS RESEARCH ...... 20 Scalping Marks...... 23 Embedded and Associated Projectile Points ...... 24 Parry Fractures and Defensive Injuries ...... 25 Cranial Fractures ...... 28 Decapitation...... 29 Dismemberment ...... 30 Cannibalism...... 31 Mortuary Treatment...... 32
v
CHAPTER Page VI. METHODS ...... 34 Estimating Age ...... 36 Sex Determination ...... 37 Determination of Archaic from Non-Archaic Burials at the O’Neal Site ..... 38 Analysis of Trauma ...... 39
VII. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ...... 43 Dust Cave ...... 43 Dust Cave: Tier One Analysis Results ...... 51 Dust Cave: Tier Two Analysis Results ...... 53 O’Neal Site ...... 54 O’Neal Site: Tier One Analysis Results...... 59 O’Neal Site: Tier Two Analysis Results ...... 62 Combined Sites Results...... 65 Trauma Locations...... 67 Traumatic Events By Age and Sex...... 71 Comparison of Tier One and Tier Two Analyses Methods ...... 74 Comparison with Previous Analyses...... 76
VIII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 80
GLOSSARY...... 99
REFERENCES CITED ...... 104
APPENDIX A BURIAL DATA TABLES ...... 126
vi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
1 Ceramics from the O’Neal site (1LU61) ...... 13
2 Projectile point types recovered from the O’Neal Site (1LU61) ...... 14
3 Dust Cave violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas ...... 52
4 Male and female violence-related traumas at Dust Cave by individual ...... 52
5 Male and female cranial and post-cranial violence-related traumas at Dust Cave by element...... 53
6 O’Neal site violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas...... 60
7 Male and female violence-related trauma at the O’Neal site by individual .. 61
8 Male and female cranial and post-cranial violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site by element ...... 62
9 Violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual ... 66
10 Male violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual...... 66
11 Female violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual...... 67
12 Cranial and post-cranial violence- and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by element ...... 67
13 Cranial and post-cranial violence- and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual ...... 67
14 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related post-cranial traumas by side at the O’Neal site ...... 69 vii
TABLE Page
15 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related cranial injuries by side at Dust Cave ...... 70
16 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related combined cranial and post-cranial injuries by side at Dust Cave...... 71
17 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related combined cranial and post-cranial injuries by side at the O’Neal site...... 71
18 Possibly violence-related and violence-related traumas in individuals over and under age 45 at the O’Neal site...... 72
19 Possibly violence-related and violence-related traumas in individuals over and under age 45 at Dust Cave...... 73
20 Summary of chi-square analyses results...... 83
21 Summary of violence- and possibly violence-related trauma occurrences at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site ...... 88
22 Frequencies of violence- and possibly violence-related traumas by location at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site...... 90
A.1 Dust Cave burial summary ...... 127
A.2 O’Neal site burial summary (Archaic burials only) ...... 128
A.3 Dust Cave skeletal traumas observed by Hogue (1994, 2003) and Davis (2004) ...... 130
A.4 O’Neal site age, sex, and skeletal traumas observed by Newman and Snow...... 131
A.5 O’Neal site skeletal traumas observed by Lubsen (2004) ...... 134
A.6 Dust Cave skeletal traumas...... 136
A.7 O’Neal site skeletal traumas ...... 137
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE Page
1 Site location map in the Pickwick Basin...... 9
2 The O’Neal Site (1LU61) in 1937 ...... 11
3 Ceramic sherds from the O’Neal Site ...... 12
4 Projectile points recovered from the O’Neal Site...... 14
5 Burial 1 from the O’Neal Site demonstrating the poor state of preservation...... 15
6 1LU496, Burial 5, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated) ...... 44
7 1LU496, Burial 7, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated) ...... 44
8 1LU496, Burial 16, cranial depression fracture A (scale approximated) ...... 45
9 1LU496, Burial 16, cranial depression fracture B (scale approximated) ...... 46
10 Photograph depicting cranial depression fracture B on left parietal of 1LU496, Burial 16...... 46
11 1LU496, Burial 18, cranial depression fracture A and B (scale approximated) ...... 47
12 1LU496, Burial 18, cranial depression fracture C (scale approximated) ...... 48
13 Photograph depicting depression fracture C on occipital bone of 1LU496, Burial 8 ...... 48
14 1LU496, Burial 19, cranial depression (scale approximated)...... 49
15 1LU496, Burial 27, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated) ...... 50 ix
FIGURE Page
16 1LU496, Burial 30a, cranial depression fractures (scale approximated)...... 51
17 1LU61, Burial 3, embedded lithic fragment in the 3rd left metatarsal...... 56
18 1LU61, Burial 3, embedded lithic fragment in the 3rd left metatarsal ...... 56
19 Photograph depicting cranial fracture on 1LU61, Burial 54...... 58
20 1LU61, Burial 54, cranial fracture with fracture lines radiating outward (scale approximated) ...... 58
21 Violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave...... 86
22 Violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site .. 87
x
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Perhaps the most compelling evidence of violence in past societies may be obtained from the examination of human skeletal remains. Human skeletal remains provide an important resource for the reconstruction of behavior and may provide useful information for assessing accidents and incidences of violence (Boyd 1996;
Lambert 2002; Larsen 1997). Osteological evidence for violence and warfare has only in recent times been thoroughly investigated (Boyd 1996; Bridges et. al 2000;
Davis 2004; Dye and Jacobi 2000; Hogue 2005; Hutchinson 1990, 1993; Jacobi and
Dye 2001; Lambert 2002; Larsen and Huynh 1993; Larson 1972; Lubsen 2004;
Martin and Frayer 1997; Merbs and Birkby 1985; Milner 1999, 2005; Milner et al.
1991; 1994; Olsen and Shipman 1994; Owsley and Jantz 1994; Shields 2003). Such analyses serve as valuable tools, as “investigation of injury morbidity and mortality facilitates the assessment of environmental, cultural, and social influences on behavior” (Larsen 1997:109).
Trauma was one of the most common pathologies affecting humans in prehistoric times (White 1991:335). “Traumatic injuries may affect the skeleton in several ways including fracturing or dislocating bone, disrupting its blood or nerve supply, or artificially deforming it” (White 1991:335). Several traumatic injuries 1 2 indicative of violence and conflict have been identified in human skeletal remains at archaeological sites worldwide. Such traumas may include scalping cutmarks, embedded and/or associated projectile points, cranial fractures, parry fractures and other injuries associated with a defensive posture, decapitation and dismemberment, as well as evidence of cannibalism. This study will apply such criteria to investigate violence in prehistoric populations at Dust Cave (1LU496) and the O’Neal site
(1LU61).
CHAPTER II
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Although an abundance of skeletal injury data is presented in osteological literature, few inferences have been made regarding human behavior and conflict
(Larsen 1997). Several problems may arise in the study of injury in archaeological skeletal remains. Among these problems are difficulties in distinguishing between accidental, intentional, and post-mortem bone fractures and/or breakage (Larsen
1997). Lyman’s (1994) study of nonhuman vertebrate material offers comparative data regarding the identification and interpretation of pre- and post-depositional processes affecting bone.
This thesis investigates violent trauma, which may be related to inter- personal violence and/or warfare, in archaeologically excavated human skeletal remains from the O’Neal site (1LU61) and Dust Cave (1LU496). These sites are located in Lauderdale County, Alabama, in the Pickwick Basin of the Tennessee
River valley. Skeletal material from Dust Cave dates primarily to the Middle
Archaic period (Hogue 1994, 2003). Skeletal material from the O’Neal site dates later than the Dust Cave material, with most burials seemingly dating to the late
Middle and Late Archaic periods (Lubsen 2004).
3 4 Skeletal samples from both sites have been analyzed previously to varying extents (Davis 2004; Hogue 1994, 2003; Lubsen 2004; Newman and Snow 1942).
Dr. S. Homes Hogue (1994), of Mississippi State University, provided preliminary skeletal data for a limited number of burials from Dust Cave and expanded upon those data with a paper presented at the Southeastern Archaeological Conference
(Hogue 2003). Valerie Davis (2004), in her Master of Arts thesis at Mississippi
State University, addressed stress indicators as possible evidence of differential treatment between the sexes at Dust Cave. Her study included an analysis of violence-related traumas. Kyle Lubsen (2004), in his Master of Arts thesis at the
University of Alabama, addressed subsistence activities during the Archaic period using human skeletal remains from the O’Neal site (1LU61) and Long Branch site
(1LU67). This study also included an analysis of traumas. Other than Lubsen’s
(2004) thesis, little information is available regarding the skeletal remains from the
O’Neal site, aside from the preliminary analysis of Newman and Snow (1942), which provided little information other than age and sex.
The purpose of this research is threefold: (1) to address intentional trauma as related to inter-personal violence and/or warfare at the O’Neal site and Dust Cave;
(2) to attempt to establish a proper chronology of the burials at the O’Neal site; and
(3) if temporally different, to address change through time or if temporally similar to compare the two sites spatially. Such research will add to the understanding of these sites in their regional context and will serve to further construct a synthesis and better understanding of the Pickwick Basin in prehistory. Data gathered from this
5 research into violent trauma may serve to further our knowledge and understanding of conflict, warfare, and other causes of intentional bone trauma in prehistory.
CHAPTER III
SITE INFORMATION
The Pickwick Basin lies in the Appalachian Plateau physiographic region and is characterized by deposits of Cretaceous, Mississippian and Devonian age (Jones
1942:331; Schuldenrein 1996:6). Lauderdale County lies in the northwestern corner of Alabama, bordered to the north by Tennessee and to the west by Mississippi.
Rivers border the southern and western portions of the county. Areas along the southern boundary adjacent to the Tennessee River are in limestone valleys. The western part of the county is part of the Coastal Plain, while the northern portion is in the Highland Rim (Sherard 1977).
Dust Cave (1LU496)
Dust Cave (1LU496), located near Florence, Alabama, in Lauderdale County, is one of many caverns penetrating the limestone bluff line of the Tennessee River in the Pickwick Basin (Figure 1). The cavern was used by prehistoric inhabitants beginning as early as 10,500 B.P. and continuing until about 5,200 B.P. (Goldman-
Finn 1994; Goldman-Finn and Driskell 1994; Sherwood et al. 2004). “During these five or so millennia, almost five meters of archaeological deposits – containing lithic
6 7 tools and debris, organic remains, features, rocks and earth – slowly but consistently filled the cave” (Goldman-Finn and Driskell 1994:4).
Soils in the vicinity of Dust Cave include those belonging to the Dewey-
Decatur association. These predominantly medium-textured soils are well-drained, non-cherty soils. Soils of this area include Staser silt loam, Chenneby silt loam, and
Choccolocco silt loam (Sherard 1977).
Burials from Dust Cave date to the Middle Archaic period (Driskell 1994,
1996; Hogue 1994, 2003; Hogue and Erwin 1993; Sherwood et al. 2004). The
Middle Archaic period largely coincides with the Hypsithermal, which is characterized as having had a warmer, drier climate.
Archaeological excavations at Dust Cave have been conducted under the direction of Dr. Boyce Driskell, formerly a Senior Archaeologist at the University of
Alabama Museum Of Natural History and currently at the University of Tennessee.
In the almost five meters of archaeological deposits, lithic tools and debris, botanical remains, faunal remains, and human skeletal remains have been recovered
(Goldman-Finn and Driskell 1994).
In the Middle Archaic strata, features uncovered included small-to-medium pits filled with charcoal, burned bone and shell, heat-altered limestone, and human skeletal remains (Goldman-Finn 1994). Burial pits tended to be shallow, and likely had been covered with stone (Driskell 1996; Hogue 1994). Human skeletal remains from Dust Cave were initially analyzed by Dr. S. Homes Hogue of Mississippi State
University (Hogue 1994, 2003). In a 2004 thesis, Valerie Davis investigated stress
8 indicators as evidence for possible differential treatment of males and females at
Dust Cave (Davis 2004). This study included an analysis of trauma (Appendix Table
A.1).
Analysis has been previously conducted on approximately 40 burials (Davis
2004:12, 37; Hogue 1994, 2003; Hogue and Dongarra 2002), addressing questions relating to demography, pathology, preservation, and stature. Analysis of pathologies included the identification and recording of traumas, non-specific infections, degenerative diseases, dental microwear, and bilateral symmetry. Stature has also been investigated.
Due to the quality of the site matrix and excellent bone preservation, Dust
Cave has presented archaeologists with a valuable opportunity to examine an
Archaic-period rockshelter site (Davis 2004; Goldman-Finn 1994, Walker 2000;
Walker et al. 2001). Rockshelter sites have been a major focus of archaeological investigations in the Southeast (Walthall 1998). “A rockshelter may be defined as a shallow cave, or the mouth of a deep cave, into which sunlight penetrates” (Walthall
1998:224). Rockshelters have been used in a variety of ways. Walthall (1998:224-
225) notes that this variability may be attributed to numerous factors such as the quality of the living space, the amount of living space, the location on the landscape, the direction of the shelter mouth, and proximity to water.
In eastern North America, beginning in the Middle Archaic period, storage and processing pits, burial pits, and earth ovens were dug into earlier cultural deposits, possibly indicating a dramatic change in the use of rockshelters during the
9 Hypsithermal (Walthall 1998). “The interior floors of rockshelter sites such as
Stanfield-Worley (DeJarnette et al. 1962), Modoc (Ahler 1993); Fowler 1959), and
Rodgers Shelter (Kay 1982) are literally riddled with Middle Archaic storage and processing pits” (Walthall 1998:225). The presence of burial pits and ovens may reflect longer and more intensive occupation of such sites. “This phenomenon is, of course, significant and may reflect the beginning of use of rockshelters, particularly large ones, as long-term base camps” (Walthall 1998:225).
(Adapted from Walker et al. 2001; Webb and DeJarnette 1942).
Figure 1 Site location map in the Pickwick Basin
10 The O’Neal Site (1LU61)
In preparation for construction of a dam in the Pickwick Basin region, the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), in cooperation with the University Of Alabama
Museum Of Natural History, undertook an archaeological survey of the area (Webb and DeJarnette 1942). The total area surveyed was approximately 194 square kilometers, lying in Hardin County, Tennessee, Tishomingo County, Mississippi, and Colbert and Lauderdale Counties, Alabama (Webb and DeJarnette 1942).
Excavation of selected sites began in 1936 with labor provided by the Engineering and Construction Division of the Works Progress Administration (WPA). Nineteen sites were excavated (Webb and DeJarnette 1942).
The O’Neal site (1LU61) is a shell mound located on the north bank of the
Tennessee River approximately 23 kilometers west of Florence, in Lauderdale
County, Alabama (Figures 1 and 2). The accumulation of shell covered an area 82.3 meters north to south by 106.7 meters east to west. This area consisted of a large rise approximately 2.5 meters above the level of the surrounding fields (Webb and
DeJarnette 1942). Artifacts at the O’Neal site place the dates of occupation from the
Middle Archaic through the Mississippian periods, with ceramic material indicating a seemingly large Woodland-period component (Cambron and Hulse 1975; Jenkins
1982).
Soils in the vicinity of the O’Neal Site include those belonging to the Bodine-
Fullerton association. These medium-textured soils are moderately well-drained to excessively-drained. Soils of this area include Bodine cherty silt loam with ten-to-
11 thirty five percent slopes and Fullerton cherty silty loam with six-to-fifteen percent slopes (Sherard 1977).
(Photo Courtesy of the University of Alabama Museum of Natural History, WPA/TVA Photograph Archive) Figure 2 The O’Neal site (1LU61) in 1937
Various ceramic sherds (Table 1 and Figure 3) and projectile points (Table 2 and Figure 4) were recovered from the O’Neal site (Webb and DeJarnette 1942).
Ceramic types (Table 1) range in dates from the Gulf Formational to the
Mississippian period (Jenkins 1982; O’Hear, personal communication 2005).
Projectile point types (Table 2) indicate Middle to Late Archaic occupation
(Cambron and Hulse 1975:86; Kneburg 1956; McGahey 2000:138-139, 2005 personal communication). Point types include McIntire, Benton, Flint Creek-
Ponchartrain, and Ledbetter. One point appears to be a Sykes (Lewis and Lewis
1961:40; McGahey 2000:101-106, 2005 personal communication) and another
12 appears to be a Cypress Creek (Lewis and Kneburg 1960; McGahey 2000:90-93,
2005 personal communication).
(Photo Courtesy of the University of Alabama Museum of Natural History, WPA/TVA Photograph Archive) Figure 3 Ceramic sherds from the O’Neal site
Many burials recovered from this shell mound were in a poor state of preservation due to the high water table and moist conditions (Figure 5). In total, 62 burials were excavated and removed from the site. Marshall T. Newman of Harvard
University and Charles E. Snow of the Alabama Museum of Natural History performed initial analyses of the skeletal materials, which consisted primarily of a determination of age and sex, a brief skeletal inventory (Appendix Table A.2), and in some cases the recording of pathologies (Newman and Snow 1942).
13
Table 1 Ceramics from the O’Neal site (1LU61)
# of Pottery Type Temper Associated Period Sherds
Wheeler Plain (smoothed) Fiber Gulf Formational 11
Wheeler Simple Stamped Fiber Gulf Formational 1
O’Neal Plain Sand Gulf Formational 9 Alexander Incised (rectilinear incising) Sand Gulf Formational 12
Alexander Incised (curvilinear incising) Sand Gulf Formational 1
Smithsonia Stamped (pinched) Sand Gulf Formational 2
Smithsonia Stamped (staggered) Sand Gulf Formational 5
Mulberry Creek Plain (smoothed) Limestone Middle Woodland 11
Long Branch Fabric Marked Limestone Middle Woodland 1 Wright Checked Stamped Limestone Middle Woodland 4 Baytown Plain (smoothed) Grog Late Woodland 10
Mulberry Creek Cordmarked Grog Late Woodland 3 Wheeler Check Stamped (rhomboidal checked) Grog Late Woodland 2
Wheeler Checked Stamped (rectangle checked) Grog Late Woodland 2
Mississippi Plain Shell Late Woodland 24 Mississippian
Total 98 (Adapted from Haag 1942)
14
Table 2 Projectile point types recovered from O’Neal site (1LU61)
Point Type Associated Period Date B.P. Cypress Creek Middle Archaic 8000-7000 Sykes Middle Archaic 7000-6500 Benton Middle Archaic 6500-5500 Ledbetter Late Archaic 5000-3500 McIntire Late Archaic 5000-4000 Flint Creek Ponchartrain Late Archaic – Gulf Formational 3500-2500
(Photo Courtesy of the University of Alabama Museum of Natural History, WPA/TVA Photograph Archive)
Figure 4 Projectile points recovered from the O’Neal site
15 In a 2004 thesis, Kyle Lubsen investigated Archaic-period subsistence practices using data collected from the Long Branch site (1LU67) and the O’Neal site (1LU61). Traumas were recorded (Appendix Table A.3). Stratigraphy and diagnostic lithic artifacts indicate that the majority of the burials recovered from the
O’Neal site date to the Middle and Late Archaic periods (Lubsen 2004).
(Photo Courtesy of the University of Alabama Museum of Natural History, WPA/TVA Photograph Archive)
Figure 5 Burial 1 from the O’Neal site demonstrating the poor state of preservation
CHAPTER IV
THE ARCHAIC PERIOD IN REGIONAL CONTEXT
Jenkins (1982) reviews the use of the term “Archaic” in eastern North
America, noting that it was used first by Ritchie (1932) in New York. The Archaic period may be described as, “…the stage of migratory hunting and gathering cultures continuing into environmental conditions approximating those of the present”
(Willey and Phillips 1958:107). Other characteristics of the Archaic period include ground and polished stone tools and the absence of horticulture and ceramic technology (Jenkins 1982).
The Archaic period in the Southeast has been divided into three sub-periods, primarily based on distinctive projectile point types. Although dates for each sub- period tend to vary geographically, the Early Archaic period dates from approximately 10,000 – 8,000 B.P. The Middle Archaic period dates from approximately 8,000 – 5,000 B.P. The Late Archaic period dates from approximately
5,000 – 2,500 B.P. (McGahey 2001). A large amount of information from the Early
Archaic period comes from caves and rock shelter sites (Bense 1994:65).
Information from the Middle and Late Archaic periods has been obtained from shell midden, midden mound, and mound sites, as well as rock shelters, caves, and other
16 17 locations (Alvey 2003; Gibson 1994; Milner and Jefferies 1998; Russo 1994;
Saunders 1994).
The use of “…freshwater mussels as a dietary staple led archaeologists to adopt the term Shell Mound Archaic… as a general descriptor for post-
Hypsithermal, pre-Woodland cultures in the region” (Peacock 2002:444). Shellfish’s use as a dietary staple has since been questioned, following research into the nutritional value of unionids and gastropods (Peacock 2002:444). Whether a majority of the shell from such shell mounds is actually Archaic also has been questioned (Peacock 2002). Peacock (1998, 2002:444-460) argues convincingly that shellfish use peaked in the Woodland period.
Early Archaic
The Early Archaic period (10,000 – 8,000 B.P.) may be characterized as a continuation of lifeways from the preceding Paleoindian period, with an increase in regional adaptations and tool style diversity. With the extinction of the Pleistocene megafauna, large mammal species such as white-tail deer became a valuable food resource. Populations could become less mobile while efficiently exploiting these resources (McGahey 2000:41-42).
Middle Archaic
The Middle Archaic period (8,000 – 5,000 B.P.) is characterized by cultural adaptations resulting from environmental changes associated with the Hypsithermal, a period of warmer temperatures and reduced rainfall (Anderson et al. 1996:5-6;
18 McGahey 2000:87-88). Changes occurred in floral and faunal species during this climatic interval (Morse and Morse 1983). Due to changing environmental conditions, humans may have concentrated in major river valleys (Brown and Vierra
1983).
Reliance upon larger game animals gave way to a more diverse diet of acorns, hickory nuts, fish and other marine resources, birds, and small mammals
(Gremillion 1996; Hogue and Erwin 1993; Walker 2000; Walker et al. 2001). Less mobile groups likely would have become more efficient in exploiting the local environment (Morse and Morse 1983). A decrease in mobility likely led to a use of a broader array of resources (Dye 1996:154; Gremillion 1996:99-114; Jenkins
1974:190-191; Sassaman 1995:180; Smith 1992:267-279, 283).
With environmental changes, plant species began to colonize new niches, eventually leading to the domestication of certain plant species (Smith 1992:281-
300). Humans could have unintentionally selected for edible seed-bearing plants through accidental planting by way of dropping or excreting seeds. Favorable or edible plants would have been encouraged, while non-favorable plants would have been discouraged (Smith 1992:281-300).
According to Bense (1994:78), human burials became more prevalent in the
Middle Archaic. Factors such as increased site size and decreases in mobility may lead to an apparent increase in human burials (Lubsen 2004; Schuldenrein 1996:3-
27). Traumas, such as broken arms and legs, were not unusual and healed fractures
19 were a normal occurrence (Davis 2004; Hogue 1994, 2003; Mensforth 2001; Milner and Jefferies 1998; Smith 1996a; 1996b).
Late Archaic
The Late Archaic period dates to approximately 5,000 – 2,500 B.P. During this period, climate regimes more closely resembled that of today’s environment in the Southeast (Bense 1994:85; McGahey 2000:136). Late Archaic populations continued to adapt to and exploit their local environments (Caldwell 1958). During this period there is a noted increase in the numbers of archaeological sites and the amount of archaeological material (G.P. Smith 1991:48).
Several osteological studies have been undertaken using Late Archaic burials.
Smith (1995) investigated evidence of scalping in western Tennessee and furnished other evidence for violence from the Pickwick Basin, where several individuals were identified with embedded projectile points. Milner and Jefferies (1998) noticed that multiple individuals occasionally were buried in one grave.
CHAPTER IV
PREVIOUS RESEARCH
Conflict may be represented in the archaeological record in several forms
(Larsen 1997), including mortuary practices (Johnson et al. 1994; Milner 1999), defensible site locations and settlement patterns (Haas 1990, 1999; Lambert 2002;
Larson 1972; Steponaitis 1991), weaponry (Blitz 1988; Lambert 1994, 2002) and iconographic and symbolic representations of warfare and violence (Fundaburk
1958; Fundaburk and Foreman 1957; Lorant 1946).
In North America, osteological evidence of violence predates the appearance of fortifications and defensible site locations (Lambert 2002). Evidence of violence has been reported at several Archaic period sites in the southeastern
United States (Bridges et al. 2000; Davis 2004; Lubsen 2004; Milner 1999; Smith
1997; Walthall 1980). Evidence collected for warfare in the Pickwick Basin and west-central Alabama indicates that inter-personal conflict was frequent during the
Mississippian period at sites such as Koger’s Island (Bridges 1996). Archaic inter- personal conflict has received more attention in other areas of the Southeast such as western Tennessee (Smith 1995, 1996a, 1996b) and in the Green River valley of
Kentucky (Mensforth 2001).
20 21 Increases in defensive constructions in the Eastern Woodlands, such as those seen at later Mississippian-period sites, may corroborate an increase in violence
(Milner et al. 1991). According to Lambert (2002:209), “the time and material resources people deem necessary for protection can help define perceptions of threat.” Such defensive behaviors may be shifts in settlement patterns from valley floors and lowlands with easily accessible fields to high ground, cliffs, and rock shelters. Such locations may be easier to defend than “open” sites in lowland areas.
Although caves and rockshelters may be more easily defended against attack due to their elevated positions and limited access (Walthall 1998), this could also function to “trap” inhabitants and not allow easy escape.
“Ethnographic observation can provide an important source of information on violence and aggression in human societies” (Larsen 1997:119). Both ethnohistorical accounts and iconography demonstrate the presence of warfare and raiding among Native American societies in the southeastern United States. In
Florida in the 16th century, Jacques de Moyne de Morgues’ images of the Timucua illustrate preparations for war, conduct during war, brutality towards enemies, and victory celebrations in which scalps, legs, and arms of the enemy were hung from poles (Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: Plate 143,145). Antoine Simon le Page du
Pratz provided woodcut images of Natchez Indian warriors scalping captives in the early 1700s (Fundaburk 1958: Plate 105). A. De Batz provides drawings of Choctaw warriors carrying scalps (Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: Plate 146).
22 Gorgets and pottery vessels from the Mississippian period also provide a valuable source of evidence of prehistoric warfare. At Moundville, a number of copper gorgets represent scalps attached to circular frames (Hudson 1976:251). A shell gorget recovered in Tennessee depicts a warrior carrying a crowned mace and a human head (Fundaburk and Foreman 1957: Plate 47). Archaeological skeletal remains, however, may provide the only direct evidence of past violent interactions.
“Skeletal injuries represent clear testimony to conflicts between once-living individuals” (Larsen 1997:119).
The literature regarding skeletal evidence of violence largely consists of descriptions of limited samples and provides little information for inferring conflict behavior in the populations from which they were drawn (Larsen 1997:119).
According to Larsen (1997), population-oriented approaches in bioarchaeology are revealing the importance of skeletal data for documenting patterns of violent behavior such as smaller-scale inter-personal conflicts and full-scale warfare. Such
“investigations illustrate the variability of traumatic injury in skeletal remains as well as the impact of violence on different components of the populations involved”
(Larsen 1997:120). As stated in Bridges et al. (2000:35), “the widespread extent of warfare or raiding in native societies in North America has been known for many years.” Corroborating skeletal evidence may attest to the frequency of indigenous warfare (Bridges et al. 2000).
Trauma was one of the most common pathologies affecting skeletons (White
1991:383). Traumatic injuries may affect “…the skeleton several ways – fracturing
23 or dislocating bone, disrupting its blood or nerve supply, or artificially deforming it”
(White 1991:383-384). Several traumatic injuries indicative of violence and conflict have been identified in human skeletal remains at archaeological sites worldwide.
Such traumas include scalping cutmarks, embedded and/or associated projectile points, cranial fractures, parry fractures and other defensive injuries, decapitation, dismemberment, and evidence of cannibalism. Certainly mortuary practices and animal gnaw marks may also provide supporting evidence for cases of violent deaths.
Scalping Marks
Scalping marks are clearly indicative of violence, such as in the case of warfare, raiding, or trophy-taking (Bridges et al. 2000; Ferguson 1997:323; Hogue
2005). According to Milner et al. (1991:584), “There can be little doubt that the removal of scalps and heads was part of the conflict-related mutilation of enemies.”
Owsley and Berryman (1975) define scalping as “the removal of the hair and soft tissue on the top and back of the head.” In anatomical terms, scalping involves
“…incising the skin over the skull down to the galea and the periosteum with a sharp object in a circular manner. The soft tissue can then be quickly removed from the cranial vault” (Hamperl 1967:630). According to Maria Smith (1997:246),
“Cutmarks associated with scalping are highly diagnostic and are identified as a series of cuts made in a somewhat circular path around the crown of the head. They are most commonly found in the hairline region of the frontal, on the mid-parietal, and more inferiorly on the suprameatal crest of the temporal bone and the nuchal
24 crest of the occipital.” Scalping marks may not always be viewed macroscopically, however. Cane knives may produce cuts on bones that are only observable under magnification, such as with a scanning electron microscope (Hogue 2005). Cane knives may produce thicker scrapes rather than v-shaped cuts which are characteristic of metal and stone knives (Hogue 2005).
Scalping marks have been recorded from archaeologically excavated human skeletal remains throughout North America (e.g. Bridges 1996; Bridges et al. 2000;
Friederici 1907; Hamperl 1967; Hamperl and Laughlin 1959; Hill 2000; Hogue
2005; Lesley 1995; Miller 1994; Milner et al. 1991; Morse 1989; Neumann 1940;
Ortner and Putschar 1985:93; O’Shea and Bridges 1989; Owsley and Berryman
1975; Pollack et al. 1987; Smith 1995; Snow 1941; Zimmerman et al. 1981:166-8) and have been used as a criterion for violent and warfare-related trauma.
An extensive body of literature exists documenting pre-Columbian scalping in North America. Osteological evidence indicates that scalping was present in the
New World millennia before European contact (Neiburger 1989; Neumann 1940;
Owsley and Berryman 1975; Smith 1995, 1997; Snow 1941, 1942; Willey and Bass
1978).
Embedded and Associated Projectile Points
Embedded projectile points in bone can, almost without question, be interpreted as evidence for violence (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and Jacobi 2000;
Jacobi et al.1996; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Lubsen 2004; Shields 2003). The possibility of such a wound being accidental is remote. This is especially the case when such
25 injuries occur in patterns by age and sex (Ferguson 1997; Ubelaker 1984:81).
Evidence of healing around such wounds indicates that the individual survived the injury. Embedded points and those found in association with skeletal remains have been reported at many archaeological sites (e.g. Armendariz, et al. 1994; Bovee and
Owsley 1994; Bridges et al. 2000; Chatters 2000; Lewis and Lewis 1961; Lubsen
2004; Milner 2005; Oakley 1971; Pryor 1976; Smith 1997; Standen and Arriaza
2000; Turner 1985) and such traumatic injury has been deemed conflict-related.
Associated projectile points may also be considered as evidence of violence- related trauma. Without skeletal involvement, however, associated projectile points can only be interpreted as representing possible violence (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Mensforth 2001). Without in situ burial photographs and detailed field notes denoting point locations, it is impossible to classify associated points as indicative of violence, although the possibility of soft tissue injury cannot be ruled out (Mensforth 2001). Milner (2005) notes that only a small percentage of projectile point wounds actually affect bone. He states,
“…wounds [from projectile points] can be conservatively estimated as being something on the order of three times the number that left indelible marks on skeletons” (Milner 2005:153-154).
Parry Fractures and Defensive Injuries
Fractures in bone occur as a result of tension, compression, torsion, bending, or shearing (White 1991:384). The analysis of fractures can provide valuable information regarding prehistoric behavior. “In any kind of fracture, adjacent bone
26 is susceptible to subsequent pathological complications such as infection, tissue death, deformity, and arthritis brought on by the initial trauma” (White 1991:385).
Parry fractures are classic combat-related injuries (Ferguson 1997:323). This type of defensive injury to the radius and/or ulna has been recorded at many archaeological sites and interpreted as violence-related (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and
Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Koval and Zuckerman 2002; Lahren and
Berryman 1984; Lubsen 2004; Martin and Akins 1994; Shermis 1982; Wilkinson and Van Wagenen 1993; Wood Jones 1910; Smith 1993, 1996a, 1997; Standen and
Arriaza 2000; Wilkinson and Van Wagenen 1993, Wood Jones 1910). “Broken forearms are often a sign of warfare, being produced when the arms were raised for defense against blows” (Ubelaker 1984:81).
Parry fractures may also be interpreted as evidence of inter-personal conflict, especially domestic violence toward women, rather than of inter-group conflict
(Martin and Akins 1994; Shermis 1982; Smith 1996a, 1997; Standen and Arriaza
2000; Walker 1997; Wilkinson and Van Wagenen 1993). Because of the possibility of such an injury occurring accidentally or resulting from inter-personal violence, one must use caution when interpreting parry fractures as firm evidence of warfare- related violence. Smith (1996a) notes that parry fractures may be more reliably interpreted as evidence of violence when accompanied by cranial fractures.
According to Bridges et al. (2000), medical studies have shown that parry fractures are likely the results of accidents. “Therefore, parry fractures cannot be used alone as a simple measure of interpersonal aggression” (Bridges et al. 2000:51).
27 In addition to parry fractures, fractures to the shoulders, ribs, forearms, and lower legs may possibly be related to aggressive behavior (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Lubsen 2004; Mays 1998; Shields 2003;
Smith 1996a). When such defensive wounds are found in combination with other violent traumas, such as cranial depression fractures and/or embedded projectile points, the individual can be interpreted as having suffered a violent attack (Smith
1996b; Wood-Jones 1910).
The distribution of post-cranial fractures may aid in determining which body parts were more susceptible to traumatic injuries (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and
Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Shields 2003). Jacobi and Dye (2001) propose that the absence of shields during battle may have resulted in the high rate of upper body fractures in the Late Archaic sample from the Perry Site (1LU25), while the decrease in upper body fractures in the Mississippian-period sample from the same site may indicate that the use of shields became necessary to defend one’s self during combat. Bridges et al. (2000), however, states that upper body injuries may have resulted from hunter-gathers being more likely to sustain injuries while hunting large game.
Dye and Jacobi have offered interpretations of fractures, emphasizing the possibility that hand-to-hand combat was responsible (Dye and Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001). Upper extremity injuries can result from defensive posturing to protect the head or from an opponent’s attempt to dislodge a weapon from the victim’s hand. Lower body injuries, such as those to the tibia and fibula, may
28 represent attempts of attackers to take their opponent to the ground. Cranial fractures may result from a successful blow from a weapon, such as a war club. If the opponent was killed, trophy items might be taken (Dye and Jacobi 2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Shields 2003).
Cranial Fractures
Blunt force traumas to the cranium, such as depression fractures, are traumas that may be associated with inter-group violence (T. Anderson 1996; Berryman and
Haun 1996; Bridges 1996; Courville 1962; Davis 2004; Hill 2000, personal communication 2005; Hogue 2003; Hutchinson 1996; Jurmain and Bellefemine
1997; McKinley 1992; Smith 1997; Standen and Arriaza 2000; Stirland 1984, 1996;
Wells 1974), as they are unlikely to occur accidentally. When the cranial vault of an individual is struck with a blunt weapon, a depressed fracture tends to drive bone fragments inward toward the brain. The “…natural slight ‘give’ of fresh or living bone means that fragments tend to be bent inward still attached to the skull. In some instances, fracture lines may radiate away from the point of impact. Post- depositional breaks to skull of a long-buried skeleton tend to shatter the vault and do not produce the inward radiation of fragments, which characterize perimortem traumas caused by blunt instruments” (Mays 1998:168).
Many times the individual survives this type of trauma, and bone remodeling around the wound is demonstrated. When a wound is perimortem, however, no bone remodeling occurs and in some cases it may be possible to determine what type of
29 weapon caused the injury (T. Anderson 1996; Anderson and Birkett 1989; Bridges
1996; Larsen 1997; Mays 1998; Stirland 1996).
Decapitation
Decapitation (Bennike 1985; McKinley 1993; Mensforth 2001; Newman and
Snow 1942; Smith 1993; Wakeley and Bruce 1989; Webb 1974; Wood Jones 1910) is also a criterion that has been used in the investigation of prehistoric violence. In osteoarchaeological contexts, decapitation may be identified by the absence of cranio-facial fragments, such as occipital bone and/or mastoid and odontoid processes, and/or cervical vertebrae with cutmarks at the site of the most superior surviving cervical vertebra (T. Anderson 2001; Boylston et al. 2000; Merbs
1989:176; Smith 1993, 1997; Willey 1990).
Cutmarks may be present on the C1 or C2 vertebrae, but also as far down the vertebral column as C6 and C7. According to Boylston et al. (2000:246), citing
Williams (1995:516), “Decapitation is likely to be the most efficient when carried out at the level of the fourth cervical vertebra or below as cuts in this region avoid impacting the gonial angle of the mandible and hyoid bone”.
Cutmarks associated with decapitation usually consist of smooth cut surfaces with well defined edges, although chop marks may be associated with decapitations resulting from battle, indicating that a heavy weapon was involved coming from one side to the other (Boylston et al. 2000). In some cases, more than one blow was administered to completely severe the head It is also suggested that knives may sometimes be used to complete the process, if the first blow failed to completely
30 decapitate the victim (T. Anderson 2001). In battle, however, one would expect only a single blow to be inflicted, because as soon as your opponent was no longer a threat, you could move on to another enemy. If time is taken to completely sever the head, it may likely be for trophy purposes (T. Anderson 2001).
Dismemberment
Dismemberment (Bennike et al. 1986; Brothwell 1971; Fowler 1984;
Mensforth 2001; Milner and Larsen 1991; Smith 1997; Snow and Fitzpatrick 1989) is also a criterion that may be used in the investigation of prehistoric violence, although one must use caution not to confuse this with disarticulation resulting from mortuary practices.
“Dismemberment trophy taking of bones of the appendicular skeleton may be identified osteoarchaeologically in an undisturbed primary internment which exhibits circumferential cutmarks restricted to the area proximal to the absent limb” (Smith
1997:246). Smith (1997) goes on to state that if these cutmarks are adjacent to a joint, they may be accompanied by indications of perimortem snapping or splintering of the longbone shaft. Defleshing, however, may produce shorter cutmarks or scrapings over a larger surface area of the bone and/or more random cutmarks at varying depths (Olsen and Shipman 1994:381; Smith 1997). Be it for the procurement of war trophies, the result of ritualized violence and sacrifice, cannibalism, mutilation, or other reasons, such traumas most surely indicate violence.
31 Cannibalism
Evidence of cannibalism may also be indicative of violent trauma. In a skeletal sample from the American Southwest, Tim White (1992) observed “human- induced tool marks on their remains from the defleshing, percussion and chopping, and disarticulation” (Larsen 1997:134). Similar modifications have been observed in animal bone processing in the region, leading researchers to conclude that cannibalism was likely practiced (Larsen 1997; White 1992). Similar patterns have been observed throughout the Southwest (Turner 1993; Turner and Morris 1970).
Reasons for cannibalism cannot be determined due to lack of evidence, however. As stated in Larsen (1997:135), “…several possible scenarios emerge, such as ritualized cannibalism involving the killing and eating of one’s enemies, or
… culinary cannibalism – the population was so starved that they consumed friends, associates, and relatives” (Larsen 1997:135). Social control has also been hypothesized as a reason for cannibalistic practices (Turner 1993).
Osteoarchaeological evidence of cannibalism has been reported in Latin
America as well. Historical and iconographical records attest to the importance of such rituals as human sacrifice and cannibalism in many Mesoamerican groups in pre-Columbian times (Larsen 1997:136-138). Evidence of cannibalism has been reported by Aguade and Lory (1997); Turner (1993); Turner and Morris (1970);
Turner and Turner (1992, 1995); and White (1992). Although no evidence of cannibalism has been reported in the southeastern United States, it is appropriate to include such criteria in any investigation into violent trauma.
32 Turner and Turner (1992), and White (1992) offer recommendations and observations for identifying cannibalism in the archaeological record. According to their studies, the minimal amount of bone damage or modification required to accept a judgment of cannibalism includes: (1) intentional bone breakage; (2) evidence of exposure to heat; (3) anvil or hammerstone abrasions; (4) cutmarks; (5) absence of bones such as vertebrae or coxae; and (6) bone polishing. Samples exhibiting only a few of these criteria are rejected as being indicative of cannibalism, and may be interpreted as human sacrifice.
Mortuary Treatment
In addition to intentional trauma, certain mortuary treatments may also be indicative of violence and warfare. In certain cases, victims of violence were not buried for some time, if at all. Adair (1775:387-388) reports the Chickasaw Indians collecting bodies after warfare. Johnson et al. (1994:431) report, after reviewing
Chickasaw history and archaeology, that in a Historic period Chickasaw burial sample, “…the proportion of bundle burials …can be related to the amount of external conflict during the time of occupation”. Hogue (2005) states that secondary burials may represent individuals who were victims of warfare or violence and whose remains were later collected for burial.
Hogue (2005:5) goes further to state that, “The use of differential burial modes as evidence of warfare may be useful at sites where primary burials are the norm.” She notes that in the Starkville, Mississippi area in the late Mississippian period, secondary burials replaced primary burials as the preferred burial mode. In
33 an attempt to differentiate whether an individual was killed away from the village
Hogue compared skeletal trauma and elemental representation among several bundle burials. “A major discrepancy in elemental frequency would be expected if some other cultural factor were present, such as selectively choosing bones for final internment” (Hogue 2005:6).
Animals such as carnivores and rodents certainly used this resource for food.
Postmortem modifications such as gnaw marks have been noted on human skeletal remains, possibly indicating that the human remains were not buried immediately after death (Boyd 1996; Haglund et al. 1988, 1989; Hogue 2005; Milner and Smith
1989; Milner et al. 1991; Sciulli and Gramly 1989; White 1991; Willey 1990; Willey and Emerson 1993; Zimmerman and Bradley 1993). Due to bioturbation, such as rodent borrowing, however, without additional skeletal corroboration classifying animal gnaw marks as indicative as violence may be questionable at best.
CHAPTER VI
METHODS
Osteological data were drawn from two sites, the O’Neal site (1LU61) and
Dust Cave (1LU496). In total, 62 burials from the O’Neal site (1LU61) and 37 burials from Dust Cave (1LU496) were analyzed. Analysis of the Dust Cave material took place in the osteology laboratory at the Cobb Institute of Archaeology, at Mississippi State University. Analysis of the O’Neal site material took place in the Vernice Day Laboratory of Human Osteology of the Alabama Museum of
Natural History, located in the Bryant Scientific Collections Building at the
University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. Although the age and sex of a number of the skeletons have previously been determined, age and sex determinations (Appendix
Tables A.1, Appendix Table A.2) were made on all skeletons used in this study by the author as set forth in guidelines by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994) and White
(1991). This is to insure consistency and confirm that no inter-observer biases exist, which is important so as not to produce skewed results and lead to inaccurate interpretations.
Whenever possible, previously obtained dates on the skeletal material were used. If no absolute date was available, skeletal remains were relatively dated according to their individual provenience, stratigraphic layer, and/or associated
34 35 burial goods and artifacts. In addition to Webb and DeJarnette’s (1942) and
Newman and Snow’s (1942) publications, information on embedded and associated projectile points, ceramics, and other associated burial goods at the O’Neal site were derived from Newman and Snow’s unpublished laboratory notes on file in the
Vernice Day Laboratory of Human Osteology at the University of Alabama.
Burials from Dust Cave have been previously cleaned, reconstructed, and inventoried (Davis 2004; Hogue 1994; 2003). Traumas have been previously recorded (Appendix Table A.3) by Davis (2004) and Hogue (1994, 2003). This analysis includes data from a published article by Hogue (1994), a paper presented at the 60th annual meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference by Hogue
(2003), laboratory notes from Hogue, findings by Davis (2004), and findings by the current author.
Burials from the O’Neal site, like those from other shell mound sites in the region, were extremely fragmentary. The burials were previously cleaned, processed, and, in some cases, restored by WPA workers in the 1930’s and 1940’s.
Measurements taken at that time followed the coding techniques and recording forms created at the Peabody Museum of Harvard University, using methods and measurements defined by Martin (1928:611-660) and Morant (1923:196-198) with a few additions (Newman and Snow 1942). Cranial observations were taken using the
Peabody Museum recording forms, which employed the average European male of middle age as a standard (Newman and Snow 1942). Observations on suture closure were taken and assessed using standards set up by Prof. T. Wingate Todd (1924,
36 1925a, 1925b, 1925c) of Western Reserve University. Post-cranial measurements were also taken using the White standard of Todd (Todd and Lyon 1924, 1925a,
1925b, 1925c). Sex determination was performed on both cranial and post-cranial skeletal elements by Charles E. Snow (Webb and DeJarnette 1942; Newman and
Snow 1942). Little information regarding skeletal trauma and pathologies is given
(Appendix Table A.4).
Kyle Lubsen (2004), while investigating Archaic period subsistence activities, reanalyzed and inventoried much of the O’Neal site skeletal material using guidelines and techniques set forth by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994). As a part of this analysis, traumas were recorded (Appendix Table A.5). This analysis includes data from Lubsen (2004); Newman and Snow (1942); unpublished laboratory notes from Newman and Snow, Webb and DeJarnette (1942), and findings by the current author.
Estimating Age
Pubic symphyses, when available, were the primary skeletal element used for determining age at death. Whenever possible, multiple lines of evidence were employed to age individuals at death. These methods include using epiphyseal closure of the long bones (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; adapted from Krogman and
Iscan 1986; McKern and Stewart 1957; Redfield 1970; Suchey et al. 1984; Ubelaker
1984, 1989), cranial suture closure (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; adapted from Baker
1984; Mann et al. 1987; Meindl and Lovejoy 1985; Todd and Lyon 1924, 1925a,
1925b, 1925c), the auricular surface of the os coxae (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994;
37 adapted from Lovejoy et al. 1985; Meindl et al. 2001), pubic symphysis development
(Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; adapted from Brooks and Suchey 1990; Suchey and
Katz 1986; and Todd 1921a, 1921b; Gilbert and McKern 1973) and dental development and eruption (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; adapted from Brothwell
1989; Ubelaker 1984).
Sex Determination
Whenever possible, morphological differences in the sciatic notch (Bass
1995; Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994), os coxae (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994; Phenice
1969), and cranium (Buiskstra and Ubelaker 1994; Meindl and Lovejoy 1985) were observed to determine the sex of individuals. Differences were scored using techniques set forth by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994). Correctly estimating the sex of subadults (those under 18 years in age) has proven difficult in previous research
(Scheuer and Black 2000). Individuals under the age of 18 often do not exhibit skeletal morphological changes associated with sexual maturity (Hogue 1994;
Ubelaker 1984). No traumas were observed in subadults, with the exception of
Burial 1 from Dust Cave and Burial 49 from the O’Neal site. Burial 1 from Dust
Cave possessed a square chin and cranial morphology characteristically associated with the male sex (Hogue 1994). The sciatic notch of Burial 49 from the O’Neal site indicated that the individual was male (Lubsen 2004). In this investigation both burials were included in the adult category. Subadults were excluded from the analysis.
38 When frequencies of violence-related traumas are correlated with demographic information, such as age and sex, researchers may identify population segments that were more likely to be victims of violence (Boyd 1996:230). One would expect a higher frequency of intentional traumas in males between the ages of approximately 15-40 years due to activities such as warfare and conflict (Buikstra and Koningsberg 1985; Larsen 1997:118; Standen and Arriaza 2000).
Determination of Archaic from Non-Archaic Burials at the O’Neal Site
Until Kyle Lubsen’s 2004 thesis, little information was available for differentiating Archaic from non-Archaic-period burials at the O’Neal site other than the work of Webb and DeJarnette (1942), Newman and Snow (1942), and unpublished laboratory notes. Stratigraphic information can be a useful indicator of the temporal period for individual burials. To determine the age of individual burials at the O’Neal site, pottery and lithic distributions, artifact inclusion in burials, burial depth, and stratigraphic location of burials were examined (Lubsen 2004). In the
O’Neal site skeletal sample, burials containing non-Archaic grave goods such as pottery (i.e. Burial 38) were excluded. The introduction of pottery to the Pickwick
Basin region did not occur until the ensuing Gulf Formational period (Lubsen 2004;
Walthall 1980:83). Burial and excavation notes were reviewed to determine the depth of burials below the ground surface and in relationship to the stratigraphy
(Lubsen 2004:50-51; Webb and DeJarnette 1942:132-142). This information was compared to the depth at which pottery was encountered. Pottery found deeper than one foot from the ground surface was due to erosion, settling, and/or disturbance
39 (Webb and DeJarnette 1942:141-142). According to Webb and DeJarnette
(1942:141), “It was plain that all these sherds belonged to a superficial layer. Nearly all were found in the 1-foot level. Where any sherd was found deeper than that, it was invariably in that position of the mound slope where erosion had been most active.” Thus, in Lubsen’s (2004) analysis, all burials located within one foot of the ground surface (i.e. Burial 20) were excluded. The current author adopted the methods of Lubsen (2004), based on corresponding information presented in Webb and DeJarnette (1942), Newman and Snow (1942), along with unpublished laboratory notes, to differentiate Archaic from non-Archaic-period burials at the
O’Neal site
Analysis of Trauma
Traumas were recorded using guidelines set forth in Standards for the Data
Collection from Human Skeletal Remains (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994).
Information regarding the fracture type, size, and shape were recorded. Only traumas demonstrating evidence of healing and those easily identifiable as unhealed were used (Walker 1989; Wilkinson 1997). Fractures suspected of resulting from post-mortem breakage were not included. Any indications of perimortem fractures were recorded.
Several problems may arise in the study of injury in archaeological skeletal remains. Among these problems are difficulties in distinguishing between accidental, intentional, and post-mortem bone fractures and/or breakage (Larsen
1997; Milner et al. 1994; Smith 1997). Bone loses its organic component at varying
40 rates, due to environmental and depositional factors. Over time, bone becomes dry as opposed to “green” or fresh. This allows delineation between bone possessing perimortem fractures, which retain much of its organic components, and postdepositional fractures of dry bone. “Discrimination is often facilitated by reference to the surface color and edge characteristics of broken surfaces” (White
1991:409). Older fractures are usually straight, with sharp linear edges. The coloration is usually similar to the rest of the bone, as the fracture had already taken place at the time of deposition. More recent, postdepositional, fractures usually have more jagged features and different coloration than adjacent surfaces (White
1991:409-410).
Traumas were recorded for each individual. Cranial traumas encountered during analysis were recorded for both complete and partial craniums. Information concerning the location, size, shape, and severity of all cranial traumas was recorded.
All cranial traumas were measured in millimeters using digital calipers. Evidence of traumas was then classified by sex. The possibility of traumas being the result of violent encounters was then assessed.
In tier one of this analysis, eight criteria were applied to indicate the presence of violent trauma. These criteria include (1) cutmarks to cranial bones, which may indicate scalping; (2) parry fractures and defensive injuries; (3) cranial fractures; (4) cutmarks to cervical vertebrae, which may indicate decapitation; (5) cutmarks to long bones near joint regions, which may indicate dismemberment; (6) embedded and associated projectile points; (7) certain mortuary practices and animal
41 gnawmarks, which may indicate that the skeletal remains were not buried for some time after death; and (8) evidence of intentional bone breakage, heating, abrasions, cutmarks, polishing, or absence of skeletal elements such as vertebrae and coxae, found in conjunction with one another, thus indicating cannibalistic practices. Each skeleton was examined for these features, although it was not anticipated that more than a few criteria would apply. Results for each burial were recorded on individual analysis forms created by the author for the purpose of this investigation. If any of the eight criteria were observed, the individual was classified as being a victim of violence-related trauma.
From skeletal observations, traumas were then assessed as being violence- related or possibly violence-related, as based on similar research performed by
Bridges et al. (2000), Davis (2004), Lubsen (2004), Mensforth (2001), Shields
(2003), and Smith (1996a, 1996b). This constitutes tier two of the analysis. It is assumed that the presence of embedded projectile points, multiple cranial fractures, and cranial fractures in conjunction with post cranial injuries that suggest violence are indicative of violence-related traumas (Bridges et al. 2000; Davis 2004; Lubsen
2004; Smith 1996a, 1996b). The presences of multiple traumas are better indicators of inter-personal violence than a single trauma and reduce the chances of misinterpretations of data (Smith 1996a).
Individuals with possible violence-related traumas included burials that exhibited only a single traumatic injury suggestive of violence not found in combination with other traumas (Davis 2004; Lubsen 2004; Smith 1996a). Without
42 other skeletal evidence, such as a presence of fractures associated with a defensive posture, such incidences were classified as possible violence-related traumas. Chi- square statistical analyses were employed to judge whether differences between the numbers of identified traumas were significant. In all cases chi-square analysis was conducted using bivariate tabular analysis with one degree of freedom (Drennan
1996:187-191; Thomas 1986).
In this investigation, associated projectile points were not classified as violence-related. Due to the lack of in situ burial photographs and detailed field notes denoting point locations, it is impossible to classify associated points as indicative of violence, although the possibility of soft tissue injury cannot be ruled out (Mensforth 2001). Additionally, burials demonstrating animal gnaw marks were not classified as violence-related if no additional skeletal evidence for violence was noted. Vertebral injuries were not included in this analysis due to their inherit nature of being stress-related or resulting from compression fractures. Additionally, fractures to the hands and feet were not included in this analysis due to the possibility of such traumas occurring accidentally, although there remains the possibility that such injuries could be deemed defensive and have been incurred while attempting to ward off an attack.
CHAPTER VII
RESULTS OF TRAUMA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Each burial from Dust Cave and the O’Neal site was closely examined for evidence of violence-related trauma. Results presented in this thesis are a compilation of Davis (2004), Hogue (1994, 2003), Hogue’s laboratory notes, Lubsen
(2004), Newman and Snow (1942), Newman and Snow’s laboratory notes, Webb and DeJarnette (1942), and data gathered by the author.
Dust Cave
Of the 37 individuals aged from Dust Cave, 19 were determined to be adults.
Of the 19 adults, sex could be determined in 15 (males n = 5; females n = 10) of the burials (Davis 2004; Hogue 2003, laboratory notes). Burial 5, a 26+2 year old female, exhibited a single cranial depression fracture (4.3 x 6.2 mm). This fracture is located on the right frontal bone in an almost vertical position (Figure 6). Burial 7, a
33+7 year old female, exhibited a cranial depression fracture (11.6 x 26.3 mm) on the left frontal bone of the cranium. The fracture is angled approximately 40 degrees to the left of vertical (Figure 7). This individual also exhibited two broken ribs and a fractured metacarpal.
43 44
Figure 6 1LU496, Burial 5, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated)
Figure 7 1LU496, Burial 7, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated)
45 Burial 16, a 55+3 year old female, exhibited two cranial depression fractures
(A = 4.8 x 5.6 mm; B = 18.2 x 33.1 mm). The smaller of the two consisted of an almost circular depression located on the left frontal bone (Figure 8). The larger of the two was located on the left parietal bone. This fracture is angled approximately
35 degrees left of vertical (Figure 9 and 10). This individual also suffered four broken ribs.
Figure 8 1LU496, Burial 16, cranial depression fracture A (scale approximated)
46
Figure 9 1LU496, Burial 16, cranial depression fracture B (scale approximated)
Figure 10 Photograph depicting cranial depression fracture B on left parietal of 1LU496, Burial 16
47 Burial 18, a 58+5 year old female, exhibited three cranial depression fractures
(A = 4.9 x 5.7 mm; B = 14.4 x 15.9 mm; C = 13.3 x 16.1 mm). Cranial depression fracture A, almost circular in size, is located on the right parietal bone near the junction of the sagittal and lambdoidal sutures (Figure 11). Fracture B, also located on the right parietal bone and somewhat circular in shape, rests near the apex of the coronal and sagittal sutures (Figure 11). Fracture C, located on the occipital bone near the junction of the sagittal and lambdoidal sutures, is situated at an approximate
30 degree angle to the right of vertical (Figure 12 and 13).
Figure 11 1LU496, Burial 18, cranial depression fractures A and B (scale approximated)
48
Figure 12 1LU496, Burial 18, cranial depression fracture C (scale approximated)
Figure 13 Photograph depicting depression fracture C on occipital bone of 1LU496, Burial 18
49 Burial 19, a 22+2 year old male, exhibited a cranial depression fracture (2.75 x 5.8 mm). This fracture is located on the right frontal bone and is situated at an angle approximately 25 degrees to the right of vertical (Figure 14). Burial 24, a 45+ year old female, contained a fractured manubrium. Although possibly a stress- related fracture, Davis (2004:59) citing Veluntini and Tarazona (1998), states that a
“fracture of the sternum/manubrium can be produced by flexion-compression with the head thrust forward with forced flexion at the cervicothoracic junction.” This burial contained no cranium and did not demonstrate any other traumas; therefore this injury cannot be included as evidence of violence.
Figure 14 1LU496, Burial 19, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated)
50 Burial 27, a 45+ year old female, exhibited one cranial depression fracture
(10.3 x 14.7 mm) on the left parietal bone. The fracture was almost vertical in its orientation (Figure 15). Burial 30a, a 30-40 year old male, had two cranial depression fractures (A = 5.3 x 8.5 mm; B = 9.6 x 14.1 mm), both located on the right parietal bone (Figure 16). Fracture A is horizontal, at an angle approximately
90 degrees left of vertical. Fracture B is vertical (90 degrees). This individual also suffered a dislocated right scapula and an unidentified fractured phalange (Davis
2004).
Figure 15 1LU496, Burial 27, cranial depression fracture (scale approximated)
51
Figure 16 1LU496, Burial 30a, cranial depression fractures A and B (scale approximated).
Dust Cave: Tier One Analysis Results
Of the 15 adults of determinable sex in the Dust Cave skeletal sample, 47 percent (males n = 2, females n = 5) may be classified as victims of violence (Table
3; Appendix Table A.6). Females composed 71 percent (n = 5), while males composed the remaining 29 percent (n = 2) of violence-related injuries. Burials 5, 7,
16, 18, 19, 27, and 30a contained cranial depression fractures, a criterion set forth by the current author for assessing violence-related trauma (Table 3). All violence- related traumas in the Dust Cave skeletal sample involved cranial depression fractures. Seven individuals exhibited 11 cranial traumas (males n = 2, females n =
5). Of the 11 cranial depression fractures observed, 73 percent (n = 8) belonged to females, with 27 percent (n = 3) belonging to males. All individuals suffering
52 cranial trauma in the Dust Cave skeletal collection survived their injuries. A chi- square analysis of the trauma data by individual indicates that there is not a significant difference (χ2 = 0.13; df = 1; p = .7) in violence-related traumas between males and female at Dust Cave (Table 4). An additional chi-square analysis of the cranial and post-cranial trauma data by element indicates that there is not a significant difference (χ2 = 0.42; df = 1; p = .5) in violence-related traumas between males and female at Dust Cave (Table 5).
Table 3 Dust Cave violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description Criteria 5 Female Right Frontal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture Left Frontal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture 7 Female 1st Right Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury Left Frontal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture 16 Female Left Parietal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture Unidentified Ribs (n = 4) / Fracture Defensive Injury Right Parietal / Depression Fracture (n = 2) Cranial Fracture 18 Female Left Occipital / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture 19 Male Right Frontal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture 27 Female Right Parietal / Depression Fracture Cranial Fracture Right Parietal / Depression Fracture (n = 2) Cranial Fracture 30a Male Right Scapula / Subluxation of Shoulder Defensive Injury
Table 4 Male and female violence-related traumas at Dust Cave by individual
Male Female Total Trauma 2 5 7 No Trauma 3 5 8 Total 5 10 15
53 Table 5 Male and female cranial and post-cranial violence-related trauma at Dust Cave by element
Male Female Total Cranial Trauma 3 8 11 Post Cranial Trauma 1 6 7 Total 4 14 18
Dust Cave: Tier Two Analysis Results
From skeletal observations, traumas were then assessed as being violence- related or possibly violence-related, following similar research performed by those such as Bridges et al. (2000), Davis (2004), Lubsen (2004), Mensforth (2001),
Shields (2003), and Smith (1996a, 1996b). This approach assumes that the presence of embedded projectile points, multiple cranial fractures, and cranial fractures in conjunction with post-cranial fractures that are suggestive of a violence-related injury are indicative of violence-related trauma. Individuals with possible violent traumas included burials that exhibited only a single traumatic injury that may be suggestive of violence and that was not found in combination with other traumas.
Using this approach, four (male n = 1; female n = 3) individuals (27 percent) may be classified as demonstrating violence-related traumas. Burial 7 contained a cranial fracture accompanied by rib fractures. Burial 16 contained multiple cranial fractures accompanied by multiple rib fractures. Burial 18 had multiple cranial fractures. Burial 30a suffered multiple cranial fractures in conjunction with a dislocated shoulder.
Three (male n = 1; female n = 2) individuals (20 percent) in the Dust Cave sample population may be classified as possible victims of violence (Table 3).
54 Burials 5, 19, and 27, each, suffered a single cranial depression fracture. Due to the lack of additional traumas, these injuries can only be classified as possible violence- related traumas using this approach.
O’Neal Site
Of the 62 burials from the O’Neal site, 57 were determined to be Archaic
(Lubsen 2004). Of this 57, a total of 36 (males n = 14; females n = 22) were determined to be adults of determinable sex. Burial 1, a 45+ year old male, demonstrated a healed fracture to the right radius. Burial 2, a 27+3 year old male, had a projectile point fragment (7.3 x 10.2mm) embedded and broken off in the posterior surface of the distal head of the left tibia (Figure 17). No evidence of healing was observed, indicating that the individual likely died soon after the injury.
The location of this may suggests that the victim was fleeing from his attacker or was surprised from behind (Lubsen 2004). Burial 3, a 37+9 year old male, contained a lithic fragment embedded in the lower right side of the 3rd left metatarsal (Figure 18).
The injury was healed with bone growth noted around the fragment. It seems feasible that this individual could have stepped on a sharp lithic object, such as a flake, with it breaking off in the bone (Lubsen 2004).
Burial 5, a 50+5 year old male, showed evidence of a healed fracture to the left radius under the radial tuberosity, which can be interpreted as a parry fracture.
The individual also had a broken 1st right metatarsal. Burial 8, a 60+ year old female, suffered 3 fractured ribs. Burial 10, a 24+ year old male, possessed no traumatic injuries, although animal gnaw marks were noted on the right clavicle.
55 Due to the lack of traumatic injuries and further evidence of violence, this individual was not included as a victim of violence-related trauma.
Burial 21, a 60+ year old female, suffered a right clavicle fracture and unidentified rib fracture. This individual also suffered from a severe infection of the right humerus and radius with bone degeneration (Lubsen 2004). Burial 27, a 19+2 year old female, had a fractured tibia and fibula at midshaft with infection. A fractured thoracic spinous process was also observed. Burial 30, a 47+2 year old male, suffered a rib fracture. A projectile point was found in association with this burial. Burial 33, a 32+2 year old female, contained a fractured rib. Two projectile points were found in association with this burial. Burial 34, a 55+ year old female, suffered three rib fractures. Burial 35, a 45+ year old male, suffered a fracture to the left femur at the base of the femoral neck. Burial 37, a 40+5 year old female, had a fractured phalange on the left foot and a fracture on the distal head of the right fibula.
56
Figure 17 1LU61, Burial 2, embedded projectile point fragment in the distal end of the left tibia.
Figure 18 1LU61, Burial 3, embedded lithic fragment in the 3rd left metatarsal
57 Burial 42, a 55+ year of male, suffered a fracture to the left ulna, possibly a parry fracture. Burial 46, a 60+ year old male, suffered a fractured left tibia and a fractured phalange. Burial 49, a 13+2 year old male, had a broken jaw. The right mandible was fractured at the ramus body junction. The trauma demonstrated evidence of healing. Although technically a subadult, whose sex is usually difficult to discern, the sciatic notch is characteristic of the male sex. Due to the nature of the trauma, this individual was included in this investigation.
Burial 51, a 42+2 year old female, exhibited a fractured 5th metacarpal and phalange. This burial also contained extra subadult skeletal remains, possibly indicating the presence of multiple individuals. A projectile point was found in association with this burial. Burial 54, a 35+ year old female, suffered a fracture to the right radius which had healed out of alignment. The right ulna also was fractured. These injuries are consistent with a parry type fracture. This individual also suffered a cranial fracture on the right parietal near the coronal suture at the junction of the frontal and temporal bones. Bone fragments are missing and fracture lines radiate outward from the fracture (Figures 19 and 20). Due to the missing bone fragments, it is difficult to determine if this injury occurred near the time of death, however, the fracture lines seem to indicate that the wound was perimortem. This individual also suffered a broken toe. A projectile point was also found in association with this burial.
58
Figure 19 Photograph depicting radial cranial fracture on 1LU61 Burial 54
Figure 20 1LU61, Burial 54, cranial fracture with fracture lines radiating outward (scale approximated)
59 Burial 55, a 42+3 year old male, had a fracture to the left tibia. Burial 57, a
60+ year old female, suffered from a fractured right ulna and fractured rib. This ulna fracture possibly could be classified as a parry fracture. A projectile point was found in association with this burial. Burial 58, a 60+ year old female, suffered a fractured right radius, consistent with a parry fracture, as well as a fractured rib.
O’Neal Site: Tier One Analysis Results
Of the 36 adults of determinable sex in the O’Neal sample population, 50 percent (n = 18; males n = 9, females n = 9) of individuals exhibited traumas that may be classified as violence-related, following the criteria set forth for assessing violence-related trauma by the current author (Table 6; Appendix Table A.7).
Violence-related injuries at the O’Neal site include a cranial fracture, embedded projectile points, parry fractures, and other defensive injuries. Of the two incidences of cranial injury, males and females each composed 50 percent (males n = 1; females n = 1). Of the 26 post-cranial skeletal elements demonstrating violence-related traumas, 31 percent (n = 8) belonged to males, with 69 percent (n = 18) belonging to females.
60
Table 6 O’Neal site violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas
Burial Sex Trauma Location / Criteria No. Description 1 Male Right Radius / Fracture Parry Fracture Left Tibia / Embedded Projectile Embedded Projectile Point 2 Male Point 3rd Left Metatarsal / Embedded Embedded Projectile Point 3 Male Lithic (Flake) 5 Male Left Radius / Fracture Parry Fracture 8 Female Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture Defensive Injury Right Clavicle / Fracture Defensive Injury 21 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury Right Tibia / Fracture Defensive Injury 27 Female Right Fibula / Fracture Defensive Injury 30 Male Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury 33 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury 34 Female Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture Defensive Injury 37 Female Right Fibula / Fracture Defensive Injury 42 Male Left Ulna / Fracture Parry Fracture 46 Male Left Tibia / Fracture Defensive Injury 49 Male Right Mandible / Fracture Cranial Fracture* Right Radius / Fracture Parry Fracture 54 Female Right Ulna / Fracture Parry Fracture Right Parietal / Fracture Cranial Fracture 55 Male Left Tibia / Fracture Defensive Injury Right Ulna / Fracture Parry Fracture 57 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury Right Radius / Fracture Parry Fracture 58 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Defensive Injury *although the mandible is not a cranial element, due to the location and nature of the injury it is classified with cranial fractures.
61 Burials 1, 5, 42, 54, 57, and 58 suffered parry fractures. Burials 8, 21, 27, 30,
33, 34, 37, 46, and 55 contained fractures to the upper torso and extremities, as well as the lower extremities, which may also be classified as defensive injuries or associated with aggression. Burials 2 and 3 had projectile point and lithic fragments embedded in bone. Burials 49 suffered a broken mandible, while burial 54 demonstrated a cranial fracture. Burials 33, 35, 37, and 51 contained various fractures not characteristic of violence, following the criteria set forth for assessing violence-related trauma by the current author. It is important to note, however, that the lithic fragment embedded in the metatarsal of Burial 3, likely occurred accidentally. Also, the single rib injuries located in Burials 30 and 33 can only questionably be considered as evidence of violence. The same may hold true for other single and multiple defensive-related injuries.
A chi-square analysis of the trauma data indicates that there is no significant difference (χ2 = 2.2; df = 1; p = .14) in the presence of violence-related traumas between the sexes at the O’Neal site (Table 7). Results also indicate that there is not a significant difference (χ2 = .32; df = 1; p = .57) in the presence of violence-related cranial and post-cranial traumas (Table 8) between the sexes at the O’Neal site by skeletal element, although the difference is worth noting.
Table 7 Male and female violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site by individual
Male Female Total Violence-Related Trauma 9 9 18 No Violence-Related Trauma 5 14 19 Total 14 23 37
62 Table 8 Male and female cranial and post-cranial violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site by element
Male Female Total Cranial Trauma 1 1 2 Post Cranial Trauma 8 18 26 Total 9 15 28
O’Neal Site: Tier Two Analysis Results
From the O’Neal site skeletal data, traumas were then assessed as being violence-related or possibly violence-related, following similar research performed by others (Bridges et al. 2000; Davis 2004; Lubsen 2004; Mensforth 2001; Shields
2003; Smith 1996a, 1996b). Using this approach, two (male n = 1; female n = 1) individuals (6 percent) of the 36 individuals of determinable sex may be classified as demonstrating violence-related traumas. Burial 2 had a projectile point broken off in the left tibia. Burial 54 suffered a severe cranial fractures accompanied by a parry fracture.
Thirty eight percent (n = 16; male n = 8, female n = 8) individuals of determinable sex in the O’Neal site sample population may be classified as possible victims of violence. Burial 3 contained an embedded lithic fragment in the 3rd left metatarsal. The lithic fragment does not appear to originate from a projectile point
(Lubsen 2004). Due to the nature and location of the injury, it is possible that the individual stepped on a sharp flake, thus producing the injury (Lubsen 2004). For these reasons, Burial 3 is classified as merely a possible victim of violence.
Burial 49 suffered a fractured mandible. Burials 1, 5, and 42 suffered parry fractures. Burials 57 and 58 suffered parry fractures accompanied by rib fractures.
63 Burials 8, 21, 30, 33, and 34 suffered injuries to the upper extremities and torso that may be deemed defense-related. Burials 27, 37, 46, and 55 contained fractures to the lower leg, which also may be deemed defense-related.
Curiously, four burials at the O’Neal site contained associated projectile points, all of which were female burials. An additional five burials contained associated blades (female n=3, male n = 1, subadult n = 1). Due to traditional views of males in prehistory hunting and participating in warfare and raiding, one would expect to find more projectile points associated with males. Many sites in Eastern
North America provide evidence of violent trauma, although most contain only a few victims. A majority of these victims were found to be males (Buikstra and
Koningsberg 1985; Bridges 1996:66, 73; Bridges et al. 2000; Milner 1999).
Little information is given regarding the types and locations of these artifacts.
Information presented in Webb and DeJarnette (1942) indicates that the projectile point associated with Burial 33 was located on the skull of the individual, thus likely being a grave good. The location of projectile points associated with Burials 32, 34, and 57 was not given.
Three of four burials containing associated projectile points also demonstrated traumas. Burials 33 and 34 contained rib, phalange, and vertebral traumas. Burial 57 contained an ulna and rib fracture.
At the Eva site, a Middle Archaic period site located in Benton County,
Tennessee, twenty out of 180 human burials contained associated projectile points.
64 Another three contained blades. Of the 20 burials containing associated points, five were male, seven were female, six were adults of undetermined sex, one was a sub adult and one an infant. Two of the three blades were recovered from female burials.
The third was recovered from an adult burial of undetermined sex (Lewis and Lewis
1961).
At the Ensworth School site, a Middle through Late Archaic period site in
Tennessee, eleven burials were found to contain associated projectile points (male n=3, female n = 0, undetermined sex n = 5, subadult/infant n = 3) [Deter-Wolf et al.
2004]. At the Stanfield-Worley Bluff Shelter (1CT125), a site in Colbert County,
Alabama with occupations from the Archaic to the Mississippian period, four burials were recovered containing associated projectile points, all of which were male
(DeJarnette et al. 1962; Sensenig and Hoar 1962).
According to Milner (2005), most projectile injuries do not affect bone, but rather soft tissue. Actual projectile point injuries may likely be over three times that of those affecting bone. Due to the lack of additional information and unavailability of in situ burial photographs, no interpretations may be made regarding their status as grave goods, incidental inclusions with fill, or as being representative of soft tissue trauma (Menforth 2001; Milner 2005).
Without skeletal involvement, associated projectile points can only be interpreted as representing possible violence (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye and Jacobi
2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Mensforth 2001). By consulting in situ burial photographs, Mensforth (2001) was able to distinguish between points embedded in
65 bone and those found in body cavities. Individuals with points in body cavities and incomplete skeletons with no cutmarks in undisturbed burials were inferred to be evidence of warfare and trophy-taking behaviors (Mensforth 2001). Unfortunately, no such inferences can be made in this case.
Combined Sites Results
A total of 56 percent (n = 20; male = 10, female = 10) of individuals of determinable sex at the O’Neal site showed evidence of traumatic injuries. Fifty percent (n = 18; male = 9, female = 9) showed evidence of violence-related traumas.
At Dust Cave, a total of 67 percent (n = 10; male = 4, female = 6) of individuals of determinable sex exhibited traumas. A total of 47 percent (n = 7; male = 2, female =
5) exhibited traumas that may be deemed violence-related. A chi-square analysis of the trauma data indicates that there is not a significant difference (χ2 = .05; df = 1; p =
.83) in the presence of violence-related traumas between Dust Cave and the O’Neal site (Table 9).
Occurrences of violence-related trauma were compared between sexes at both
Dust Cave and the O’Neal site. A chi-square analysis of the trauma data indicates that there is not a significant difference (χ2 = .9; df = 1; p = .17) in the presence or absence of males with traumas at the two sites (Table 10). Similarly, there is not a significant difference (χ2 = .23; df = 1; p = .63) in the presence or absence of females with violence-related traumas at the two sites (Table 11).
66 Table 9 Violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual
Dust Cave O’Neal Total Violence-Related Trauma 7 18 25 No Violence-Related Trauma 8 18 26 Total 15 36 51
Table 10 Male violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual
Dust Cave O’Neal Total Violence-Related Trauma 2 9 11 No Violence-Related Trauma 3 5 8 Total 5 14 19
Incidences of cranial and post-cranial traumas associated with violence were compared between the two sites. Seven individuals in the Dust Cave skeletal sample suffered cranial depression fractures, accounting for 70 percent of individuals containing traumas. One hundred percent of individuals with violence-related traumas contained cranial depression fractures. Two individuals in the O’Neal site skeletal sample contained cranial traumas, accounting for only 10 percent of the individuals with traumatic injuries and only 12 percent of individuals suffering violence-related traumas. Chi-square analysis of the trauma data by skeletal element indicates that a highly significant statistical difference (χ2 = 15.7; df = 1; p = .00007) exists in the frequency of cranial traumas between the two sites (Table 12). Chi- square analysis of the trauma data by individual confirms that there is, indeed, a significant difference (χ2 = 17.3; df = 1; p = .00003) in the presence or absence of cranial traumas between the two sites (Table 13).
67 Table 11. Female violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual.
Dust Cave O’Neal Total Violence-Related Trauma 5 9 14 No Violence-Related Trauma 5 13 18 Total 10 22 32
Table 12. Cranial and post-cranial violence- and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by element.
Dust Cave O’Neal Total Cranial Traumas 11 2 13 Post Cranial Traumas 7 26 33 Total 18 28 46
Table 13. Cranial and post-cranial violence- and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site by individual.
Dust Cave O’Neal Total Cranial Traumas 7 2 9 Post Cranial Traumas 0 16 16 Total 7 18 25
Trauma Locations
Of the 18 individuals demonstrating violence-related or possibly violence- related traumas at the O’Neal site, 61 percent (n = 11; males = 4, females = 7) contained traumas to the upper extremities and torso. Of the 17 total upper extremities and torso skeletal elements exhibiting trauma, 76 percent (n = 13) belonged to females, with only 24 percent (n = 4) belonging to males. Thirty three percent (n = 6; males = 4, females = 2) of the violence-related or possibly violence- related traumas in the O’Neal site skeletal sample involved traumas to the lower leg
68 region. Of the seven affected elements, 57 percent (n = 4) involved males, with 43 percent (n = 3) involving females. Eleven percent (n = 2; males = 1, females = 1) of individuals suffered cranial injuries. Curiously, only females suffered multiple post- cranial injuries.
Of the seven individuals demonstrating violence-related or possibly violence- related traumas in the Dust Cave sample population, 43 percent (n = 3; males = 1, females = 2) contained traumas to the upper extremities and torso. Of the seven affected elements, 14 percent (n = 1) involved males, with 86 percent (n = 6) involving females. No individuals contained traumas to the lower leg region. One hundred percent (n = 7; males = 2, females = 5) of individuals possessing violence- related or possibly violence-related traumas in the Dust Cave sample population had cranial depression fractures. Of all individuals demonstrating trauma in the Dust
Cave sample population, 70 percent suffered cranial injury. As with the O’Neal site results, only females contained multiple post-cranial fractures.
Extremity injuries were divided according to corresponding side in an attempt to determine if a particular side was more prone to injury and uncover any patterns that might exist between the sexes. Any traumas to the cranium and unsided skeletal elements were excluded. Of the sided post-cranial elements demonstrating traumas deemed violence- or possibly violence-related at Dust Cave, 100 percent (n
= 2) involved the right side. Males (n = 1) and females (n = 1) each composed 50 percent of right-sided injuries. If it were possibly to identify the rib fractures present in the sample by side, this ratio would likely change.
69 At the O’Neal site, however, 40 percent (n = 6) of traumas of determinable side involved the left side, with 60 percent (n = 9) involving the right side. Females
(n = 8) suffered 89 percent of injuries to the right side, with males (n = 1) comprising
11 percent. Males (n = 6), however, comprised 100 percent of injuries to the left side. Chi-square analysis indicates that the difference between right and left sided post-cranial injuries at the O’Neal site between the sexes (Table 14) is significant (χ2
= 11.43; df = 1; p = .0007). Due to the small sample size, similar a chi-square analysis with the Dust Cave data could not be performed.
Table 14 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related post-cranial traumas by side at the O’Neal site
Male Female Total Right 1 8 9 Left 6 0 6 Total 7 8 15
Results indicate that males at both Dust Cave and the O’Neal site were more prone to fractures to their left sides. Females were more susceptible to injuries to their right sides. Lubsen (2004), in his analysis of the Long Branch site (1LU67) and
O’Neal site (1LU61) reached similar conclusions. According to Lubsen (2004:126),
“The pattern of increased frequency in male left side fractures and female right side fractures suggests that some of these injuries may be due to interpersonal conflict.”
It may be suggested that males used their left arms to parry blows, while using their right arms to yield weapons. Females, conversely, may have used their right arms to
70 block blows, whether resulting from intra-group or inter-group violence (Lubsen
2004:126).
Of the cranial injuries present at Dust Cave (n = 11), 36 percent (n = 4) involved the left side, with 64 percent (n = 7) involving the right side. Females accounted for 100 percent (n = 4) of injuries to the left side and 57 percent (n = 4) of injuries to the right side of the crania. Males suffered 43 percent (n = 3) of traumas to the right side of the crania. At the O’Neal site, both incidences of cranio-facial fractures involved the right side (n = 2), with males (n = 1) and females (n = 1) each containing 50 percent of fractured elements. Chi-square analysis indicates that the difference between right and left sided cranial injuries at Dust Cave between the sexes (Table 15) is not significant (χ2 = 2.4; df = 1; p = .1). Due to small sample size, a similar chi-square analysis with the O’Neal site data could not be performed. Chi- square analysis indicates that the difference between right and left sided cranial and post-cranial injuries at Dust Cave between the sexes (Table 16) is not significant (χ2
= 2.5; df = 1; p = .1). The difference between right and left sided cranial and post- cranial injuries at the O’Neal site between the sexes (Table 17) is, however, significant (χ2 = 10.43; df = 1; p = .001).
Table 15 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related cranial injuries by side at Dust Cave
Male Female Total Right 3 4 7 Left 0 4 4 Total 3 8 11
71 Table 16 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related combined cranial and post-cranial injuries by side at Dust Cave
Male Female Total Right 4 5 9 Left 0 4 4 Total 4 9 13
Table 17 Male and female violence- and possibly violence-related combined cranial and post-cranial injuries by side at the O’Neal site
Male Female Total Right 2 9 11 Left 6 0 6 Total 8 9 17
Traumatic Events By Age and Sex
Trauma data were divided into age categories between the sites. At the
O’Neal site, eighteen individuals may be considered victims of violence-related or possibly violence-related trauma. Of this eighteen, ten (55.5 percent) were over age
45 (male n = 5, female n = 5). Seven individuals (39 percent) with violence-related or possibly violence-related traumas were between the ages of 18-to-45 (male n = 3, female n = 4). Only one victim (5.5 percent) of violence-related or possibly violence-related trauma was under the age of eighteen (male n = 1). Chi-square analysis indicates that the difference between violence-related and possibly violence- related traumas in individuals age 45 and over and those under the age of 45 between the sexes at the O’Neal site (Table 18) is not significant (χ2 = 0; df = 1; p = 1).
Burials 2 and 54 from the O’Neal site, both victims of violence-related traumas, possessed perimortem injuries. These individuals died soon after the
72 infliction of these injuries. Both of these individuals fall into the 18-to-45 year old age range. This supports previous hypotheses that this age group is more susceptible to injuries relating to warfare, raiding, and other forms of inter-personal violence
(Buikstra and Koningsberg 1985; Bridges 1996:66, 73; Bridges et al. 2000).
At Dust Cave, seven individuals may be considered victims of possibly violence-related or violence-related trauma. Of this seven, three (43 percent) were over the age of 45 (male n = 0, female n = 3). Four individuals (57 percent) with possibly violence-related or violence-related trauma were between the ages of 18-to-
45 (male n = 2, female n = 2). No individuals considered victims or possibly victims of violence trauma in the Dust Cave sample population were under the age of eighteen. Chi-square analysis (Table 19) indicates that the difference between violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas in individuals age 45 and over and those under the age of 45 between the sex at the Dust Cave is not significant (χ2
= 2.1; df = 1; p = .15). No individuals in the Dust Cave sample population contained perimortem injuries.
Table 18 Possibly violence-related and violence-related traumas in individuals over and under age 45 at the O’Neal site
Male Female Total < age 45 4 4 8 > / = age 45 5 5 10 Total 9 9 18
73 Table 19 Possibly violence-related and violence-related traumas in individuals over and under age 45 at Dust Cave
Male Female Total < age 45 2 2 4 > / = age 45 0 3 3 Total 2 5 7
At the O’Neal site, individuals of advanced age (age 45 and over) have more occurrences of violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas than do those under age 45. At Dust Cave, slightly more individuals under age 45 display violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas than do those ages 45 and over. These results seem to indicate that no certain age group is more at risk for incurring violence-related traumas. The high rate of traumas observed in individuals over the age of 45 may simply represent an accumulation of traumas over time.
Because almost all of the individuals in the Dust Cave and O’Neal site sample population survived their injuries and many reached an advanced age, this hypothesis seems reasonable.
In Mensforth’s (2001) study of late Archaic violent trauma, males were twice as likely to have cranial depression fractures as females. This is not the case with the
Dust Cave skeletal material. Smith (1996a) studied female-directed violence from
Late Archaic sites in Tennessee and stated that warfare may or may not have played a role in female traumatic injuries. Domestic abuse could not be ruled out, but no systematic patterns emerged either. Studies, such as Jurmain and Kilgore (1998) have reported increased radius fractures in females. Dye (1990) states that male participation in warfare became the norm later in time, rather than the more equal sex
74 ratio present at earlier sites. Other studies have indicated an increased frequency of violent traumas in females in the Woodland and Mississippian periods (Wilkinson and Van Wagenen 1993).
In the O’Neal site skeletal sample, three females suffered parry fractures, with two containing rib fractures as well. Two females contained multiple rib fractures. Four females suffered upper torso and lower extremity injuries. One female was victim of a severe cranial fracture. At Dust Cave, two females each suffered multiple rib fractures. An additional female suffered a fractured manubrium. Six females suffered a total of eight cranial depression fractures. At both the O’Neal site and Dust Cave, all incidences of multiple post-cranial fractures occurred in females.
Comparison of Tier One and Tier Two Analyses Methods
After the results were recorded, data collected from tier one and tier two of this analysis were compared in an attempt to determine which approach more accurately expressed the gathered trauma data. Over the course of the analysis, the shortcomings of the tier one approach became evident. Tier one of this analysis is rather broad in scope, whereas tier two is more selective as to what constitutes evidence of violence.
In tier one of this analysis, eight criteria were applied to indicate the presence of violent trauma. These criteria include (1) evidence of scalping; (2) parry fractures and defensive injuries; (3) cranial fractures; (4) evidence of decapitation; (5) evidence of dismemberment; (6) embedded and associated projectile points; (7)
75 evidence of cannibalism; and (8) certain mortuary treatments. If any of the eight criteria were observed, the individual was classified as being a victim of violence- related trauma.
Tier two of the analysis is more discriminating. Traumas were assigned as being violence-related or possibly violence-related based on the injuries present in an individual. Multiple lines of evidence are often required to assign an injury as occurring as a result of violence and reduce the chances of misinterpretations of data.
In this tier of the analysis, the presence of embedded projectile points, multiple cranial fractures, and cranial fractures in conjunction with post cranial injuries that suggest violence are indicative of violence-related traumas. Individuals with possible violence-related traumas included burials that exhibited only a single traumatic injury suggestive of violence.
At the O’Neal site, Burials 1, 5, and 42 contained single parry fractures. No other traumas were observed. Burials 57 and 58 contained parry fractures in combination with rib fractures. Burials 30 and 33 contained single rib fractures.
Burials 8 and 34 contained multiple rib fractures. Burial 21 contained a clavicle and rib fracture. Burials 27, 37, 46, and 55 contained only lower leg fractures. While these post-cranial traumas may provide excellent supporting evidence for incidences of violence-related injuries when found in conjunction with cranial fractures or projectile point injuries, alone they can only be questionably interpreted as being violence-related. Under tier one of this analysis, these burials are classified as victims of violence. Under tier two, however, these injuries can only be assigned to
76 the possibly violence-related category. It is the opinion of the author that tier two of this analysis yields a more accurate interpretation of violence-related injuries.
Comparison with Previous Analyses
Results of this analysis were compared to the results presented by Hogue
(1994, 2003), Hogue’s unpublished laboratory notes, Davis (2004), Newman and
Snow (1942), Newman and Snow’s unpublished laboratory notes, and Lubsen
(2004). Hogue (1994) and Davis (2004) noted a left ulna injury in Burial 1 from
Dust Cave. The current author did not observe this trauma. Hogue (1994:179) states, “The left proximal ulna of Burial 1 exhibited mild osteitis in association with lipping, porosity, and eburnation indicating possible subluxation or luxation of the elbow.” Hogue (1994:179) further states that “…as no other elements of the elbow joint were affected this interpretation is highly questionable.” Davis indicates that
Burial 7 from Dust Cave contains a fractured left metatarsal. The current author did not observe a metatarsal fracture. Davis also states that Burial 9 from Dust Cave contains an unidentified, fractured left rib. In the current analysis, no rib fractures in
Burial 9 were observed. According to Davis, Burial 27 from Dust Cave had a fracture to an unidentified phalange. The current author did not observe any phalange fractures in Burial 27. Other than these minor differences, the analyses of
Davis (2004), Hogue (1994, 2003), and the current author identify traumas with a relative degree of consistency (Appendix Table A.3, Appendix Table A.6). Age and sex estimations between these analyses are also consistent (Appendix Table A.1).
77 Lubsen (2004) observed a possible navicular fracture in Burial 6 from the
O’Neal site. The current author did not observe this trauma. Also, according to
Lubsen (2004), Burial 14b from the O’Neal site contained an unidentified rib fracture. This author did not observe any fractures in this individual. Other than the possible navicular (Burial 6) and rib fracture (Burial 14b), Lubsen and the current author observed all other traumatic injuries with consistency (Appendix Table A.4,
Appendix Table A.7). Results of age and sex estimations between the analyses of
Lubsen (2004) and the current author are fairly consistent (Appendix Table A.2).
The traumas recorded by Lubsen (2004) and the current author were then compared with the results of the original analysis of the O’Neal site skeletal remains by Newman and Snow (Newman and Snow 1942; Newman and Snow unpublished laboratory notes; Webb and DeJarnette 1942). Although the analyses of Lubsen
(Appendix Table A.5) and the current author (Appendix Table A.7) yielded similar results, these results differ significantly from those of Newman and Snow (Appendix
Table A.4).
Both Lubsen (2004) and the current author identified a radius fracture in
Burial 1 from the O’Neal site. Newman and Snow recorded no fractures in this individual. Burials 2 and 3 both have embedded lithic material in bone. Burial 3 also contains a vertebral compression fracture. None of these injuries were recorded by Newman and Snow. Newman and Snow did not observe any traumas in Burials
6, 8, 14b, 18, 30, 33, 34, 37, 46, 49, 51, 57, or 60. Lubsen and the current author observed injuries in each of these burials. According to the notes of Newman and
78 Snow, Burial 5 had a healed fracture to the left ulna. Neither Lubsen nor the current author could locate an ulna with this burial. The fractured left radius and metatarsal observed by Lubsen and the current author were not noted by Newman and Snow.
The severe elbow trauma and bone degeneration in Burial 21 was noted by
Newman and Snow; but, the clavicle and rib fractures were not. Injuries to Burial 27 were simply recorded as “tibia bowing” when, in fact, there were both tibia and fibula fractures and a fractured thoracic vertebra. Burial 35 contained a fractured left femur and thoracic and lumbar vertebral injuries. Newman and Snow identified the femoral fracture as being on the right femur. According to their notes, this individual had a broken neck. Nothing to indicate this was observed by Lubsen or the current author. Burial 42 contained a fractured left ulna. Newman and Snow only noted a “swollen right humerus.” The fracture to the right ulna of Burial 54 was recorded as being on the left by Newman and Snow. The cranial fracture, vertebral injuries, and phalange fracture were not recorded. The left tibia fracture present in
Burial 55 was not recorded by Newman and Snow, nor was the rib fracture in Burial
58 (Appendix Table A.4, Appendix Table A.7).
Many differences in the age and sex estimations for the O’Neal site material exist between the original analysis of the material in the first half of the twentieth century by Newman and Snow (Appendix Table A.4) and the more recent analyses by Lubsen (2004) and the current author (Appendix Table A.2). This is, with no doubt, due to advances in methods for age and sex estimation of skeletal remains over the past seventy years. The same is true for the observation of traumatic
79 injuries. Advances in methods, approaches, and knowledge have facilitated the observation and understanding of traumatic injuries and the evidence of such injuries on human skeletal remains.
CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Skeletal material from Dust Cave, dating to the Middle Archaic period, and the O’Neal site, dating to the Late Archaic period, were analyzed in an attempt to provide a better understanding of the chronology of burials at the O’Neal site and to address questions related to violence and conflict in the past at the two sites and to determine what, if any, changes occurred through time. Two tiers of analyses were performed, assessing traumas as being violence- or possibly violence-related.
Results were then compared by age and sex, as well as location, to better understand the trauma patterns revealed.
Eight criteria were applied to indicate the presence of violent trauma. These criteria include: (1) evidence of scalping; (2) parry fractures and defensive injuries;
(3) cranial fractures; (4) evidence of decapitation; (5) evidence of dismemberment;
(6) embedded and associated projectile points; (7) evidence of cannibalism; and (8) certain mortuary treatments. This composed the first tier of the analysis.
Tier two of the analysis assigned traumas as being violence- or possibly violence-related. The presence of embedded projectile points, multiple cranial fractures, and cranial fractures in conjunction with post cranial injuries that suggest violence were necessary to classify traumas as violence-related. Individuals with
80 81 possible violence-related traumas included burials that exhibited only a single traumatic injury suggestive of violence.
Of the eight criteria applied in this investigation of violence-related trauma, instances of four criteria were observed. Skeletal remains from Dust Cave contained primarily cranial fractures, along with rib and shoulder injuries which may be deemed related to aggression (Figure 21). Skeletal remains from the O’Neal site contained cranial fractures, embedded projectile points, parry fractures, and animal gnaw marks, along with multiple other defensive injuries (Figure 22). All but four chi-square statistical analyses performed resulted in insignificant differences being observed (Table 20). Significant differences were noted in the frequency of cranial traumas between the two sites by skeletal element (P = .00004) and by individual (P
= .0004). Statistically significant differences were also observed in the relation of post-cranial injuries (P = .0007) and combined cranial and post-cranial traumas (P =
.001) by side between the sexes at the O’Neal site.
According to the criteria set forth by the author for determining violence- related trauma in tier one of this analysis, 47 percent (male n = 2; female n = 5) of adults of determinable sex in the Dust Cave skeletal sample may be classified as victims of violence-related trauma (Table 21). A total of 11 cranial depression fractures were observed in these seven individuals. In addition to cranial depression fractures, six rib fractures and a dislocated shoulder were observed that are possibly associated with violence (Figure 21).
82 In the O’Neal site skeletal sample, 50 percent (male n = 9, female n = 9) of individuals of determinable sex exhibited traumas that may be classified as violence-related, following the criteria set forth by the current author in tier one of the analysis (Table 21). A multitude of injuries associated with violence were present (Figure 22), including cranial fractures, embedded projectile points, parry fractures, a clavicle fracture, rib injuries, and lower leg injuries.
Using the tier-two approach, four individuals (males n = 1, females n = 3) in the Dust Cave sample population may be considered victims of violence-related trauma. Three individuals (males n = 1, females n = 2) contain traumas that may be classified as possibly violence-related (Table 21). At the O’Neal site, two individuals (males n = 1, females n = 1) may be considered victims of violence- related traumas using the tier-two approach. Sixteen individuals (males n = 8, females n = 8) contain injuries that may be classified as possibly violence-related
(Table 21).
Cranial trauma was, by far, the most common injury type in the Dust Cave skeletal material (Figure 21, Table 22). Post-cranial injuries were more common at the O’Neal site (Figure 22, Table 22). At Dust Cave, individuals between the ages of
18-to-45 (57 percent) possessed more fractures than any other age group, followed closely by those ages 45 and over (43 percent). At the O’Neal site, more individuals over the age of 45 (55.5 percent) were victims of violence, followed by those between the ages of 18-to-45 (39 percent). One individual (5.5 percent) under the age of 18 possessed an injury that may be associated with violence.
83
Table 20 Summary of chi-square analyses results
Statistical Description Site P Value Significance Male / Female Dust Not Violence-Related Trauma by P = .7 Cave Significant Individual Male / Female Cranial and Post-Cranial Dust Not P = .5 Violence-Related Trauma by Cave Significant Element Male / Female Not Violence-Related Trauma by O’Neal P= .14 Significant Individual Male / Female Cranial and Post-Cranial Not O’Neal P = .57 Violence-Related Trauma by Significant Element Dust Cave / O’Neal Not Combined P = .83 Trauma by Individual Significant Dust Cave / O’Neal Not Male Violence-Related Trauma Combined P = .17 Significant by Individual Dust Cave / O’Neal Female Violence-Related Not Combined P = .63 Trauma Significant by Individual Dust Cave / O’Neal Cranial / Post-cranial Violence- Combined P = .00007 Significant and Possibly Violence-Related Traumas by Element Dust Cave / O’Neal Cranial / Post-cranial Violence- Combined P = .00003 Significant and Possibly Violence-Related Traumas by Individual Males / Female Violence- and Possible O’Neal P = .0007 Significant Violence-Related post-cranial traumas by side Males / Female Violence- and Possible Dust Cave P = .1 Not Significant Violence-Related Cranial Traumas by side Males / Female Violence- and Possible Violence-Related Combined Dust Cave P = 2.57 Not Significant Cranial and Post-cranial Traumas by side
84 Table 20 (Continued)
Statistical Description Site P Value Significance Males / Female Violence- and Possible Violence-Related Combined O’Neal P = .001 Significant Cranial and Post-cranial Traumas by side Violence- and Possibly Violence-Related Trauma in O’Neal P = 1 Not Significant Individuals Over and Under Age 45 Violence- and Possibly Violence-Related Trauma in Dust Cave P = .15 Not Significant Individuals Over and Under Age 45
The high rate of traumas observed in individuals over the age of 45 and the relative lack of perimortem injuries may simply represent an accumulation of traumas over time. Results do not clearly indicate that a certain age group was more at risk for incurring violence-related traumas.
Post-cranial trauma patterns indicate that males at both Dust Cave and the
O’Neal site were more prone to fractures to their left sides, while females were more susceptible to injuries to their right sides. At the O’Neal site, both incidences of cranial trauma (n = 2; males = 1, females = 1) involved the right side. Males at Dust
Cave, however, only suffered cranial fractures to their right sides. This might possibly suggest that a right-handed attacker inflicted the injuries from behind the victim (Larsen 1997:157; Mays 1998:178-179; Williamson et al. 2003:119). One must use caution, however, in making such assumptions (Williamson et al.
2003:119). Females at Dust Cave were at equal risk of right- and left-sided cranial injuries.
85 All incidences of multiple post-cranial traumas at both the O’Neal site and
Dust Cave occurred in females. At Dust Cave slightly fewer males may be classified as victims of violence-related trauma, while more males are classified as possibly victims of violence-related trauma. At the O’Neal site, however, violence-related injuries are equally distributed between the sexes. Twice as many females as males, however, possessed possibly violence-related traumas. When trauma data are compared by skeletal element rather than simply by individual, differences between the sexes may be easier expressed. In almost all cases, females contained more skeletal elements with traumas that may be deemed violence- or possibly violence- related (Table 21).
86
Figure 21 Violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas at Dust Cave
87
Figure 23 Violence-related and possibly violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site
88
Table 21 Summary of violence- and possibly violence-related trauma occurrences at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site
Dust Cave O’Neal Site No. of Individuals 37 57 No. of Adults 19 38 No. of Adults of Determinable 15 36 Sex (males = 5, females = 10) (males = 14, females = 22) 10 20 No. of Traumas by Individual (males = 4, females = 6) (males = 10, females = 10) 23 40 No. of Traumas by Element (males = 7, females = 16) (males = 14, females = 26) No. of Violence-Related 7 18 Traumas by Individual (Tier One Approach) (males = 2, females = 5) (males = 9, females = 9) No. of Violence-Related 18 28 Traumas by Element (Tier One Approach) (males = 4, females = 14) (males = 9, females = 19) No. of Violence-Related 4 2 Traumas by Individual (Tier Two Approach) (males = 1, females = 3) (males = 1, females = 1) No. of Violence-Related 15 4 Traumas by Element (Tier Two Approach) (males = 3, females = 12) (males = 1, females = 3) No. of Possibly Violence- Related Traumas by 3 16 Individual (males = 1, females = 2) (males = 8, females = 8) (Tier Two Approach) No. of Possibly Violence- 3 24 Related Traumas by Element (Tier Two Approach) (males = 2, females = 1) (males = 8, females = 16)
89 The author predicted that there would be an increase in the traumas over time. The O’Neal site skeletal sample did, indeed, contain a slightly higher percentage of violence-related injuries than did the Dust Cave material using the tier- one approach (Table 21). In the tier-two approach, Dust Cave, however, contained a higher percentage of violence-related traumas, with the O’Neal site possessing more possibly violence-related traumas (Table 21). This can be attributed to the more discriminating nature of classifying violence-related injuries in the second tier’s approach. Results may be skewed by recovery and sampling biases, however. A larger sample size from both the O’Neal site and Dust Cave would have provided a better glimpse into violence at these sites.
The most notable difference in relation to violence-related traumas between the two sites involved the types of traumas observed (Table 22). The O’Neal site yielded a variety of violence-related injuries. Violence-related injuries at Dust Cave primarily involved cranial fractures. This difference in the presence of cranial traumas between the sites was statistically significant (Table 20).
A change through time in both the type and level of inter-personal violence is suggested by the results of this study. “The types of traumatic injuries seen at each site may be important in helping to determine the nature of interpersonal conflict there” (Bridges et al. 2000:58). All victims of violence in the Dust Cave sample contained cranial depression fractures. Individuals at the O’Neal site suffered multiple types of violence-related injuries, primarily involving post-cranial elements.
A decisive shift in trauma patterns exists, be it a result of changing settlement
90 patterns, evolving weapon technology, changing patterns of aggression, or any number of reasons (Lambert 2002).
Table 22 Frequencies of violence- and possibly violence-related traumas by location at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site
Dust Cave O’Neal Site Cranial Traumas 100% 11% (by Individual) (males = 2, females = 5) (males = 1, females = 1) Cranial Traumas 61% 7% (by Element) (males = 3, females = 8) (males = 1, females = 1) Upper Extremities / Torso Traumas 43% 61% (by Individual) (males = 1, females = 2) (males = 4, females = 7) Upper Extremities / Torso Traumas 39% 68% (by Element) (males = 1, females = 6) (males = 4, females = 15) Lower Extremity Traumas None observed 33% (by Individual) (males = 4, females = 2) Lower Extremity Traumas None observed 25% (by Element) (males = 4, females = 3)
Bridges et al. (2000:55) suggest that most incidences of violence at Archaic sites in the Pickwick Basin resulted from inter-personal disagreements rather than raiding or warfare, although evidence of more organized raiding and warfare may be seen at sites such as Mulberry Creek and Archaic sites in Tennessee and Kentucky
(Bridges et al. 2000; Mensforth 1996; Shields 2003; Smith 1996b). According to
Bridges et al. (2000:55), “…small scale interpersonal conflicts may have erupted at times during the Archaic period into more widespread and organized raiding.
Nevertheless, a more significant and lasting change seems to have coincided with the introduction of the bow and arrow in the Eastern Woodlands during the Late
Woodland period.”
91 It was predicted that males would have a greater frequency of violent trauma when compared to females if inter-personal violence was present. This prediction was based on the assumption that males faced a greater likelihood of being injured in hunting, warfare, and other violent behaviors (Bridges et. al 2000; Walker 1989). In traditional hunter-gatherer and horticulturalist groups, females would have been less likely to fall victim to such violent traumas and more likely to incur accidental and stress-related injuries associated with overuse and strain on the skeleton resulting from daily activities.
Results of this study indicate that females in the earlier Dust Cave skeletal sample suffered more violence- and possibly violence-related injuries than did males.
Results from the temporally later O’Neal site skeletal material indicate that males and females were at a more equal risk of falling victim to violence, although one must keep in mind that females often contained multiple injuries (Table 23).
The fairly equal sex distribution of violence-related traumas at the later
O’Neal site may also be explained by an increase in inter-group conflict. At later
Woodland and Mississippian period sites, females were subject to similar injuries as males. Females, however, “…simply were not killed as often, possibly because women were sought as captives” (Bridges et al. 2000:58).
Cranial and post-cranial fractures could have resulted from either intra- or inter-group conflicts. However, one must keep in mind the possibility that certain injuries could have been game-related (Bridges et al. 2000; Jacobi, personal communication 2006). “Specifically, the ball game, played largely by males, was
92 renowned for the often-spectacular injuries (including death) associated with it”
(Bridges et al. 2000:57). Participants would often attempt to cripple skilled players on the opposing team. In early historic times, the ball game was used similarly to warfare as a means to increase one’s social status. The ball game was often referred to as the “little brother of war” (Bridges et al. 2000:57, citing Hudson 1976; Swanton
1928). Confirming archaeological evidence for ballgames in prehistory in the
Southeast is lacking, however.
The exact etiology of the violence-related injuries observed at Dust Cave and the O’Neal site cannot be determined with absolute certainty; however, intra-group conflict resolution could be posed as a likely candidate due to the types and location of injuries observed (Bridges et al. 2000; Dye, personal communication 2006;
Jacobi, personal communication 2006). No evidence suggestive of organized warfare, such as trophy taking, was observed at either site, although projectile point injuries were noted at the O’Neal site. As previously stated, certain tools such as cane knives may leave marks that cannot be viewed macroscopically (Hogue 2005).
Cranial were not observed under magnification, therefore the presence of scalping marks cannot be completed dismissed. No matter the etiology, results from Dust
Cave and the O’Neal site clearly indicate that violence played an active role in
Archaic society.
Violence-related traumas have been reported at many archaeological sites in the southeastern United States. In western Tennessee, projectile point injuries, scalping, and dismemberment were observed in 2.3 percent of Archaic-period burials
93 (Lambert 2002; Smith 1997). At the Perry site in northern Alabama, embedded spear points were observed in 2.7 percent of the Late Archaic period burials (Bridges et al. 2000; Lambert 2002). These traumas certainly seem to imply inter-group hostility (Lambert 2002). According to Lambert (2002:229), “most of the archaeological and osteological evidence suggests that relatively small-scale engagements predominated, involving a limited number of aggressors and resulting in relatively few victims per encounter.” Lambert continues to state that even such low-level warfare could result in high death tolls.
Increases in violence may have occurred resulting from economic or population stress (Larsen 1997). With demographic and subsistence change comes an increase in competition for resources. According to Smith (1997:257), “It has been observed that in the Late Archaic in the Southeast, particularly among the interior riverine populations of the midsouth, there is a dramatic increase in population density resulting in, among other things, restricted range of group territories and sedentism.” Social stratification has also been posed as an explanation for increases in conflict. Trophy items, such as scalps, hands, or limbs, would have been taken to enhance one’s prestige (Smith 1997). As noted above, no trophy items were observed in the Dust Cave or O’Neal site material.
An increase in the importance of warfare may be seen later in prehistory.
Mississippian-period burials from Koger’s Island contain more than twice the fractures than Archaic-period burials from the Perry site (Bridges et al. 2000:45).
The apparent shift in trauma types between Dust Cave and the later O’Neal site may
94 serve as a precursor to the increase in violence observed in later prehistoric times
(Bridges et al. 2000). The more equal sex ratio in relation to violence-related traumas at the O’Neal site may indicate that both males and females were taking part in, and victim of, inter-group conflict such as warfare and raiding.
Violence- and possibly violence-related traumas occurring in females pose interesting questions. These injuries could have resulted from inter-group violence, such as warfare or raiding, or intra-group violence, such as spousal abuse.
Abduction was common among various groups in the southeast (Wilkinson 1997, citing Hudson 1976:253). “Abduction and/or ‘adoption’ into a new group was commonly accompanied by physical violence” (Wilkinson 1997:38). Female- directed violence perpetrated by females cannot be discounted either. Violence among women is more common in polygamous societies, which were not uncommon in the historic-period Southeast (Wilkinson 1997). Burbank (1992) documented that women are injured as frequently by other women as they are by men. In cases of female-directed abuse, however, an unequal distribution of traumas between the sexes should be present (Wilkinson 1997). According to Wilkinson (1997:37),
“Spousal abuse would also correlate with …cases of multiple injuries, as physically abused women tend to evince multiple injuries.” Lubsen (2004:105) adds corroborating evidence, stating that increased frequencies of rib fractures at the
O’Neal site indicate that females “…bore the brunt of non-lethal attacks.”
At Dust Cave, females displayed more injuries associated with violence than did males. Only females contained multiple traumatic injuries. Rib fractures
95 primarily occurred in females. It could be suggested that the higher proportion of injuries in females at Dust Cave may have resulted from female-directed violence
(Davis 2004; Smith 1996a, 1997). The fact that cranial and upper body traumas were present in many of the females in the sample certainly supports this (Bridges et al. 2000; Owsley and Bruweldheide 1997; Smith 1996a, 1997). Domestic abuse of females may certainly be a plausible explanation.
Over the course of this research, new questions have presented themselves, while other questions remain. Dust Cave is known to have been seasonally occupied (Goldman-Finn 1994). No traumas recorded in the Dust Cave skeletal sample were perimortem. The possibility exists that traumas were brought to Dust
Cave from other areas. Reanalysis and comparison of material from contemporary sites is recommended to determine if similar trauma patterns exist. It is also recommended that future research involve analysis of epigenetic traits and/or strontium analysis to test genetic drift and population movements.
The high frequency of cranial injuries at Dust Cave presents additional questions. Similar patterns have not been noted at other Archaic-period rockshelters sites such as Stanfield Worley or Russell Cave (Bridges et al. 2000; DeJarnette et al.1962; Davis 2004; Griffin 1974; Hogue 1994, 2003; Sensenig and Hoar 1962).
Although no descriptions of Late Archaic crania are presented, the nearby Perry site did not contain the frequency of cranial injuries that were observed in the Dust Cave sample. Trauma patterns and percentages at the Perry site do, however, more closely resemble those observed in the late Archaic material from the O’Neal site, although
96 the lower leg region, not ribs, was deemed most susceptible to injury (Bridges et al.
2000; Jacobi and Dye 2001; Shields 2003). Middle- and Late-Archaic burials from the Mulberry Creek site also did not contain the frequency of cranial injuries observed at Dust Cave (Jacobi, personal communication 2006; Shields 2003). The frequency of cranial fractures at Dust Cave is also higher than those recorded at other
Archaic-period shell-midden sites such as Indian Knoll, Ward, or Carlston Annis
(Lubsen 2004; Mensforth 2001; Shields 2003).
Projectile point injuries are absent from the Dust Cave skeletal sample, while they are present in the later Archaic material from the O’Neal site and the Perry site, as well as Mulberry Creek (Davis 2004; Hogue 1994, 2003; Jacobi and Dye 2001;
Lubsen 2004; Shields 2003). Additionally, no evidence of decapitation and/or trophy taking is present at Dust Cave or the O’Neal site; however, the Perry site did contain these trauma types (Jacobi and Dye 2001; Shields 2003; Webb and
DeJarnette 1942). Further investigation of Archaic-period violence-related traumas is necessary to answer many of the questions posed by this research.
Results of this analysis also indicate that different researchers analyzing the same skeletal samples can produce similar findings and results. However, results obtained by Lubsen (2004) and the current author differ from those presented by
Newman and Snow (1942). Due to advances in methods and techniques in osteological analyses over the past seven decades, skeletal collections from such sites excavated and analyzed in the first half of the twentieth century should be reanalyzed using modern methods and techniques before many of these collections
97 are lost to repatriation via the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation
Act (Lubsen 2004).
Additionally, the author suggests that skeletal collections from sites such as
Russell Cave and Stanfield Worley be reanalyzed using current methods and techniques to gain a better understanding of Archaic-period traumas at rockshelter and cave sites. Published skeletal analyses of such sites are often limited in nature and scope. Cranial depression fractures can be small and easily overlooked.
Questions relating to patterns of cranial injuries require further research.
Rockshelters and caves may, indeed, provide a degree of safety and shelter to its inhabitants against inter-group conflict. Future research may address the nature of inter- versus intra-group conflict at such sites. A more thorough investigation of violence-related trauma at these and other rockshelter and cave sites may aid in the current understanding of inter- and intra-site conflict in the Archaic period.
“Bones relay only a partial story of a population’s experiences, and a small amount of evidence may be indicative of a very common problem” (Wilkinson
1997:39). Ethnohistorical accounts, as well as archaeological and osteological investigations, have aided in the understanding of the lives of prehistoric people.
Perhaps the best evidence for violence and conflict, however, is confirming osteological data. Many traumas are almost certainly indicative of conflict. As is the case with any archaeological analysis, one must use caution in interpreting prehistoric behavior (Davis 2004; Jurmain and Kilgore 1998). Using multiple lines of evidence reduces the chances of misinterpretations of data (Smith 1996a, 1997).
98 According to Lambert (2002:230), “With the growing recognition of war as an important force in population dynamics and political transitions in prestate societies has come recognition that both the presence and absence of war needs verification.” In order to better understand violence and warfare in the Archaic period, further comparative research, on a larger scale, is needed. Only with additional research of local trauma patterns may researchers be better able to comprehend conflict in a broader perspective. “Clearly, answers to questions of the causes and consequences of human violence reside in a proper understanding of when and how it occurred and, most importantly, why” (Lambert 2002:230).
GLOSSARY
The following source provided the basis for most of the definitions in this glossary: Andrefsky (1998) Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis.; Bass (1995) Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual. 4th Ed.; Bridges (1989) American Journal of Physical Anthropology 79:321-339; Dunnell (1971) Systematics in Prehistory.; Larsen (1997) Bioarchaeology: Interpreting Behavior from the Human Skeleton.; Merbs (1989) Trauma. In M.Y. Iscan and K.A.R. Kennedy (ed.) Reconstruction of Life from the Skeleton.; Merriam Webster’s (1993) Collegiate Dictionary, 10th Edition.; Ubelaker (1984) Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation.; White (1991) Human Osteology.; and Glossary of Skeletal Anatomy (www.bioanth.org/biomed/anatomy.htm).
Anterior Opposite of posterior; ventral; the front surface of the body or a part thereof. Often used to refer to a structure that is farther from the trunk (main part of the body) than another.
Arthritis Inflammation of a joint.
Artifact Any object made or manipulated by humans. A portable and discrete artifact may be collected without being destroyed. This is in contrast to features, which are artifacts, but are destroyed or dismantled during collection.
Atlas The first cervical vertebra
Auricular Sacroiliac articulation
Cannibalism Ritualistic or dietary eating of human flesh by a human being.
Chert A compact cryptocrystalline or microcrystalline variety of quartz originating from a sedimentary context.
Component A manifestation of a phase at a particular site.
Coronal Suture The suture that lies between the frontal and parietals.
99 100 Cranial Depression Fracture A type of fracture, usually from blunt force trauma, in which cranial bones are driven inward toward the brain, often resulting in a circular or oval-shaped depression on the cranial vault.
Cranial Sutures Fibrous joints of the skull.
Cranium Bones of the skull except the mandible
Culture A concept referring to shared ideas used as an explanatory device.
Decapitation The removal of an individuals head.
Diaphysis The shaft of a long bone
Distal Opposite of proximal; situated away from the center of the body, remote from the point of attachment or origin. Often used to refer to a structure that is farther from the trunk (main part of the body) than another.
Dismemberment To cut off or disjoin the limbs, members, or parts of; to break up or tear into pieces.
Epiphysis The cap at the end of a long bone that develops from a secondary ossification center; the end of a long bone that is originally separated from the main bone by a layer of cartilage but that later becomes united to the main bone through ossification.
Feature A non-portable discrete artifact.
Fracture Structural failure (breaking) of bone or cartilage.
Frontal bone Forms the forehead, the roofs of the orbits, and most of the anterior part of the cranial floor.
Inferior Opposite of superior; situated lower down (nearer the soles of the feet) in relation to a specific structure or reference point, situated below or directed downward. Often used to describe the position of one structure relative to another.
Joint Any connection between different skeletal elements.
101 Lambdoidal Suture The suture that passes between the two parietals and the occipital bone.
Lateral Towards the side of the body; farther from the midline or mid- sagittal plane. Lipping Bone projecting beyond the margin of the affected articular surface, usually in osteoarthritis.
Lithic Derived from Greek word meaning stone or pertaining to stone.
Long Bones Collective term for the bones of the arms and legs. Specifically, the humerus, radius, ulna, femur, tibia, and fibula.
Luxation Dislocation of an anatomical part.
Mandible The bone forming the lower jaw; the largest and strongest bone of the face, presenting a body and a pair of rami, which articulate with the skull at the tempromandibular joints.
Mode (Analytic) An intuitive cultural class of attributes of discrete objects; (synthetic) a cultural paradigmatic class of attributes of discrete objects.
Morphology The form and structure of an object.
Occipital bone A single trapezoid-shaped bone situated at the posterior and inferior part of the cranium.
Occupation A spatial cluster of discrete objects which can reasonably be assumed to be the product of a single group of people at a particular locality and deposited there over a period of continuous residence, comparable to other such units in the same study.
Os Coxae The hip bone, which comprises the ilium, ischium, and pubis. Also called the pelvic bone.
Osteitis Inflammation of bone tissue resulting from infection or injury.
Paleopathology The study of diseases in ancient populations as revealed by skeletal remains and preserved soft tissues.
102
Parietal bones One of the two quadrilateral bones on either side of the cranium forming part of the superior and lateral surfaces of the skull, which join at the midline at the sagittal suture. The parietal bones form the greater portion of the sides and roof of the cranial cavity.
Parry Fracture A fracture to the forearm (radius and/or ulna) resulting from raising the arm in a defensive position to protect the head.
Perimortem Occurring at or near the time of death.
Post-cranial skeleton All bones except the cranium and mandible.
Posterior Opposite of anterior; dorsal; directed toward or situated nearer the back surface of the body. Often used to indicate the position of one structure relative to another.
Postmortem Occurring after death.
Premortem Occurring before death.
Pubic Symphysis see Symphysis
Remodeling The cyclical process of bone resorption and deposition at one site.
Resorption The process of destruction of bone by osteoclasts.
Sagittal suture The suture that passes down the midline between the parietal bones.
Sciatic Notch in the hip bone
Scoliosis Lateral deviation (curvature) from the vertical line of the spine
Skull All the bones of the head; including cranium and mandible.
Spondylolysis An interruption of the pars interarticularis of a vertebra, in which abnormal vertebral stress leads to mechanical failure.
Subluxation Partial dislocation of an anatomical part.
103 Superior Opposite of inferior; situated above or directed upward. Often used to describe the position of one structure relative to another.
Sutures Articulations of the skull bones along joints with interlocking, saw-tooth or zipper-like articulations.
Symphysis The region where two paired bones, such as the left and right pubis, join together.
Temporal bone One of the two irregular bones on either side of the skull forming part of the lateral surfaces and base of the skull, and containing the organs of hearing. The temporal bones form the inferior sides of the cranium and part of the cranial floor.
Trauma An injury or wound to living tissue caused by an extrinsic agent.
Traumatic Pertaining to or caused by a wound or injury.
Type (Analytic) An intuitive cultural class of discrete objects; (synthetic) a paradigmatic class of discrete objects defined by modes.
REFERENCES CITED
Adair, J. 1775 The History of the American Indians. Edward and Charles Dilly, London.
Aguade, Carmen Ma. Pijoan and Josefina Mansilla Lory 1997 Evidence for Human Sacrifice, Bone Modification, and Cannibalism in Ancient Mexico. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past, pp217-240. Gordon and Breach, Langhorne.
Ahler, S.R. 1984 Archaic Settlement Strategies in the Modoc Locality, Southwest Illinois. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee.
Alvey, J.S. 2003 A Study of Middle Archaic Site Function, Seasonality, and Occupational Intensity in the Uplands of Northeast Mississippi: The Trice Site (22LE827). M.A. Thesis, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Mississippi State University, Starkville.
Anderson, D.G. 1996 Approaches to Modeling Regional Settlement in the Archaic Period Southeast. In K.E. Sassaman and D.G. Anderson (ed.) Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast, pp. 41-56. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Anderson, D.G., Lisa D. O’Steen, and Kenneth E. Sassaman 1996 Environmental and Chronological Considerations. In D.G. Anderson and Kenneth E. Sassaman (ed.) The Paleoindian and Early Archaic Southeast, pp.3-15. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Anderson, T. 1996 Cranial Weapon Injuries from Anglo-Saxon Dover. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:10-14.
2001 Two Decapitations from Roman Towcester. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 11:400-5.
104 105 Anderson, T. and Birkett, D. 1989 The Human Skeletal Remains from Burgh Castle, Norfolk. English Heritage AML Rep 27/89.
Andrefsky, W., Jr. 1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.
Armendariz, J., S. Irigari, and F. Etxeberria 1994 New Evidence of Prehistoric Arrow Wounds in the Iberian Peninsula. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 4:215-22.
Baker, R.K. 1984 The Relationship of Cranial Suture Closure and Age Analyzed in a Modern Multi-Racial Sample of Males and Females. M.A. Thesis, California State University, Fullerton.
Bass, W. M. 1995 Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual. 4th Ed. Special Publication No. 2 of the Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia.
Bennike, P 1985 Palaeopathology of Danish Skeletons: A Comparative Study of Demography, Disease, and Injury. Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen.
Bennike, P., K. Ebbesen, and L.B. Jorgensen 1986 The Bog Fond from Sigersdal. Journal of Danish Archaeology 5:85-115.
Bense, J.A. 1994 Archaeology of the Southeastern United States: Paleoindian to World War I. Academic Press, San Diego.
Berryman, H.E. and S.J. Haun 1996 Applying Forensic Techniques to Interpret Cranial Fracture Patterns in an Archaeological Specimen. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:2-9.
Blitz, J.H. 1988 Adoption of the Bow in Prehistoric North American. North American Archaeologist 9:123-145.
Bovee, D.L. and D.W. Owsley 1994 Evidence of Warfare at the Heerwald Site. In D.W. Owsley and R.L. Jantz (ed.) Skeletal Biology in the Great Plains: Migration, Warfare, Health, and Subsistence, pp.355-62. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
106 Boyd, D.C 1996 Skeletal Correlates of Human Behavior in the Americas. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3(3):189-251.
Boylston, A., C. J. Knusel, and C.A. Roberts 2000 Investigation of a Romano-British Rural Ritual in Bedford, England. Journal of Archaeological Science 27:241-254.
Bridges, P.S. 1989 Spondylolysis and Its Relationship to Degenerative Joint Disease in the Prehistoric Southeastern United States. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 79:321-339.
1996 Warfare and Mortality at Kroger’s Island. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:66-75.
Bridges, P.S., K.P. Jacobi, and M.L. Powell 2000 Warfare-Related Trauma in the Late Prehistory of Alabama. In P.M. Lambert (ed.) Bioarchaeological Studies of Life in the Age of Agriculture: A View From the Southeast, pp. 35-62. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Brooks, S.T., and J.M. Suchey 1990 Skeletal Age Determination Based on the Os Pubis: A Comparison of the Acsadi-Nemeskeri and Suchey-Brooks Methods. Human Evolution 5:227- 238.
Brothwell, D. 1971 Forensic Aspects of the So-Called Neolithic Skeleton Q1 from Maiden Castle, Dorset. World Archaeology 3:233-41.
1989 The Relationship of Tooth Wear to Aging. In M.Y. Iscan (ed.) Age Markers in the Human Skeleton, pp 303-318. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield.
Brown, J. and R. Vierra 1983 What Happened in the Archaic? Introduction to an Ecological Approach to Koster Site Archaeology. In J. Phillips and J. Brown (ed.) Archaic Hunters and Gatherers in the American Midwest: Multidisiplinary Studies in the Archaic, pp. 165-196. Academic Press. Buikstra, J.E. and L.W. Konigsberg 1985 Paleodemography: Critiques and Controversies. American Anthropologist 87:316-33.
107 Buikstra, J.E. and D.H. Ubelaker 1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 44.
Caldwell, J R. 1958 Trend and Tradition in the Prehistory of the Eastern United States. Memoir No. 88. The American Anthropological Association, Illinois.
Cambron, J.W. and D.C. Hulse 1975 Handbook of Alabama Archaeology: Part I Point Types. Revised Edition. The Archaeological Research Association of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
Chatters, James C. 2000 The Recovery and First Analysis of An Early Holocene Human Skeleton From Kennewick, Washington. American Antiquity Vol. 65, No. 2. pp.291- 316.
Courville, C.B. 1962 Forensic Neuropathology:IV. Significance of Traumatic Extracranial and Cranial Lesions. Journal of Forensic Sciences 7:303-22
Davis, Valerie S. 2004 A Study of Stress Indicators as Evidence for Possible Differential Treatment of Males and Females at Dust Cave (1LU496), Alabama. M.A. Thesis, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Mississippi State University, Starkville.
DeJarnette, D.L., E.B. Kurjack, and J.W. Cambron 1962 Stanfield-Worley Bluff Shelter Excavations. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 8(1-2):1-111.
Deter-Wolf, A., S, Norris, M. Wampler, and J. Tuschul 2004 The Ensworth School Project: Archaeological Investigations at Site 40DV184, Davidson County, Tennessee. TRC, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee.
Drennan, R.D. 1996 Statistics for Archaeologists: A Common Sense Approach. Plenum Press, New York.
Driskell, Boyce 1994 Stratigraphy and Chronology at Dust Cave. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 40(17-34).
108 1996 Stratified Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Deposits at Dust Cave, Northwestern Alabama. In D.G. Anderson and K.E. Sassaman (ed.) The Paleoindian and Early Archaic Southeast, pp. 315-330. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Dunnell, R.C. 1971 Systematics in Prehistory. The Free Press, New York.
Dye, D.H. 1990 Warfare in the Sixteenth-Century Southeast: The DeSoto Expedition in the Interior. In D.H. Thomas (ed.) Columbian Consequences: Archaeological and Historical Perspectives on the Spanish Borderlands East, Volume 2. pp.211-222. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
1996 Riverine Adaptations in the Midsouth. In K.C. Carstens and P.J. Watson (ed.) Of Caves and Shell Mounds, pp. 140-158. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Dye, D.H. and K.P. Jacobi 2000 Raiding and Mortuary Patterning at the Koger’s Island Site, Lauderdale County, Alabama. Paper presented at the 57th Annual Meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Macon, Georgia.
Ferguson, R.B 1997 Violence and War in Prehistory. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past, pp. 321-356. Gordon and Breach, Langhorne.
Fowler, M.L. 1959 Summary Report of Modoc Rock Shelter. Reports of Investigation 8. Illinois State Museum, Springfield.
Fowler, W.R., Jr. 1984 Late Preclassic Mortuary Patterns and Evidence for Human Sacrifice at Chalchuapa, El Salvador. American Antiquity 49:603-18.
Frayer, D.W. 1997 Ofnet: A Neolithic Massacre. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past, pp. 321-356. Gordon and Breach, Langhorne. Friderici, G. 1907 Scalping in America. Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution, 1906, pp. 423-438. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
109 Fundaburk, E.L. 1958 Southeastern Indians: Life Portraits; A Catalogue of Pictures, 1564-1860. E.L. Fundaburk, Luverne, Alabama
Fundaburk, E.L. and M.D. Foreman 1957 Sun Circles and Human Hands: The Southeastern Indians – Art and Industries. E.L. Fundaburk, Luverne, Alabama.
Gilbert, M. and T. McKern 1973 A Method for Aging the Female Os Pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 38:31-38.
Gibson, J.L. 1994 Before Their Time? Early Mounds in the Lower Mississippi Valley. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):162-186.
Goldman-Finn, Nurit S. 1994 Dust Cave in Regional Context. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 40:212- 231.
Goldman-Finn, Nurit S., and Boyce N. Driskell 1994 Introduction to Archaeological Research at Dust Cave. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 40(1-16).
Gremillion, K.J. 1996 The Paleoethnobotanical Record for the Mid-Holocene Southeast. In K.E. Sassaman and D.G. Anderson (ed.) Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast, pp. 99-114. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Griffin, J.W. 1974 Investigations in Russell Cave, Russell Cave National Monument, Alabama. National Park Service, Publication in Archeology 13. Washington, D.C.
Haag, W.G. 1942 A Description and Analysis of the Pickwick Pottery. In W.S. Webb and D.L. DeJarnette (ed.) An Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin in the Adjacent Portions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, pp. 509-526. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Haas, J. 1990 Warfare and the Evolution of Tribal Polities in the Prehistoric Southwest. In J. Haas (ed.) The Archaeology of War, pp.171-89. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
110
1999 The Origins of War and Ethnic Violence. In J. Carmen and A. Harding (eds.) Ancient Warfare: Archaeological Perspectives. Sutton Publishing, Stroud, U.K.
Haglund, W.D., D.T. Reay, and D.R. Swindler 1988 Tooth Mark Artifacts and Survival of Bones in Animal Scavenged Human Skeletons. Journal of Forensic Sciences 33:985-997.
1989 Candid Scavenging/Disarticulation Sequences of Human Remains in the Pacific Northwest. Journal of Forensic Sciences 34:587-606.
Hamperl, H. 1967 The Osteological Consequences of Scalping. In D. Brothwell and A.T. Sandison (ed.) Diseases in Antiquity, pp. 630-634. C.C. Thomas, Springfield, IL.
Hamperl, H. and W.S. Laughlin 1959 Osteological Consequences of Scalping. Human Biology 31:80-9.
Hill, M.C. 1981 Analysis, Synthesis, and Interpretations of Skeletal Material Excavated for the Gainesville Section of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway. Biocultural Studies in the Gainesville Lake Area of the Tennessee Tombigbee Waterway. Vol. 4. Report of Investigations 14. Office of Archaeological Research, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
2000 Human Burials. In R. Walling, L. Alexander, and E. Peacock, The Jefferson Street Bridge Project: Archaeological Investigations at the East Nashville Mounds Site (40DV4) and the French Lick/Sulphur Dell Site (40DV5) in Nashville, Tennessee, pp. 455-479. Tennessee Department of Transportation Office of Environmental Planning and Permits, Publications in Archaeology No. 7.
Hogue, S. Homes 1994 Human Skeletal Remains from Dust Cave. In N.S. Goldman-Finn and B.N. Driskell (ed.) Preliminary Archaeological Papers on Dust Cave, Northwest Alabama, pp.173-191. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 40(1-2).
2003 Bioarchaeology at Dust Cave. Paper presented at the 60th Annual Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Charlotte, North Carolina.
111 2005 Determination of Warfare and Interpersonal Conflict in the Protohistoric Period: A Case Study from Mississippi. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, in press.
Hogue, S. Homes and V. Dongarra 2002 Biochemical Changes in Long Bone Structure: A Study of Preagricultural and Agricultural Populations in Northeastern Mississippi and Northwestern Alabama. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 27:69-88.
Hogue, S. Homes, and W. Erwin 1993 A Preliminary Analysis of Diet Change Using Small Burial Samples from Three Sites in Mississippi. Mississippi Archaeology 28:1-19.
Hudson, C.M. 1976 The Southeastern Indians. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Hutchinson, D.L. 1990 Postcontact Biocultural Change: Mortuary Site Evidence. In D.H. Thomas (ed.) Columbian Consequences, Vol. 2. Archaeological and Historical Perspectives on the Spanish Borderlands East, pp.61-70. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
1993 Tatum Mound and the Evidence for Spanish and Native American Confrontation. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 36:23.
1996 Brief Encounters: Tatum Mound and the Evidence for Spanish and Native American Confrontation. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:51- 65.
Jacobi, K.P. and D.H. Dye 2001 Headless in Alabama: Raiding and Mortuary Patterning at the Perry Site and Koger’s Island Site. Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting of the Southeastern Archaeological Conference, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Jacobi, K.P., P.S. Bridges, and M.L. Powell 1996 Healing Stages of Scalping in Prehistoric Remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology Supplement 22:130-131.
Jenkins, N.J. 1974 Subsistence and Settlement in the Western Middle Tennessee Valley during the Transitional Archaic-Woodland Period. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 20(2):183-193.
112 1982 Archaeology of the Gainesville Lake Area: Synthesis. Report of Investigations 23, Office of Archaeological Research, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
Johnson, J.K., J.D. Yearous, and N.R. Stallings 1994 Ethnohistory, Archaeology, and Chickasaw Burial Mode During the Eighteenth Century. Ethnohistory 41:3.
Jones, W.B. 1942 Geology of the Pickwick Basin, in Adjacent Parts of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama. In W.S. Webb and D.L. DeJarnette (ed.) An Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin in the Adjacent Portions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, pp. 331-335. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Jurmain, R.D. 2001 Paleoepidemiological Patterns of Trauma in Prehistoric Population from Central California. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 115:13-23.
Jurmain, R. and V.I. Belleifemine 1997 Patterns of Cranial Trauma in a Prehistoric Population from Central California. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7:43-50.
Jurmain, R. and L. Kilgore 1998 Sex-related Patterns of Trauma in Humans and African Apes. In A.Grauer and P. Stuart-Macadam (ed.) Sex and Gender in Paleopathological Perspective, pp. 11-26. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kay, M. 1982 Holocene Adaptations within the Lower Pomme de Terre River Valley. Illinois State Museum Society, Springfield.
Kneburg, M. 1956 Some Important Projectile Points Found in the Tennessee Area. Tennessee Archaeologist 13(1). Tennessee Archaeological Society, Knoxville.
Koval, J.K. and J.D. Zuckerman 2002 Handbook of Fractures, 2nd Edition. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia.
Krogman, W.M. and M. Y. Iscan 1986 The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine. Second Edition. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield.
113 Lahren, C.H. and H.E. Berryman 1984 Fracture Patterns and Status at Chucalissa (40SY1): A Biocultural Approach. Tennessee Anthropologist 9:15-21.
Lambert, P.M. 2002 The Archaeology of War: A North American Perspective. Journal of Archaeological Research 10(3):207-240.
Larsen, C.S. 1997 Bioarchaeology: Interpreting Behavior from the Human Skeleton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Larsen, C.S. and H.P. Huynh 1993 Death by Gunshot: Biocultural Implications of Trauma at Mission San Luis. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 36:26.
Larson, L.H., Jr. 1972 Functional Considerations of Warfare in the Southeast during the Mississippi Period. American Antiquity 37:383-92.
Lesley, B.P. 1995 Early Evidence of Scalping and Warfare in Late Woodland Illinois. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Supplement 20:124.
Lewis, T.M.N. and M. Kneburg 1960 Aaron B. Clement Collection. Tennessee Archaeologist 16(1):49-61.
Lewis, T.M.N. and M.K. Lewis 1961 Eva: An Archaic Site. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Lorant, S. 1946 The New World, the First Pictures of America. Duell, Sloan, Pearce, New York.
Lovejoy, C.O., R.S. Meindl, T.R. Pryzbeck, and R.P. Mensforth 1985 Chronological Metamorphosis of the Auricular Surface of the Ilium: A New Method for the Determination of the Adult Skeletal Age at Death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:15-28.
Lubsen, K.D. 2004 What Trauma in Skeletal Remains Can Tell Us About Subsistence Activities During the Archaic: An Examination of the Burials at the Long Branch (1LU67) and O’Neal (1LU61) Sites. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
114 Lyman, R.L. 1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy, Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mann, R. S. Symes, and W. Bass 1987 Maxillary Suture Obliteration: Aging the Human Skeleton Based on Intact or Fragmentary Maxilla. Journal of Forensic Sciences 32:148-157.
Martin, R. 1928 Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. 2nd ed., vol.2. Jena.
Martin, D.L. and N.J. Akins 1994 Patterns of Violence Against Women in the Prehistoric Southwest. Paper presented at the Southwest Symposium, Tempe Arizona.
Martin, D.L. and D.W. Frayer (ed.) 1997 Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past. War and Society Series Vol.3. Gordon and Breach Publishers, Amsterdam.
Mays, S.A. 1998 The Archaeology of Human Bones. Routledge, New York.
McGahey, S.O. 2000 Mississippi Projectile Point Guide. Archaeological Report No. 31. Mississippi Department of Archives and History, Jackson.
McKern, T. and T. Dale Steward 1957 Skeletal Age Changes in Young American Males, Analyzed from the Standpoint of Identification. Technical Report EP-45. Headquarters, Quartermaster Research and Development Command.
McKinley, J.I. 1992 A Probable Trephination from an Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Oxborough, Norfolk. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 2:333-335.
1993 A Decapitation from the Romano-British Cemetery at Baldock, Hertfordshire. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 3:41-4
Meindl, R. and O. Lovejoy 1985 Ectocranial Suture Closure: A Revised Method for the Determination of Skeletal Age at Death Based on the Lateral-Anterior Sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:57-66.
115 Meindl, R., R. Mensforth, and H. York 2001 Overcoming Biases in the Paleodemographic Record: Estimating Adult Skeletal Age and Population Growth, with an Example from the Archaic Period of the Eastern Woodlands, USA. Paper Presented at the 71st Meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Buffalo, New York.
Mensforth, R.P. 2001 Warfare and Trophy Taking in the Archaic Period. In O.H. Pruter, F.E. Pedde, and R.S. Meindl (ed.) Archaic Transitions in Ohio and Kentucky Prehistory, pp. 110-138. Kent State University Press, Kent.
Merbs, C.F. and W.H. Birkby 1985 Evidence for Prehistoric Scalping at Nuvakwewtaga (Chavez Pass) and Grasshopper Ruin, Arizona. In C.F. Merbs and R.J. Miller (ed.) Health and Disease in the Prehistoric Southwest, pp.23-42. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Paper 34.
1989 Trauma. In M.Y. Iscan and K.A.R. Kennedy (ed.) Reconstruction of Life from the Skeleton. pp. 161-190. Alan R. Liss, New York.
Merriam Webster 1993 Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 10th Edition. Merriam Webster.
Miller, E. 1994 Evidence for Prehistoric Scalping in Northeastern Nebraska. Plains Anthropologists 39:211-219.
Milner, G.R. 1999 Warfare in Prehistoric and Early Historic Eastern North America. Journal of Archaeological Research 7:105-151
2005 Nineteenth-Century Arrow Wounds and Perceptions of Prehistoric Warfare. American Antiquity 70(1):144-156.
Milner, G.R. and R.W. Jefferies 1998 The Read Archaic Shell Midden in Kentucky. Southeastern Archaeology 17(2):119-132.
Milner, G.R. and C.S. Larsen 1991 Teeth as Artifacts of Human Behavior: Intentional Mutilation and Accidental Modifications. In M.A. Kelley and C.S. Larsen Advances in Dental Anthropology, pp.357-78. Wiley-Liss, New York.
116 Milner, G.R. and V.G. Smith 1989 Carnivore Alteration of Human Bone from a Late Prehistoric Site in Illinois. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 79:43-9.
Milner, G.R., E. Anderson, and V.G. Smith 1991 Warfare in Late Prehistoric West-Central Illinois. American Antiquity 56(4):581-603.
Milner, G.R., C.S. Larsen, D.L. Hutchinson, and M. Williamson 1994 Conquistadors, Excavators, or Rodents. Southeastern Archaeological Conference Bulletin 37: 51.
Morant, G.M. 1923 A First Study of the Tibetan Skull. Biometrika Vol. 14, Nos. 3-4, pp. 193- 260. London.
Morse, D.F. 1989 Pathology and Abnormalities of the Hampson Skeletal Collection. In D.F. Morse (ed.) Nodena: An Account of 90 Years of Archaeological Investigation in Southeast Mississippi County, Arkansas (2nd Edition), pp.41- 60. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series 30.
Neiburger, E.J. 1989 A Prehistoric Scalping: 600A.D. Central States Archaeological Journal 36:204-8.
Neumann, G.K. 1940 Evidence for the Antiquity of Scalping from Central Illinois. American Antiquity 4:287-9.
Newman, M.T. and C.E. Snow 1942 Preliminary Report on the Skeletal Material from Pickwick Basin, Alabama. In W.S. Webb and D.L. DeJarnette (ed.) An Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin in the Adjacent Portions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, pp. 393-507. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Oakley, C.B., Jr. 1971 An Archaeological Investigation of Pinson Cave (1Je20). M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
117 Olsen, S. and P. Shipman 1994 Cut-Marks and Perimortem Treatment of Skeletal Remains on the Northern Plains. In D.W. Owsley and R.L. Jantz (ed.) Skeletal Biology in the Great Plains: Migration, Warfare, Health, and Subsistence, pp.377-387. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Ortner, D.J. and W.G. Putschar 1985 Identification of Paleopathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
O’Shea, J.M. and P.S. Bridges 1989 The Sargent Site Ossuary (22Cu28), Custer County, Nebraska. Plains Anthropologists 34:7-21.
Owsley, D. 1994 Warfare in the Coalescent Tradition Populations of the Northern Plains. In Owsley, D. and R, Jantz (ed.) Skeletal Biology in the Great Plains: Migration, Warfare, Health, and Subsistence, p337. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Owsley, D.W. and H.E. Berryman 1975 Ethnographic and Archaeological Evidence of Scalping in the Southeastern United States. Tennessee Anthropologist 31(1):41-58.
Owsley, D.W. and K.L Bruweldheide 1997 Bioarchaeological Research in Northeastern Colorado, Northern Kansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota. In Bioarchaeology of the North Central United States, pp.7-56. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series 49.
Owsley, D.W. and R.L. Jantz (eds.) 1994 Skeletal Biology in the Great Plains: Migration, Warfare, Health, and Subsistence. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Peacock, E. 1998 Fresh-Water Mussels as Indicators of Prehistoric Human Environmental Impact in the Southeastern United States. Doctoral Thesis, University of Sheffield, England.
2002 Shellfish Use During the Woodland Period in the Middle South. In D.G. Anderson and R.C. Mainfort, Jr. (ed.) The Woodland Southeast, pp. 444-460. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
Phenice, T. 1969 A Newly Developed Visual Method of Sexing the Os Pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 30:279-301.
118 Pollack, D., M.L. Powell, and A. Adkins 1987 Preliminary Study of Mortuary Patterns at the Larkin Site, Bourbon County, Kentucky. In D, Pollack )(ed.) Current Archaeological Research in Kentucky, vol. 1, pp.188-203. Kentucky Heritage Council, Lexington.
Pryor, F. 1976 A Neolithic Multiple Burial from Fengate, Peterborough. Antiquity 50:232-3.
Redfield, A. 1970 A New Aid to Aging Immature Skeletons: Development of the Occipital Bone. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 33:217-220.
Ritchie, W.A. 1932 The Lamoka Lake Site. Researches and Transactions of the New York State Archaeological Association 7(4):79-134.
Robb, J. 1997 Violence and Gender in Early Italy. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past, pp.111-144. Gordon and Breach, Langhorne.
Russell, T.A. 1996 Fractures of the Tibia and Fibula. In Rockwood and Green (ed) Fractures in Adults, 4th Edition. Lippencott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia.
Russo, M. 1994 A Brief Introduction to the Study of Archaic Mounds in the Southeast. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):89-93.
Sassaman, K.E. 1995 The Cultural Diversity of Interactions among Mid-Holocene Societies of the American Southeast. In M.S. Nassaney and K.E. Sassaman (ed.) Native American Interactions: Multiscalar Analyses and Interpretations in the Eastern Woodlands, pp. 174-202. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Saunders, R 1994 The Case for Archaic Period Mounds in Southeastern Louisiana. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):118-134.
Scheuer, L. and S. Black (ed.) 2000 Developmental Juvenile Osteology. Academic Press, London.
119 Schuldenrein, J. 1996 Geoarchaeology and the Mid-Holocene Landscape History of the Greater Southeast. In K.E. Sassaman and D.G. Anderson (ed.) Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast, pp. 3-27. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
Sciulli, P.W. and R.M. Gramly 1989 Analysis of the Ft. Laurens, Ohio, Skeletal Sample. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 80:11-24.
Sensenig, E.C. and J.E. Hoar 1962 Skeletal Material from the Stanfield-Worley Bluff Shelter. Journal of Alabama Archaeology 8(1-2):115-119.
Sherard, H. 1977 Soil Survey of Lauderdale County, Alabama. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
Shermis, S. 1982 Domestic Violence in Two Skeletal Populations. Ossa 9-11:143-151.
Sherwood, S.C., B.N. Driskell, A.R.Randall, and S.C. Meeks 2004 Chronology and Stratigraphy at Dust Cave, Alabama. American Antiquity 69(3):533-555.
Shields, B. 2003 An Analysis of the Archaic Human Burials at the Mulberry Creek (1CTT27) Shell Mound, Colbert County, Alabama. MA. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
Smith, B.D. 1992 Rivers of Change: Essays on Early Agriculture in Eastern North America. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Smith, B.W. 1991 Late Archaic-Poverty Point Trade Network. Geoscience and Man 29:173- 180.
Smith G.P. 1991 The Archaic Period in the Mississippi Drainage of Western Tennessee. In C.H. McNutt (ed.) The Archaic Period in the Mid-South, pp. 46-58. Archaeological Report No. 24., Mississippi Department of Archives and History.
120 Smith, M.O. 1993 A Probable Case of Decapitation at the Late Archaic Robinson Site (40SM4), Smith County, Tennessee. Tennessee Anthropologist 18:131-42.
1995 Scalping in the Archaic Period: Evidence from the Western Tennessee Valley. Southeastern Archaeology 14:60-8
1996a Parry Fractures and Female-Directed Interpersonal Violence: Implications from the Late Archaic Period of West Tennessee. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:84-91.
1996b Biocultural Inquiry into Archaic Period Populations of the Southeast: Trauma and Occupational Stress. In K.E. Sassaman and D.G. Anderson (ed.) Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast, pp. 134-154. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
1997 Osteological Indications of Warfare in the Archaic Period of the Western Tennessee Valley. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past pp.241-266. Gordon and Breach, Langhorne.
Snow, C. 1941 Possible Evidence of Scalping at Moundville. In Anthropological Studies at Moundville, pp.53-59. Geological Survey of Alabama, Museum Paper 15, Alabama Museum of Natural History, Tuscaloosa.
1942 Additional Evidence of Scalping. American Antiquity 4:398-400.
Snow, C.C. and J. Fitzpatrick 1989 Human Osteological Remains from the Battle of Little Bighorn. In E.E. Scott, R.A.J. Fox, M.A. Connor, and D. Harmon (ed.) Archaeological Perspectives on the Battle of Little Bighorn, pp.243-306. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
Standen, Vivien and Bernardo T. Arriaza 2000 Trauma in the Preceramic Coastal Populations of Chile: Violence or Occupational Hazards. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 112:239- 49.
Steponaitis, V.P. 1991 Contrasting Patterns of Mississippian Development. In T. Earle (ed.) Chiefdoms, Power, Economy, and Ideology, pp. 193-228. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
121 Stirland, A. 1984 A Possible Correlation Between Os Acromiale and Occupation in the Burials from the May Rose. Proceedings of the Fifth European Meeting of the Paleopathology Association, Siena 327-334.
1996 Patterns of Trauma in a Unique Medieval Parish Cemetery. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 6:92-100.
Suchey, J. and D. Katz 1986 Skeletal Age Standards Derived from an Extensive Multiracial Sample of Modern Americas. Abstract. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 69:269.
Suchey, J., P. Owings, D. Wiseley, and T. Noguchi 1984 Skeletal Aging of Unidentified Persons. In T. Rathburn and J. Buikstra (ed.) Human Identification: Case Studies in Forensic Anthropology, pp. 278-297. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois.
Swanton, J.R. 1911 Indian Tribes of the Lower Mississippi River Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico, (reprinted 1976). Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 43. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
1928 Social Organization and Social Usages of the Indians of the Creek Confederacy. Forty-second Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, pp. 25-472. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Thomas, D.H. 1986 Refiguring Anthropology: First Principles of Probability and Statistics. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, Illinois.
Todd, T.W. 1921a Age Changes in the Pubic Bone, I: The Male White Pubis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 3:285-334.
1921b Age Changes in the Pubic Bone, III: The Pubis of the White Female, IV: The Pubis of the Female White-Negro Hybrid. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 4:1-70.
Todd, T.W. and D. Lyon 1924 Endocranial Suture Closure, Its Progress and Age Relationship. Part I. Adult Makes of White Stock. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 7:325- 384.
122 1925a Cranial Suture Closure, Its Progress and Age Relationship. Part II. Ectocranial Closures in Adult Makes of White Stock. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 8:23-45
1925b Cranial Suture Closure, Its Progress and Age Relationship. Part III. Ectocranial Closures in Adult Makes of Negro Stock. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 8:47-71.
1925c Cranial Suture Closure, Its Progress and Age Relationship. Part IV. Ectocranial Closures in Adult Makes of Negro Stock. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 8:149-168.
Turner, C.G., II 1993 Cannibalism in Chaco Canyon: the Charnal Pit Excavated in 1926 at Small House Ruin by Frank H. H. Roberts, Jr. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 91:421-39.
Turner, C.G., II and N.T. Morris 1970 A Massacre at Hopi. American Antiquity 35:320-331.
Turner, C.G., II and J.A. Turner 1992 The First Claim for Cannibalism in the Southwest: Walter Hough’s 1901 Discovery at Canyon Butte Ruin 3, Northeastern Arizona. American Antiquity 57:661-682.
1995 Cannibalism in the Prehistoric American Southwest: Occurrence, Taphonomy, Explanation, and Suggestion for Standardized World Definition. Anthropological Science 103:1-22.
Turner, K.R. 1985 Human Skeletal Remains, 22LO860. In J. Rafferty and M.E. Starr (eds.) Test Excavations at Two Woodland Sites, Lowndes County, Mississippi, pp.131- 139. Report of Investigations 3, Cobb Institute of Archaeology, Mississippi State University.
Ubelaker, D.H. 1984 Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation. Tarazacum, Washington, D.C.
1989 The Estimation of Age at Death from Immature Human Bone. In M.Y. Iscan (ed.) Age Markers in the Human Skeleton, pp.55-70. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois.
123 Velutini, J.A. and P.F. Tarazona 1998 Fractures of the Manubrium with Posterior Displacement of the Clavicle and First Rib. International Orthopaedics 22:269-271.
Wakeley, J. And M.F. Bruce 1989 Interpreting Signs of Trauma on a Human Axis Vertebra. Journal of Anatomy 167:265.
Walker, P.L. 1989 Cranial Injuries as Evidence of Violence in Prehistoric Southern California. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 80:313-323.
1997 Wife Beating, Boxing, and Broken Noses: Skeletal Evidence for the Cultural Patterning of Interpersonal Violence. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past pp. 145-180. Gordon and Breech, Langhorne.
Walker, R. 2000 Subsistence Strategies at Dust Cave: Changes from the Late Paleoindian through Middle Archaic Occupations. University of Alabama, Report of Investigations 78.
Walker, P.L., John R. Johnson, and P.M. Lambert 1988 Age and Sex Biases in the Preservation of Human Skeletal Remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 76:183-188.
Walker R., K. Detwiler, S.C. Meeks, and B.N. Driskell 2001 Berries, Bones, and Blades: Reconstructing Late Paleoindian Subsistence Economy at Dust Cave, Alabama. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 26:169-197.
Walthall, J.A. 1980 Prehistoric Indians of the Southeast: Archaeology of Alabama and the Middle South. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.
1998 Rockshelters and Hunter-Gatherer Adaptation to the Pleistocene/Holocene Transition. American Antiquity 63(2):223-238.
Webb, W.S. 1974 Indian Knoll. (Reprinted Edition). University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
124 Webb, W.S. and D.L. DeJarnette 1942 An Archaeological Survey of Pickwick Basin in the Adjacent Portions of the States of Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 129, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
1948 Little Bear Creek Site Cto8, Colbert County, Alabama. Alabama Museum of Natural History Museum Paper 26. University of Alabama.
Wells, C. 1974 Probable Trephination of Five Early Saxon Skulls. Antiquity 48:298-301.
White, T. D. 1991 Human Osteology. Academic Press, New York.
1992 Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Wilkinson, R.G. 1997 Violence Against Women: Raiding and Abduction in Prehistoric Michigan. In D. Martin and D. Frayer (ed.) Troubled Times: Violence and Warfare in the Past pp. 21-44. Gordon and Breech, Langhorne.
Wilkinson, R.G. and K.M. Van Wagenen 1993 Violence Against Women: Prehistoric Skeletal Evidence from Michigan. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 18:190-216.
Willey, G.R. and P. Phillips 1958 Method and Theory in American Archaeology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Willey, P. 1990 Prehistoric Warfare on the Great Plains: Skeletal Analysis of the Crow Creek Massacre Victims. Garland, New York.
Willey, P. and W.M. Bass 1978 A Scalped Skull from Pawnee County. Kansas Anthropological Association Newsletter 24:1978.
Willey, P. and T.E. Emerson 1993 The Osteology and Archaeology of the Crow Creek Massacre. Plains Anthropologist 38:227-269.
125 Williams, P. 1995 Gray’s Anatomy. 38thedition. Churchill Livingstone, New York.
Williamson, M.A., C.A. Johnston, S.A. Symes, and J.J. Schultz 2003 Interpersonal Violence between 18th Century Native Americans and Europeans in Ohio. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 122:113- 122.
Wood Jones, F. 1910 General Pathology (Including Diseases of the Teeth). In G. Elliot Smith and F. Wood Jones (ed.) The Archaeological Survey of Nubia, Report for 1907- 1908, pp. 263-91. National Printing Company, Cairo.
Yarnell, R.A. and M. J. Black 1985 Temporal Trends Indicated by a Survey of Archaic and Woodland Plant Food Remains from Southeastern North America. Southeastern Archaeology 4(2):93-106.
Zimmerman, L.J., T.E. Emerson, P. Willey, M. Swegle, J.B. Gregg, P. Gregg, E. White, C. Smith, T. Haberman, and M.P. Bumstead 1981 The Crow Creek Site (39BF11) Massacre: A Preliminary Report. Submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District.
Zimmerman, L.J. and L.E. Bradley 1993 The Crow Creek Massacre: Initial Coalescent Warfare and Speculations About the Genesis of Extended Coalescent. Plains Anthropologists 38:215- 216.
APPENDIX
BURIAL DATA TABLES
126 127
Table A.1 Dust Cave burial summary
Burial Degree of Preservation Age in Years Sex No. Completeness 1 Complete Excellent 15+3 Male? 2 Incomplete ~ Adult Male? 3 Complete Excellent 55+3 Female 4 Complete Good 0.25-0.75 ~ 5 Complete Good 26+2 Female 6 Incomplete ~ 2+0.75 ~ 7 Complete Good 33+7 Female 8 Complete Good 0.5+0.25 ~ 9 Complete Good/Excellent 47+3 Female 10 Complete Good/Excellent 1-1 ~ 11 Incomplete ~ Adult ~ 12 Complete Good/Excellent 0-0.5 ~ 13 Incomplete ~ Adult Female? 14 Incomplete ~ 4+1 ~ 15a Incomplete ~ 5+3 ~ 15b Incomplete ~ Adult ~ 16 Complete Good 55+3 Female 17 Complete Good 3+1 18 Complete Fair 58+5 Female 19 Complete Good 22+2 Male 19a Incomplete Good Neonate ~ 20 Complete Good/Excellent 0.5+0.25 ~ 21 Complete Good/Excellent 3+1 ~ 22 Complete ~ 4.5+1 ~ 23 Incomplete ~ Adult Female? 24 Complete Good/Excellent 45+ Female 25 Incomplete Very Poor Adult ~ 26 Incomplete Good 25+5 Male 27 Incomplete Good 45+ Female 28 Incomplete Good 4+1 ~ 29 Incomplete Good 0.75+0.25 ~ 30a Complete Excellent 35-40 Male 30b Incomplete Good Adult ~ 30c Incomplete Good 9 ~ 31 Complete Excellent 0.5+0.25 ~ 32 Incomplete Good Subadult ~ 33 Incomplete Good Subadult ~ • (Adapted from Hogue Laboratory Notes)
128
Table A.2 O’Neal site burial summary (Archaic burials only)
Degree of Burial No. Preservation Age in Years Sex Completeness 1 Incomplete Poor - Fair 45+ Male 2 Complete Good 27+3 Male 3 Complete Good 37+9 Male 5 Incomplete Fair - Good 50+5 Male 6 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 7 Incomplete Fair - Good 27+3 Female 8 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Female 8a ~ ~ 6+1 ~ 8b ~ ~ 7+1 ~ 8c ~ ~ 6+1 ~ 9 ~ ~ 5+2 ~ 10 Incomplete Fair - Good 24+ Male? 11 ~ ~ 5+1 ~ 11a ~ ~ 3+1 ~ 12 Incomplete Fair - Good 15+3 Male 13 ~ ~ 1+0.5 ~ 13a ~ ~ 7+1 ~ 13b ~ ~ 4+1 ~ 14 ~ ~ 0+0.5 ~ 14a ~ ~ <12 ~ 14b Incomplete Fair - Good 25+ ~ 18 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Female 21 Complete Good 60+ Female 23 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 27 Complete Good 19+1 Female 28 Incomplete Fair -Good 37+3 ~ 30 Complete Good 47+2 Male 32 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 33 Complete Good 32+2 Female 34 Complete Good 55+ Female 35 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Male 36 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Male 37 Complete Good 40+5 Female 39 Complete Good 42+3 Female 40 Complete Good 45+ Male 41 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female? 42 Incomplete Fair - Good 55+ Male
129
Table A.2 (Continued)
Burial No. Degree of Preservation Age in Years Sex Completeness 43 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 43a ~ ~ 7+1 ~ 43b ~ ~ 7+1 ~ 44 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 46 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Male 47 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Male 49 Complete Good 13+2 Male 50 ~ ~ 1-0.5 ~ 51 Incomplete Fair - Good 42+2 Female 52 ~ ~ 7+2 ~ 53 ~ ~ 7+3 ~ 54 Incomplete Fair - Good 35+ Female 55 Complete Good 42+3 Male 56 ~ ~ 13+1 ~ 57 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Female 58 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Female 59 Incomplete Fair - Good 45+ Female 60 Incomplete Fair - Good 19+1 Female 61 ~ ~ <12 Male? 62 Incomplete Fair - Good 60+ Female
130
Table A.3 Dust Cave skeletal traumas observed by Hogue (1994, 2003) and Davis (2004)
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description Left Patella / Fracture 1 Male Left Ulna / Subluxated Elbow 3 Female 5th Lumbar Vertebra / Spondylolysis 5 Female Right Frontal / Depression Fracture Left Frontal / Depression Fracture 1st Right Rib / Fracture 7 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Unidentified Left Metatarsal / Fracture Unidentified Left Metacarpal / Fracture 5th Lumbar Vertebra / Scoliosis 9 Female Unidentified Left Rib / Fracture Left Frontal / Depression Fracture Left Parietal / Depression Fracture 16 Female Unidentified Left Rib / Fracture Unidentified Right Ribs (n=3) / Fracture Right Parietal / Depression Fracture (n=2) 18 Female Left Occipital / Depression Fracture 19 Male Right Frontal / Depression Fracture 24 Female Manibrium / Fracture Unidentified Metatarsal / Fracture 26 Male Unidentified Phalange / Fracture 27 Female Left Parietal / Depression Fracture Right Parietal / Depression Fracture (n=2) 30a Male Right Scapula / Subluxated Shoulder Unidentified Phalange / Fracture
131
Table A.4 O’Neal site age, sex, and skeletal traumas observed and recorded by Newman and Snow
Burial # Sex Age Recorded Traumas 1 F 40 none 2 M 26 none 3 M 26 none 4 M 26 none healed left ulna fracture, 5 M 50-60 swollen mid right fibula 6 F 37 none 7 F 24 none 8 F 25 vertebral arthritic lipping 8a M 6 none 9 F 26 none 10 F 26 none 11 F 5 none 12 M 7-9 none 13 F 5-6 none 14 M 16 none 15 ? ? none 16 F 27 none 17 F 24 none 18 F 39 none 19 ? ? none lumbar vertebral scar, 20 M 27 lesion left frontal crest radius/ulna fused with 21 F 28 humerus, ulna shaft knotty & shriveled 22 M 30-40 none 23 F 24 none 24 F 10-11 none 25 F 24 none 26 F 25 none marks on occipital bone, 27 F 22 tibia bowing 28 F 22 none 29 ? 45 none
132
Table A.4 (Continued)
Burial # Sex Age Recorded Traumas 30 M 33 vertebra arthritic lipping 31 M 33 lumbar vertebral lipping 32 M 26 none 33 F 23 none 34 F 43 none broken neck, broken 35 M 40 right femur arthritic lipping at elbow 36 M 40-50 and ankle 37 F 26 none 38 M 3-4 none 39 M 24 none 40 M 42-46 none 41 M 36 none 42 M 42 swollen right humerus 43 M 25-38 none 44 F 24 none 45 ? ? none 46 M 38 none 47 M 34 none 48 ? ? none 49 M 8-9 none 50 F 2 none 51 F 23-30 none 52 F 6 none 53 M 8-10 none healed fracture to right radius, left ulna lipping, 54 F 28 thoracic vertebral arthritic lipping 55 M 42 knee joint lipping 56 F 11 none
133
Table A.4 (Continued)
Burial # Sex Age Recorded Traumas 57 F 23 none 58 F 39 right radius fracture 59 ? 45 none 60 F 21 none 61 M 14 none 62 F 29 none (Adapted from Newman and Snow laboratory notes)
134
Table A.5 O’Neal site skeletal trauma observed and recorded by Lubsen (2004)
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description 1 Male Right Radius / Fracture 2 Male Left Tibia / Embedded Projectile Point 3rd Left Metatarsal / Embedded Lithic 3 Male 3rd Lumbar Vertebra / Compression Fracture Left Radius / Fracture 5 Male 1st Right Metatarsal / Fracture 6 Female? Navicular / Fracture 8 Female Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture 14b Unknown Unidentified Rib / Fracture 18 Female 4th Lumbar Vertebra / Spondylolysis Right Clavicle / Fracture 21 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Right Radius, Ulna, Humerus / Severe Infection & Degeneration Right Tibia / Fracture 27 Female Right Fibula / Fracture Unidentified Thoracic Vertebra / Fractured Spinous Process 30 Male Unidentified Rib / Fracture First Proximal (tarsal) Phalange / Fracture 33 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture 34 Female Atlas / Fused Condyle and Facet Left Femur / Fracture 35 Male 11th Thoracic Vertebra / Compression Fracture with fusion to T10 3rd Lumbar Vertebra / Spondylolysis with fusion of L2 and L4 1st Proximal (tarsal) Phalange 37 Female Right Fibula / Fracture 42 Male Left Ulna / Fracture Left Tibia / Fracture 46 Male Unidentified Phalange / Fracture 49 Male Mandible / Fracture 5th Right Metacarpal / Fracture 51 Female? 5th Proximal Phalange / Fracture
135
Table A.5 (Continued)
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description Right Radius / Fracture Right Ulna / Fracture 54 Female Right Parietal / Fracture 11th and 12th Thoracic Vertebrae / Fused 1st (tarsal) Phalange / Fracture 55 Male Left Tibia / Fracture Right Ulna / Fracture 57 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Right Radius / Fracture 58 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture 60 Female 5th Lumbar Vertebra / Spondylolysis
136
Table A.6 Dust Cave skeletal traumas
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description 1 Male Left Patella / Fracture 5 Female Right Frontal / Depression Fracture Left Frontal / Depression Fracture 1st Right Rib / Fracture 7 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture 3rd Left Proximal Metacarpal / Fracture Left Frontal / Depression Fracture 16 Female Left Parietal / Depression Fracture Unidentified Rib (n=4) / Fracture Right Parietal/ Depression Fractures (n=2) 18 Female Left Occipital / Depression Fracture 19 Male Right Frontal / Depression Fracture 24 Female Manibrium / Fracture 26 Male 5th Left Proximal Metatarsal / Fracture 27 Female Right Parietal / Depression Fracture Right Parietal / Depression Fractures (n=2) 30a Male Right Scapula / Possible Subluxation of Shoulder Unidentified Phalange / Fracture
137
Table A.7 O’Neal site skeletal traumas
Burial No. Sex Trauma Location / Description 1 Male Right Radius / Fracture 2 Male Left Tibia / Embedded Projectile Point 3rd Left Metatarsal / Embedded Lithic 3 Male 3rd Lumbar Vertebra / Compression Fracture Left Radius / Fracture 5 Male 1st Right Metatarsal / Fracture 8 Female Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture Right Clavicle / Fracture 21 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Right Tibia / Fracture 27 Female Right Fibula / Fracture Unidentified Thoracic Vertebra / Fractured Spinous Process 30 Male Unidentified Rib / Fracture First Proximal (tarsal) Phalange / Fracture 33 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture 34 Female Unidentified Ribs (n=3) / Fracture Left Femur / Fracture 35 Male 11th Thoracic Vertebra / Compression Fracture 1st Proximal (tarsal) Phalange 37 Female Right Fibula / Fracture 42 Male Left Ulna / Fracture Left Tibia / Fracture 46 Male Unidentified Phalange / Fracture 49 Male Mandible / Fracture 5th Right Metacarpal / Fracture 51 Female 5th Right Proximal Phalange / Fracture Right Radius / Fracture Right Ulna / Fracture 54 Female Right Parietal / Fracture 11th and 12th Thoracic Vertebrae / Fused 1st (tarsal) Phalange / Fracture 55 Male Left Tibia / Fracture Right Ulna / Fracture 57 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture Right Radius / Fracture 58 Female Unidentified Rib / Fracture