Content uploaded by Anna Osterholtz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Anna Osterholtz on Jul 12, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Commingled and
Disarticulated
Human Remains
Working Toward Improved Theory,
Method, and Data
Anna J. Osterholtz
Kathryn M. Baustian
Debra L. Martin Editors
Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
Anna J. Osterholtz • Kathryn M. Baustian
Debra L. Martin
Editors
Commingled and
Disarticulated Human
Remains
Working Toward Improved Theory,
Method, and Data
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
ISBN 978-1-4614-7559-0 ISBN 978-1-4614-7560-6 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-7560-6
Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013943277
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection
with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifi cally for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this
publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s
location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions
for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations are liable to
prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for
any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein.
Cover Illustration: Cover art courtesy of Robert Turner, Offi ce of Archaeological Studies, Department of
Cultural Affairs, Santa Fe, NM
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
Editors
Anna J. Osterholtz
Department of Anthropology
University of Nevada
Las Vegas, NV , USA
Debra L. Martin
Department of Anthropology
University of Nevada
Las Vegas , NV , USA
Kathryn M. Baustian
Department of Anthropology
University of Nevada
Las Vegas, NV , USA
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
To my parents (and forces of nature),
Roger and Janet Osterholtz. (AJO)
To my large family assemblage.
Thanks for your continual support. (KMB)
To all my commingled and disarticulated
grad students. (DLM)
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
vii
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn M. Baustian, and Debra L. Martin
Part I Long Term Usage Assemblages
Making Sense of Social Behavior from Disturbed and Commingled
Skeletons: A Case Study from Çatalhöyük, Turkey .................................... 17
Başak Boz and Lori D. Hager
Commingled Human Skeletal Assemblages: Integrative Techniques
in Determination of the MNI/MNE ............................................................... 35
Anna J. Osterholtz, Kathryn M. Baustian, Debra L. Martin,
and Daniel T. Potts
Bioarchaeological Spatial Analysis
of the Walker-Noe Crematory (15GD56) ...................................................... 51
Nicholas P. Herrmann, Joanne L. Devlin, and Jessica C. Stanton
Into the Kettle: The Analysis of Commingled Remains
from Southern Ontario ................................................................................... 67
Bonnie Glencross
Part II Episodic Assemblages
Crow Creek Bone Bed Commingling: Relationship Between Bone
Mineral Density and Minimum Number of Individuals
and Its Effect on Paleodemographic Analyses ............................................. 85
Ashley Kendell and P. Willey
Extreme Processing at Mancos and Sacred Ridge:
The Value of Comparative Studies ................................................................ 105
Anna J. Osterholtz
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
viii
Disarticulated and Disturbed, Processed and Eaten? Cautionary
Notes from the La Plata Assemblage (ad 1000–1150) ................................. 129
Debra L. Martin, Nancy J. Akins, and H.Wolcott Toll
Partible, Permeable, and Relational Bodies in a Maya Mass Grave .......... 149
William N. Duncan and Kevin R. Schwarz
Part III Caveats and Contributions from Other Disciplines
Unmingling Commingled Museum Collections:
A Photographic Method ................................................................................. 173
Katie J. Zejdlik
Primary and Secondary Burials with Commingled Remains
from Archaeological Contexts in Cyprus, Greece, and Turkey .................. 193
Sherry C. Fox and Kathryn Marklein
Commingled Bone Assemblages: Insights from Zooarchaeology
and Taphonomy of a Bone Bed at Karain B Cave, SW Turkey .................. 213
Levent Atici
Normal Goat or Diseased Human? Disciplinary Boundaries
and Methodological Traps in the Analysis of Fragmentary
Remains at Franchthi Cave, Greece .............................................................. 255
Della Collins Cook
Taking Analyses of Commingled Remains into the Future:
Challenges and Prospects ............................................................................... 265
Kathryn M. Baustian, Anna J. Osterholtz, and Della Collins Cook
Index ................................................................................................................. 275
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
ix
Contributors
Nancy J. Akins Museum of New Mexico Offi ce of Archaeological Studies , Santa
Fe , NM , USA
Levent Atici Department of Anthropology , University of Nevada, Las Vegas ,
Las Vegas , NV , USA
Kathryn M. Baustian Department of Anthropology , University of Nevada,
Las Vegas , Las Vegas , NV , USA
B a şak Boz Department of Archaeology , Trakya University , Edirne , Turkey
Della Collins Cook Department of Anthropology , Indiana University , Bloomington ,
IN , USA
Joanne L. Devlin Department of Anthropology , University of Tennessee ,
Knoxville , TN , USA
William N. Duncan Department of Sociology and Anthropology , East Tennessee
State University , Johnson City , TN , USA
Sherry C. Fox Wiener Laboratory , American School of Classical Studies at
Athens , Athens , Greece
Bonnie Glencross Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies ,
Wilfrid Laurier University , Waterloo , ON , Canada
Lori D. Hager Pacifi c Legacy, Inc. , Berkeley , CA , USA
The Archaeological Research Facility University of California , Berkeley , CA , USA
Nicholas P. Herrmann Department of Anthropology and Middle Eastern Cultures,
Cobb Institute of Archaeology , Mississippi State University , Mississippi State ,
MS , USA
Ashley Kendell Department of Anthropology , Michigan State University ,
East Lansing , MI , USA
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
x
Kathryn Marklein Department of Anthropology , The Ohio State University ,
Columbus , OH , USA
Debra L. Martin Department of Anthropology , University of Nevada, Las Vegas ,
Las Vegas , NV , USA
Anna J. Osterholtz Department of Anthropology , University of Nevada,
Las Vegas , Las Vegas , NV , USA
Daniel T. Potts Institute for the Study of the Ancient World , New York University ,
New York , NY , USA
Kevin R. Schwarz ASC Group, Inc. , Columbus , OH , USA
Jessica C. Stanton Department of Anthropology and Middle Eastern Cultures,
Cobb Institute of Archaeology , Mississippi State University , Mississippi State ,
MS , USA
H. Wolcott Toll Museum of New Mexico Offi ce of Archaeological Studies ,
Santa Fe , NM , USA
P. Willey Anthropology Department , California State University, Chico , Chico ,
CA , USA
Katie J. Zejdlik Department of Anthropology , Indiana University , Bloomington ,
IN , USA
Contributors
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xi
List of Figures
Fig. 1 Types of commingled and fragmentary assemblages .......................... 2
Fig. 1 Flow of human bones in and out of the grave during the life
of the Çatalhöyük house ...................................................................... 20
Fig. 2 Distribution of Çatalhöyük human bones by depositional
categories ............................................................................................. 23
Fig. 3 Age categories by deposition ............................................................... 24
Fig. 4 Location of interments in or near Çatalhöyük buildings by age .......... 26
Fig. 5 An example of dismemberment at Çatalhöyük: the secondary
interment of a partial older woman from Building 49.
Photo courtesy of the Çatalhöyük Research Project ............................ 28
Fig. 6 Figurine from Istanbul Area of East Mound of Çatalhöyük,
side view. Photo courtesy of the Çatalhöyük
Research Project .................................................................................. 29
Fig. 1 Overall MNI, without regard to sex or side ......................................... 42
Fig. 2 Detailed MNI diagram, without regard to sex or side ......................... 43
Fig. 3 Overall MNI by element and side ........................................................ 44
Fig. 4 Sex ratios by element ........................................................................... 45
Fig. 1 Location of Walker- Noe and other Middle Woodland
mortuary facilities in the central Ohio River Valley
(modifi ed from Pollack, Schlarb, Sharp, & Tune, 2005) ..................... 52
Fig. 2 Site plan map with the excavation units and cremated bone
distribution depicted ............................................................................ 53
Fig. 3 GIS-based MNE summary raster for the left temporal bone ............... 56
Fig. 4 Site plan with the platform and unit centroids
and straight-line distances plotted ....................................................... 57
Fig. 5 Three-dimensional representation of cremated bone weight
standardized by unit size ...................................................................... 60
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xii
Fig. 6 Biplots depicting the relationship of the three axes
of the L*a*b* color space to distance from the platform.
A least squares fi t line is placed in each biplot.
The L*a*b* color model is shown in the upper right
quadrant of the fi gure ........................................................................... 61
Fig. 7 Distribution of temporal bones MNI values
by excavation unit and element side .................................................... 62
Fig. 8 Three plots showing the relationship of bone weight
adjusted for unit size (left), cranial bone weight
percentage (center), and MNI (right). In each plot,
loess fi t lines are added to highlight the relationships
and common trends in these variables ................................................. 62
Fig. 1 Historically documented locations of Iroquois occupations
in southern Ontario .............................................................................. 69
Fig. 2 Wendat primary interment, where human remains are held
until the Feast of the Dead. From Samuel de Champlain’s,
Voyages et descouvertures, 1619 ......................................................... 70
Fig. 3 The Huron, Feast of the Dead in which remains are reburied
in a large communal pit (ossuary). From Lafi tau, J.F. (1724),
Moeurs des sauvages amériquains, comparées aux moeurs
des premiers temps, vol. II ................................................................... 71
Fig. 4 Acute plastic bowing deformation (APBD) of the distal third
in a Glen Williams ulna (left) compared to a second
Glen Williams ulna (right) showing normal curvature ........................ 77
Fig. 1 Locations of Crow Creek and other important
Middle Missouri River Subregion sites ............................................... 87
Fig. 2 Crow Creek Site, showing house depressions, fortifi cation
ditch and the Bone Bed with commingled skeletons. Modifi ed
from Kivett and Jensen (1976, p. 2), Fig. 1. Courtesy of the
Nebraska State Historical Society ....................................................... 91
Fig. 3 View of the Crow Creek Bone Bed (looking north) showing
hundreds of commingled skeletons. Courtesy of the
University of South Dakota’s Department of Anthropology
and Sociology ...................................................................................... 92
Fig. 4 Bone segments applied to limb bones from the
Crow Creek Site ................................................................................... 95
Fig. 1 Sacred Ridge conjoin exhibiting differential burning .......................... 112
Fig. 2 Different methods for dismemberment of the hip:
(a) Sacred Ridge, with circumferential cutmarks on the femoral
neck (photo by Anna Osterholtz) and (b) circum-acetabuluar
cutmarks on the os coxa (photo courtesy of Tim White) ..................... 125
List of Figures
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xiii
Fig. 1 Drawing of the disarticulated bone deposit located
in the fi ll of a pit structure from site LA 37593. Courtesy
Robert Turner, Offi ce of Archaeological Studies,
Department of Cultural Affairs, Santa Fe, NM ................................... 133
Fig. 2 Drawing of the disarticulated bone deposit located in the fi ll
of a pit structure from site LA 37592. Group 2 shows evidence
of intentional arrangement and placement of bones.
Courtesy Robert Turner, Offi ce of Archaeological Studies,
Department of Cultural Affairs, Santa Fe, NM ................................... 137
Fig. 3 Graph showing the percent of bone elements by site for
LA 37592, LA 37593 and LA 65030 ................................................... 145
Fig. 1 Map of Petén lakes region with sites mentioned in text ...................... 156
Fig. 2 Map of Zacpetén and Group A, the principal
civic-ceremonial architectural group at the site ................................... 157
Fig. 3 Eastern facing profi le of Op. 1000 on the 106 line .............................. 158
Fig. 4 (a) Bivariate plot of Lhat comparing left and right femora;
(b) univariate plot of Lhat comparing all femora;
(c) map of femora and temporals; (d) bivariate plot Lhat
comparing femora and temporals ........................................................ 161
Fig. 5 (a) Bivariate plot of Lhat comparing left ulnae and radii;
(b) map of left ulnae and radii; (c) bivariate plot
of Lhat comparing right ulnae and radii; (d) map of right
ulnae and radii ...................................................................................... 162
Fig. 1 In-situ photo the “Aztalan Princess.” MPM photo
negative no. 60500.Originally published in Barrett
(1933, pp. 474–475) ............................................................................. 184
Fig. 2 In-situ photo of human hand in “baking pit.” MPM photo
negative no. 60405. Originally published in Barrett
(1933, pp. 452–453) ............................................................................. 186
Fig. 3 In-situ photo of faunal remains under pot sherd.
MPM photo negative no. 60519. Originally published
in Barrett (1933, pp. 476–477) ............................................................ 188
Fig. 1 Map of Eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea with study
locations highlighted: (a) Thebes; (b) Corinth; (c) Paphos;
(d) Kalavasos-Kopetra; and (e) Oymaağaç Höyük .............................. 194
Fig. 2 Fragmentary and complete humeri from two perinatal
individuals (left) compared with subadult and adult
humeral remains ................................................................................... 197
Fig. 3 Oymaağaç Höyük, Turkey ................................................................... 200
Fig. 4 Roman period mass grave 7384.009 prior to exhumation
of skeletal material (photo by H. Marquardt, with permission
from Oymaağaç-Nerik Projekt) ........................................................... 201
List of Figures
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xiv
Fig. 5 Schematic representation of database coding system. Overall
context and content of skeletal elements are linked with
demographic, metrical/non-metrical, and pathological data .............. 203
Fig. 6 Sample recording form for radial metrical
and non-metrical observations ........................................................... 206
Fig. 7 Left navicular manifesting os tibiale externum
(photo by H. Marquardt, with permission from
Oymaağaç-Nerik Projekt) .................................................................. 207
Fig. 1 Location of Karain B Cave ................................................................ 217
Fig. 2 The stratigraphy of Karain B Cave .................................................... 219
Fig. 3 A close-up of the bone bed (upper) and animal bones
sorted into skeletal element/portion (lower) ...................................... 220
Fig. 4 Skeletal elements in ascending order according to
their bone mineral density values ...................................................... 232
Fig. 5 The relationship between basic and derived quantitative
units using log scale ........................................................................... 238
Fig. 6 Some of the basic taphonomic variables used to characterize
the assemblage ................................................................................... 238
Fig. 7 Expected vs. observed MNE values to probe skeletal
part abundance using log scale .......................................................... 239
Fig. 8 %Survivorship of skeletal parts in the bone bed assemblage ............ 241
Fig. 9 Ratios of upper to lower and proximal to distal limb
elements on a log scale ...................................................................... 241
Fig. 10 Completeness of skeletal elements and body parts
based on MNE ................................................................................... 244
Fig. 11 Long bone shaft fragment size frequencies ....................................... 246
Fig. 1 Faunal cranial elements mistaken for human,
(a) endocranial surfaces, (b) ectocranial surfaces ............................. 257
Fig. 2 Nondescript cranial elements from a single excavation unit
differing in taphonomic features that suggest differing histories ...... 259
List of Figures
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xv
List of Tables
Table 1 Terminology used throughout the volume ........................................ 8
Table 1 Depositional categories at Çatalhöyük .............................................. 19
Table 1 Sex ratios by element ........................................................................ 44
Table 1 MNI estimates for various cranial elements ...................................... 58
Table 2 Correlation statistics and probabilities of skeletal
and dental attributes with distance from central platform ................. 59
Table 1 Number of adult Crow Creek segments by element
and binomial distribution by side ...................................................... 96
Table 2 Number of subadult Crow Creek segments by element
and binomial distribution by side ...................................................... 97
Table 3 Number of adult and subadult Crow Creek segments
by element-portion present and Fischer’s exact test results .............. 97
Table 4 Proxy BMD readings for Crow Creek adult and subadult
long bone segments ........................................................................... 98
Table 1 Comparison of Frontal Bones ........................................................... 108
Table 2 Comparison of Zygomatics ............................................................... 108
Table 3 Comparison of Maxillae .................................................................... 109
Table 4 Comparison of Mandibles ................................................................. 109
Table 5 Comparison of Parietals .................................................................... 110
Table 6 Comparison of Occipitals .................................................................. 111
Table 7 Comparison of Temporals ................................................................. 111
Table 8 Comparison of Clavicles ................................................................... 113
Table 9 Comparison of Scapulae ................................................................... 113
Table 10 Ratios of MNI between Mancos and Sacred Ridge
for the Upper Limb............................................................................ 114
Table 11 Comparison of Humerii..................................................................... 115
Table 12 Comparison of Radii ......................................................................... 116
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
xvi
Table 13 Comparison of Ulnae....................................................................... 117
Table 14 Comparison of Vertebral Elements.................................................. 118
Table 15 Comparison of the Pelvic Girdle ..................................................... 119
Table 16 Comparison of Femora .................................................................... 121
Table 17 Comparison of Patellae ................................................................... 122
Table 18 Comparison of Tibiae ...................................................................... 122
Table 19 Comparison of Fibulae .................................................................... 122
Table 20 Comparison of Hand Elements........................................................ 123
Table 21 Comparison of Foot Elements ......................................................... 124
Table 1 A comparison of dates, location, MNI, element frequency
and alteration types for the sites LA 37592, LA 37593
and LA 65030 .................................................................................. 144
Table 1 Radiocarbon dates from Op. 1000, Zacpetén .................................. 158
Table 2 Quantifi cation and cutmarks of long bones in Op. 1000 ................. 159
Table 1 All known burials and cremations from Aztalan ............................. 180
Table 2 All known isolated, fragmented and commingled remains
from Aztalan .................................................................................... 181
Table 1 Prevalence of osteoarthritis in the left and right knee joints
according to femoral, tibial, and fi bular elements ........................... 208
Table 1 Potential limitations of the basic quantitative
units used ......................................................................................... 223
Table 2 Variables used in the analysis of taxonomic representation ............ 224
Table 3 Variables used in the analysis of assemblage composition
and formation .................................................................................. 225
Table 4 Skeletal elements in anatomical order and their idealized
%Survivorship values in “one” complete skeleton (MNI = 1) ......... 227
Table 5 Skeletal parts and their density values in ascending order
from least dense to densest .............................................................. 231
Table 6 Relative abundance of taxa .............................................................. 236
Table 7 Expected vs. observed MNE, MAU, %MAU,
and %Survivorship values ............................................................... 240
Table 8 MNE values for long bone shafts and epiphyses............................. 243
Table 9 Body part frequencies ...................................................................... 243
Table 10 Frequency of butchered specimens ................................................. 245
List of Tables
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
1
A.J. Osterholtz et al. (eds.), Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains: Working
Toward Improved Theory, Method, and Data, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-7560-6_1,
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
Introduction
This volume provides new analytical procedures and theoretical models that can be
applied to human remains that are neither complete nor undisturbed. The focus on
commingled, disarticulated, disturbed, and/or collective burials is important because
often these kinds of assemblages languish in museums and repositories due to chal-
lenges in analysis. Starting out as an organized podium session at the Society for
American Archaeology annual meeting in 2012, these studies provide valuable
theory, methods, and data to the interpretation of commingled and disarticulated
human remains.
The primary goal of each study in this volume is to address innovation and appli-
cability in the treatment of commingled and fragmentary assemblages. The indi-
vidual contributions present a wide variety of methodologies and theoretical
viewpoints for the analysis and interpretation of commingled assemblages. These
case studies provide a template adaptable enough to meet the variable needs of any
commingled analysis, whether it is the commingling of three individuals or three
hundred. There is no right way to analyze a commingled assemblage. This set of
studies provides what can be considered best practices for the analysis of commin-
gled and disarticulated human remains.
Introduction
Anna J. Osterholtz , Kathryn M. Baustian , and Debra L. Martin
A. J. Osterholtz (*) • K. M. Baustian • D. L. Martin
Department of Anthropology , University of Nevada, Las Vegas ,
4505 S. Maryland Parkway, Mailstop 455003 , Las Vegas , NV 89154 , USA
e-mail: annao@unlv.nevada.edu; baustian@unlv.nevada.edu; debra.martin@unlv.edu
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
2
Types of Commingled, Disarticulated, or Fragmentary
Assemblages
There are three main types of commingled assemblages that are covered in this
volume (Fig. 1 ). Though many different actions can lead to commingling and frag-
mentation, similar methodologies can be used in their analyses.
Long-Term Usage Commingled Assemblages
The fi rst type of commingled assemblage results from long-term usage. These
assemblages are the result of primary and/or secondary interments from community
groups. Long-term usage of a tomb will inadvertently lead to greater commingling
and fragmentation due to movement of the extant elements with the placement of
new remains (whether they be secondary or primary in nature). Demography within
the assemblage will refl ect mortuary programs within the society. Or, if all individu-
als from a community are buried together, the demography will refl ect this. If, for
example, it is culturally sanctioned for children to be interred separately from adults,
Fig. 1 Types of commingled and fragmentary assemblages
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
3
the ossuary containing adult remains would not be expected to contain juvenile
remains. Within ossuaries exhibiting long-term usage, a further distinction can be
drawn between primary and secondary assemblages. These will be the result of dif-
ferent depositional histories and present different elemental distributions of remains.
Primary long-term usage commingled assemblages are those where the deposi-
tion of new burials occurs on top of prior interments. Burials decompose naturally
and the smaller elements (such as hand and foot phalanges) will fi lter down to the
bottom of the tomb. All other things being equal (e.g., rodent predation is low and
elements are not removed for secondary purposes), the representation of the smaller
bones will be consistent with those for the larger elements. Secondary long-term
usage assemblages are those where the assemblage represents the end of a multistage
process. Bodies are processed in one location (such as a charnel house), and then
remains are gathered together for disposal within the secondary structure. Typically,
the collection of smaller elements such as hand and foot phalanges is less thorough
and will lead to an underrepresentation of these elements in proportion to larger
bones. Often, there is a mixture of primary and secondary deposits in community
tombs. For example, the Tell Abraq assemblage (Osterholtz et al. 2013 ) consists of a
mixture of both primary and secondary interments, as suggested by the degree of
representation of the smaller bones of the hands and feet. While there is an under-
representation of these elements, they are present in signifi cant numbers to suggest
at least some primary depositions (Osterholtz, Baustian, & Martin, 2012 ).
Episodic-Usage Commingled Assemblages
Another major category of commingled assemblages results from episodes of mass
burial. These include burials that result from plague or warfare, and they are indica-
tive of the death of multiple individuals at a single time. Hence they are episodic in
nature, versus more chronic or long term as discussed in the prior section.
Characteristics of these assemblages may include minimal commingling, less han-
dling of the body at the time of death (i.e., little to no processing), and little frag-
mentation. Element representation is expected to be consistent with the demography
of the burial population. Demography itself will refl ect the processes leading to the
creation of the deposit. Primarily, there are fi ve main categories of human or cultural
activities that create an episodic assemblage.
Assemblages relating to plague or epidemic disease will present the demographic
signature of the disease that created them. Normally, epidemic disease will dispro-
portionately affect the very old and very young within society. These are the indi-
viduals expected to be overly represented in plague pits. Because disease on such a
grand scale often leads to fears of contamination (particularly prior to an under-
standing of disease processes), interference with the body after death is expected to
be kept to a minimum. In their analysis of burials associated with a typhoid outbreak
in South Africa, L’Abbe, Henderson, and Loots (
2003 ) note that for 36 burials, the
overall impression is of “rudimentary burial methods” ( 2003 , p. 315). Also of
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
4
interest with this burial assemblage is that an existing structure (in this case an
active mine shaft) was co-opted as a place of burial. Burials following natural disas-
ters also follow this pattern (e.g., Perera, 2005 ) but will exhibit a demographic pro-
fi le consistent with all individuals exposed to the disaster.
The burial of warriors or soldiers is known from battles worldwide and across
time periods and often presents to the archaeologist as a commingled assemblage.
Examples of this type of burial can be seen in battlefi elds such as the Battle of the
Little Bighorn (Phillips, 1987 ) and the Battle of Towton (Fiorato, Boylston, &
Knüsel, 2007 ). Assemblages resulting from raiding are expected to contain an
overabundance of older males and older females if young females are taken as
spoils or captives. The taking of women and children and killing the men is a strong
pattern in raiding activities and is well established in the ethnographic literature
(e.g., Cameron, 2011 ; Maschner & Reedy-Maschner, 1998 ). Among the Inupiaq,
Burch ( 2005 ) noted that raids tended to occur when young males were not in the
community, and so demographic profi les resulting from raiding activity would be
expected to show low frequencies of young males if, and only if, the absence of
males in the community was a precursor to raiding activity. If males were present
at the time of the raid, they can be expected to be overrepresented as the focus of
raiding would have been the capture of young females (who would be underrepre-
sented). In either case, older females would be expected to be overrepresented in
relation to younger females, the goal of raiding activities. Little commingling or
fragmentation is expected, unless bodies left exposed after raiding were not recov-
ered or buried until after signifi cant time had lapsed. Partial exposure and animal
predation may be responsible for differential preservation and element representa-
tion of some sets of remains within these mass graves (Willey, 1990 ). The Crow
Creek site provides an excellent example of this type of commingled assemblage
(Kendell & Willey, 2013 ).
Assemblages resulting from genocide present a demographic profi le consistent
with the living population that is targeted which may be all the males and boys (as
was seen in the Serbian-Croation confl ict of the 1990s), or it may be men, women,
and children (as was the case with the Rwandan-Tutsi genocide of 1994). The term
“genocide” is generally attributed to lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944 with respect
to the 1915 mass killing of Armenians. The United Nations General Assembly codi-
fi ed genocide as a legal concept in 1948 providing the defi nition as intentional
destruction of a specifi c group based on national, ethnic, racial, or religious affi lia-
tion (Schabas, 2008 ). Integral to the defi nition is the intent to completely destroy a
group, and from an archaeological perspective, the demography will refl ect if part
or all of the group was targeted. Kimmerle and Baraybar ( 2008 ) provide numerous
examples of mass graves fi tting this description. Komar ( 2008 ) states that there are
no identifi ed examples of genocide in the archaeological record, likely due to the
importance of intent for the identifi cation of a genocidal assemblage. These assem-
blages are expected to have traumatic injury on the majority of remains and may be
directly related the cause of death (e.g., Hougen, 2008 ). Assemblages of this type
are thoroughly explored by Adams and Byrd (
2008 ) and are not covered in this
volume.
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
5
The episodic assemblages of Sacred Ridge (Osterholtz, 2013 ; Osterholtz &
Stodder, 2010 ; Stodder & Osterholtz, 2010 ; Stodder, Osterholtz, Mowrer, & Chuipka,
2010 ), La Plata (Martin, Akins, & Toll, 2013 ), and Op. 1000 (Duncan & Schwarz,
2013 ) present interesting analytical challenges as the degree and patterning of pro-
cessing as well as taphonomy must be taken into account in the overall interpretation.
Processed human remains with cut marks and signs of defl eshing and dismembering
among other things are also present in episodic assemblages. In the case of Sacred
Ridge, the assemblage appears to be the result of a massacre of a clan or extended
family with extensive processing, possible trophy taking, and interment shortly after
death. This site is one of several in the Southwest exhibiting “extreme processing”
(Kuckelman, Lightfoot, & Martin, 2000 ). These assemblages, interpreted by Turner
and Turner ( 1999 ) as cannibalistic, exhibit episodic deposition and commingling,
burning, fracturing, possible scalping, and mutilations. Interpretations abound
regarding these assemblages, including cannibalism (e.g., Turner & Turner, 1999 ;
White, 1992 ), terrorism (Turner & Morris, 1970 ; Turner & Turner, 1999 ), witchcraft
executions (Darling, 1999 ), and politically motivated massacres with social over-
tones (e.g., Osterholtz, 2010 ; Stodder, Osterholtz, & Mowrer, 2010 ).
Martin et al. ( 2013 ), on the other hand, describe an assemblage (La Plata) where
intentional manipulation of the remains is present, but the degree of processing is
less intensive and represents a different intention, likely related to secondary mortu-
ary processing. Alternatively, the Op. 1000 site is interpreted as representing the
desecration of land by immigrants. In this way, Duncan and Schwarz ( 2013 ) argue for
land tenure and co-optation of space by manipulation of the bodies. This could be
seen as a form of extreme processing, as the bodies are used as symbols to convey a
message to the living witnesses. In essence, this designation of processed human
bone describes the appearance of the assemblage when discovered, not the activities
that create it. Careful analysis of these assemblages is necessary to infer activities
and motivations surrounding the creation of the deposit.
Lab Commingling
Lab commingling is an artifi cial process that can occur at any stage of analysis or
curation. Zejdlik ( 2013 ) details the use of excavation photos to sort out issues of lab
commingling for the ultimate analysis of the remains. The presence of lab commin-
gling can complicate analysis for numerous reasons. Primary among them is the loss
of information and context. When commingling occurs in the course of the creation of
a deposit archaeologically (such as at Tell Abraq), there is a signifi cant amount of
information that can be inferred based on the presence of that commingling. We can
analyze these remains within a heuristic framework informed though ethnographic
analogy (see Baustian, Osterholtz, & Cook, 2013 ) with groups where similar practices
still exist. When lab commingling occurs, however, no such allusions can be drawn.
Zejdlik’s use of photos was a simple but effective way to combat lab commingling and
return the burials to a state where they could be productively analyzed.
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
6
Volume Focus and Organization
This volume began with a symposium organized at the 77th Annual Meetings of the
Society for American Archaeology entitled “Commingled and Disarticulated
Human Remains: Working Toward Improved Theory, Method, and Data.”
Participants were asked to provide case studies relating their experiences with com-
mingled and/or fragmentary assemblages with an eye toward theory and innovation.
Additional chapters were added to provide geographical, methodological, and tem-
poral coverage.
Innovation
Methodological innovations such as the use of photos to assist in conjoining exer-
cises (Zejdlik, 2013 ), the adaptation of a feature-based approach for the determi-
nation of MNI (Osterholtz, Baustian, Martin, & Potts, 2013 ), and the application
of taphonomic techniques from zooarchaeology (Atici, 2013 ) are but a few of the
innovative methodologies detailed in this volume. Statistical techniques (Duncan
and Schwarz 2013 ) can help to bring to the surface hidden relationships. How
these innovations are used to answer social questions is explored by Baustian and
colleagues ( 2013 ).
Applicability
A second goal of the organized session and this volume is to provide archaeologists
and bioarchaeologists with a multitude of techniques for the analysis of commin-
gled and fragmentary remains. By showcasing different time frames and geographic
regions (as the authors of these chapter have done), it is clear that no matter what
period or location in which an archaeologist is working, the analytical challenges
of commingled remains are often present and instead of leaving these unanalyzed,
this volume shows that they can be identifi ed, quantifi ed, and part of a research
strategy.
As with most archaeological puzzles, there are multiple solutions to the analyti-
cal challenges of commingled assemblages. There is no right way of attacking the
analysis of fragmented and commingled remains. There are multiple ways of ana-
lyzing and presenting these data. It falls to the analyst to determine what is appro-
priate for the research goals of the project. Different methodologies will be
appropriate for different situations. This volume provides numerous case studies
that highlight the tremendous data potential along with the limitations of a com-
mingled assemblage.
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
7
Terminology
The study of commingled remains is fraught with acronyms and jargon. For students
of bioarchaeology and archaeology, Table 1 provides an overview of some of the
more often used terms in the volume. Working defi nitions are provided here.
Individual Chapters
Long-Term-Usage Assemblages
Boz and Hager (chapter “Making Sense of Social Behavior from Disturbed and
Commingled Skeletons: A Case Study from Çatalhöyük, Turkey”) examine the
relationship between the living and the dead at Çatalhöyük, Turkey, through an
analysis of the location of the burials within intramural spaces. They compare two
distinct methods for the determination of MNI, highlighting the benefi ts of each
method. Through careful examination of the locations of the burials as well as their
designation as primary versus secondary , the authors present a complex picture
highlighting the importance of the manipulation of the dead through the replace-
ment of elements by contemporary inhabitants.
Likewise, Osterholtz, Baustian, Martin, & Potts (2013) provide a methodology
for the determination of MNI based on feature count for the Tell Abraq assemblage.
In assemblages with high degrees of fragmentation, the use of anatomical features
to determine MNI will allow for an identifi cation of the differential representation
of elements. In this way, mortuary behavior can be discussed with respect to over-
and underrepresentation of various elements. In this assemblage, for example, male
crania are underrepresented, suggesting that these were retained and disposed of in
an alternate mortuary context or taken as trophies. Without the intensive methodol-
ogy described by the authors, though, this relationship would be unclear and not
quantifi able.
Herrmann, Devlin, and Stanton ( 2013 ) examine the mortuary patterns at the
Walker-Noe site in southern Kentucky Bluegrass in their analysis of a fragmentary
and cremated assemblage. This chapter provides an excellent example of the use of
high-tech methodology in the analysis of commingled assemblages in that they
examined the representation of individual landmarks, standardized color mapping
(using a spectrophotometer) , and spatial patterning. They were able to show that
color (degree of burning) and cranial representation varied with respect to the dis-
tance from the central platform at which a fragment was recovered, suggesting that
distribution of elements after cremation was not random, but instead shows the
complexity of Adena mortuary activity.
Finally, Glencross (2013) examines commingled assemblages from southern
Ontario that date from the Woodland period. She argues that commingled remains
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
8
Table 1 Terminology used throughout the volume
Term Defi nition
Ancestor
veneration
The act of using human remains in religious or cultic worship. Elements or
fragments to be used as venerated remains (or relics) are taken from
either primary or secondary contexts (see below), modifi ed (or used
without any modifi cation), and disposed of in an alternate fashion from
the rest of the burial.
Bone mineral
density
(BMD)
Degree of mineralization present within an element (or individual). BMD is
dependent upon age, sex, diet, health, and other social and genetic
factors. BMD plays a large role in survivorship (see below), fragmenta-
tion (see below), and the composition of any assemblage.
Bonebed “A single sedimentary stratum with a bone concentration that is unusually
dense (often but not necessarily exceeding 5 % bone by volume),
relative to adjacent lateral and vertical deposits.” (Behrensmeyer,
2007 ,
p. 66). This defi nition is not based on species identifi cation, and can be
applied to both human and nonhuman assemblages.
Commingled
remains
Human (or faunal, or a mixture of both) remains that have become
indistinguishable as individuals due to mixing of elements, either
intentionally or unintentionally. Fragmentation (see below) is not
necessary for commingled assemblages, but typically accompanies this
type of mixing.
Compound
mortuary
program
Mortuary program consisting of multiple stages, with a reduction process
and a secondary or fi nal disposal (Sprague,
2005 , p. 63). Essentially,
with a compound (or, secondary disposal), it is expected that the body
will be less complete at the fi nal stage of disposal than it was at the
beginning of the process.
Cremated
remains
Bones where a primary portion of the mortuary program involved the
systematic burning of the body. Degrees of burning vary, from charring
to calcination. Key to the identifi cation of remains as “cremated” is that
the burning is an end in itself. A goal of the mortuary activity is to
produce burned remains (as opposed to part of a mortuary process
preparatory to breaking the bones for another purpose, see EP assem-
blages below).
Extreme
processing
events (EP)
Term typically used to describe processed assemblages from the American
Southwest dating to the Pueblo II and Pueblo III ( ad 900–1300) periods
(Kuckelman et al.,
2000 ). These assemblages, like PHR (see below),
contain intentionally modifi ed human bone. EP assemblages, though,
have a suite of characteristics: good preservation, highly fragmented,
burning, perimortem fracturing, tool marks, and (possibly) pot polish.
These assemblages have typically been identifi ed by Turner and Turner
(
1999 ) as resulting from cannibalistic activity. Others have posited witch
disposal (Darling,
1999 ; Walker, 1998 ) and ritual massacre ( Stodder
et al., 2010 ).
Fragmentary
remains/
fragmentation
Remains that are no longer complete. Fragmentation is by defi nition
breaking a bone into more than one part. In some cases, such as EP
assemblages (see above), fragmentation is severe, resulting in diffi cul-
ties in identifi cation of elements as well as the development of baseline
data (MNI, MNE, etc.—see below). Fragmentation may be the result of
natural taphonomic processes (such as natural fi ltration or trampling) or
intentional processes (such as EP events or as part of ancestor
veneration).
(continued)
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
9
Term Defi nition
MNE “Minimum Number of Elements.” This measure is the number of total
elements represented, regardless of side. This is the “minimum number
of skeletal units required to account for all of the fragments in an
assemblage that are identifi able as each skeletal category or skeletal
portion” (Atici,
2013 ). This may be determined in multiple ways, but
involves the identifi cation of specifi c elements or element features.
MNI “Minimum Number of Individuals.” This measure may be determined
through a variety of methods, but all involve replication. A single
individual can only have one left femur, and so if 14 left femora (or
features found on the left femora, if using a feature-based approach)
are present, a minimum of 14 individuals are present in an assemblage.
NISP “Number of Identifi ed Specimens.” This is a measure of the number of
fragments that can be identifi ed to at least general taxonomic or size
categories (e.g. “large mammal”). Typically, NISP is used in
conjunction with MNI or MNE to describe the amount of
fragmentation (see above). Generally with increased NISP, MNI
decreases (due to increased fragmentation).
Ossuary burial Commingled assemblage that “involves the periodic and collective
secondary burial of individuals previously interred separately
elsewhere” (Glencross,
2013 ). Ossuary burials are the result of a
compound disposal program (see above).
Primary
depositions/
inhumations
Depositions (burials) of individuals in a complete stage. The body is
interred (or otherwise disposed of) and then not disinterred, moved,
or otherwise manipulated.
Processed human
remains (PHR)
A broad term used in this volume to describe intentionally modifi ed human
bone. This may entail defl eshing as part of a mortuary program,
modifying remains for ancestor veneration, or otherwise intentionally
changing their depositional outcome (i.e., where/how they are discarded).
No statement about the cultural meaning of the processing is given; this
designation is merely used as a recognition of the intentionality of the
processing of the remains. EP events (see above) are one form of PHR.
Ripley’s K
function
A statistic used to explore whether an assemblage exhibits special
randomness. This statistic is used by Duncan and Schwarz (
2013 )
to show intentionality in fragmentation on the basis of side and element.
Secondary
depositions
Disposal of remains at the conclusion of a compound mortuary program
(see above). Element representativeness is expected to be different for
assemblages arising from secondary disposals in that smaller bones are
less likely to be present.
Survivorship Potential for preservation of various skeletal elements. This will vary based
on BMD (see above), age at death of the individual, morphology, age of
the deposit, size of the fragment (and general size of the animal), or
intentional modifi cation/destruction.
Taphonomic
fi lters
“Complex interacting factors including human activities, non-human animal
ravaging, and diagenetic processes” that “do not necessarily operate
simultaneously and may affect an assemblage differentially, increasing
the preservation potential of some bones while destroying others.”
(Atici,
2013 ).
Unmingling The act of reassociating individuals from commingled and/or fragmentary
isolated bones, typically through the examination of fi eld photographs
(Zejdlik,
2013 ).
Zooarchaeology The study of nonhuman bony remains in an archaeological context.
Table 1 (continued)
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
10
present an excellent vehicle for the discussion of the population versus the individ-
ual and how these two topics are inextricably linked. The individual in commingled
assemblages cannot be completely removed from the discussion of the population,
but the population cannot be discussed without respect to the individuals contained
within the assemblage.
Episodic Commingled Assemblages
Kendell and Willey ( 2013 ) provide in their analysis of the Crow Creek bone bed a
discussion of the factors that impact skeletal preservation based on bone mineral
density. They show that age at death impacts bone mineral density and that this
should be acknowledged when discussing MNI measures. In a different kind of
commingled assemblage from Post-Classic Maya site Op. 1000, Duncan and
Schwarz ( 2013 ) explore the concept of embodiment through statistical analysis of
the relationships between elements. Using Ripley’s K function, they were able to
show that the distribution of elements within the mass grave is not random and use
this to argue that the grave was intentionally created to co-opt ritual space by new-
comers to the area through manipulation of the bodies of the previous inhabitants.
Both of these chapters use methodological innovation to provide data on the demo-
graphic nature of the assemblages.
Finally, Osterholtz (2013) provides a comparison of the extreme processing evi-
dent at Sacred Ridge with that from Mancos Canyon. The Mancos Canyon study
(White, 1992 ) was one of the fi rst studies of disarticulated human remains that pro-
vided a detailed taphonomic methodology. Building on this, Osterholtz presents a
detailed analysis, on an element-by-element basis, which allowed for a discussion
of processing techniques. By carefully examining fracture patterning, tool mark
presence and distribution, and burning patterns, different patterns in the treatment of
the individuals could be identifi ed between the two sites. These differences in pro-
cessing may be indications of different motivations for the massacres of individuals.
Using a similar methodology, Martin and colleagues ( 2013 ) demonstrate the impor-
tance of careful taphonomic and locational (stratigraphic detail) data to make sure
that disarticulated remains with processing are not always relegated automatically
to cannibalism. Very different natural and cultural processes can result in bones that
have cut marks and that are disarticulated.
Contributions from Other Disciplines, Caveats,
and Future Directions
Zejdlik ( 2013 ) provides a case study of the importance of excavation records and
particularly photographs in her analysis of the Aztalan site assemblage. Commingling
of these remains occurred post-excavation, and photographs and excavation records
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
11
were used to unmingle individuals. Once unmingled, skeletal analysis could be
accomplished using standard techniques. This chapter shows that sometimes the
simplest techniques are the most effective ones.
Fox and Marklein (2013) present four assemblages with varying degrees of com-
mingling from the eastern Mediterranean. The assemblages from Helenistic
Kalavasos- Kopetra site and Roman sites of Paphos, Cyprus, and Corinth, Greece,
present commingling as part of a secondary burial practice. The late Byzantine site
of Thebes in Greece, on the other hand, has burials that were comingled during
excavation. Using both of these types of assemblages, Fox and Marklein propose a
methodology for the purpose of maximizing data potential from commingled
assemblages focused on comparison of elements between spatial locations. This
methodology facilitates analysis regardless of when the commingling occurred (in
antiquity or during excavation).
In an important study, Atici ( 2013 ) provides examples of how zooarchaeologi-
cal theory, particularly in the determination of MNI and MNE, can be used in the
analysis of any commingled assemblage, whether it consists of human or nonhu-
man bone. Zooarchaeology has developed a wide range of techniques for the
analysis of such assemblages, and understanding the theoretical underpinnings of
these methods is important for the most robust interpretation possible of com-
mingled assemblages. This chapter makes clear the great partnership that zooar-
chaeologists and bioarchaeologists can have.
Cook (2013) highlights the need for cross-disciplinary training through her
reanalysis of the Franchthi Cave cranial fragments. Angel originally examined these
remains and determined them to be pathological human remains, but during reanal-
ysis, Cook properly identifi ed them as normal caprid cranial vault fragments. This
case study shows the importance of breadth and depth in an analyst’s experience as
well as the importance of cross-species identifi cation.
Opening and concluding chapters serve in this collection of studies as “book
ends” to provide an overview of the major themes that run throughout. The concluding
chapter suggests where the gaps still reside within the study of commingled remains.
Theoretical approaches are highlighted in the fi nal chapter as a means towards
showing how important they are for interpreting meaning and explaining human
behavior. Future directions are suggested so that this volume, although one of the
fi rst of its kind, will not remain so.
References
Adams, B. J., & Byrd, J. E. (Eds.). (2008). Recovery, analysis, and identifi cation of commingled
remains . Totowa, NJ: Humana Press.
Atici, L. (2013). Commingled bone assemblages: Insights from zooarchaeology and taphonomy of
a Bonebed at Karain B Cave, SW Turkey. In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin
(Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated human remains: Working toward improved theory,
method, and data . New York: Springer.
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
12
Baustian, K. M., Osterholtz, A. J., & Cook, D. C. (2013). Taking analyses of commingled remains
into the future: Challenges and prospects. In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin
(Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated human remains: Working toward improved theory,
method, and data . New York: Springer.
Behrensmeyer, A. K. (2007). Bonebeds through time. In R. R. Rogers, D. A. Eberth, & A. R.
Fiorilla (Eds.), Bonebeds: Genesis, analysis, and paleobiological signifi cance (pp. 65–101).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Burch, E. S., Jr. (2005). Alliance and confl ict: The world system of the Inupiaq Eskimos . Omaha:
University of Nebraska Press.
Cameron, C. M. (2011). Captives and culture change. Current Anthropology, 52 (2), 169–209.
Darling, J. A. (1999). Mass inhumation and the execution of witches in the American Southwest.
American Anthropologist, 100 (3), 732–752.
Duncan, W. N., & Schwarz, K. R. (2013). Partible, permeable, and relational bodies in a Maya
Mass Grave. In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and dis-
articulated human remains: Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York:
Springer.
Fiorato, V., Boylston, A., & Knüsel, C. (Eds.). (2007). Blood red roses: The archaeology of a mass
grave from the Battle of Towton AD 1461 . Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Glencross, B. (2013). Into the kettle: The analysis of commingled remains from Southern Ontario.
In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated
human remains: Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York: Springer.
Herrmann N. P., Devlin, J. L., & Stanton, J. C. (2013). Bioarchaeological spatial analysis of the
Walker-Noe Crematory (15GD56). In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.),
Commingled and disarticulated human remains: Working towards improved theory, method,
and data . New York: Springer.
Hougen, H. P. (2008). Cast Study 5.1: Torture sequels to the skeleton. In E. H. Kimmerle & J. P.
Baraybar (Eds.), Skeletal trauma: Identifi cation of injuries resulting from human rights abuse
and armed confl ict (pp. 234–235). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Kendell, A., & Willey, P. (2013). Crow creek bone bed commingling: The relationship between
bone mineral density and minimum number of individuals and its effect on paleodemographic
analyses. In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and disar-
ticulated human remains: Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York:
Springer.
Kimmerle, E. H., & Baraybar, J. P. (Eds.). (2008). Skeletal trauma: Identifi cation of injuries result-
ing from human rights abuse and armed confl ict . Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Komar, D. (2008). Patterns of mortuary practice associated with genocide: Implications for
archaeolgoical research. Current Anthropology, 49 (1), 123–133.
Kuckelman, K. A., Lightfoot, R. R., & Martin, D. L. (2000). Changing patterns of violence in the
Norther San Juan Region. Kiva, 66 (1), 147–165.
L’Abbe, E. N., Henderson, Z. L., & Loots, M. (2003). Uncovering a nineteenth-century typhoid
epidemic at the Koffi efontein Mine, South Africa. World Archaeology, 35 (2), 306–318.
Martin, D. L., Akins, N., & Toll, W. H. (2013). Disarticulated and disturbed, processed and eaten?
Cautionary notes from the La Plata Assemblage (AD 1000–1150). In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M.
Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated human remains: Working
toward improved theory, method, and data . New York: Springer.
Maschner, H. D. G., & Reedy-Maschner, K. L. (1998). Raid, retreat, defend (Repeat): The
archaeology and ethnohistory of warfare on the North Pacifi c Rim. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology, 17 , 19–51.
Osterholtz, A. J. (2010). Hobbling and torment at Sacred Ridge: Perimortem damage to the feet as
a mechanism of social and physical control. Paleopathology Association Meetings .
Albuquerque, NM.
Osterholtz, A. J. (2013). Extreme processing at Mancos and Sacred Ridge: The value of compara-
tive studies. In A. J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and dis-
A.J. Osterholtz et al.
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
13
articulated human remains: Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York:
Springer.
Osterholtz, A. J., Baustian, K. M., & Martin, D. (2012). Determining the minimum number of
individuals (MNI) for Tell Abraq, UAE . Paper presented at the 77th Annual meeting of the
Society for American Archaeology, Memphis, TN.
Osterholtz, A. J., Baustian, K. M., Martin, D. L., & Potts, D. T. (2013). Commingled human skel-
etal assemblages: Integrative techniques in determination of the MNI/MNE. In A. J. Osterholtz,
K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated human remains:
Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York: Springer.
Osterholtz, A. J., & Stodder, A. L. W. (2010). Conjoining a neighborhood: Data structure and
methodology for taphonomic analysis of the very large assemblage from Sacred Ridge.
American Association of Physical Anthropologists Meetings . Albuquerque, NM
Perera, C. (2005). After the Tsunami: Legal implications of mass burials of unidentifi ed victims in
Sri Lanka. PLoS Medicine, 2 (6), 0494–0496. doi:
10.1371/journal.pmed.0020185
Phillips, P. (1987). Cannibalism, combat, and post battle mutilation: Observed similarities between
Cannibalism criteria and human remains from custer battlefi eld (M.A. thesis). University of
Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.
Schabas, W. (2008). Convention for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide .
United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law.
http://www.un.org/law/avl
Sprague, R. (2005). Burial terminology: A guide for researchers . Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
Stodder, A. L. W., & Osterholtz, A. J. (2010). Analysis of the processed human remains from the
Sacred Ridge site: Methods and data collection protocol. In E. M. Perry, A. L. W. Stodder, &
C. A. Bollong (Eds.), Animas-La Plata project: XV-Bioarchaeology (pp. 243–278). Pheonix:
SWCA Environmental Consultants.
Stodder, A. L. W., Osterholtz, A. J., & Mowrer, K. (2010). The bioarchaeology of genocide: The
mass grave at Sacred Ridge, Site 5LP0245. Paper presented at the American Association of
Physical Anthropologists Meetings, Albuquerque, NM.
Stodder, A. L. W., Osterholtz, A. J., Mowrer, K., & Chuipka, J. P. (2010b). Processed human
remains from the Sacred Ridge Site: Context, taphonomy, interpretation. In E. M. Perry, A. L.
W. Stodder, & C. A. Bollong (Eds.), Animas-La Plata project: XV-Bioarchaeology (pp.
279–415). Phoenix: SWCA Environmental Consultants.
Turner, C. G., II, & Morris, N. (1970). A Massacre at Hopi. American Antiquity, 35 (3), 320–331.
Turner, C. G., II, & Turner, J. A. (1999). Man corn: Cannibalism and violence in the prehistoric
American Southwest . Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Walker, W. H. (1998). Where are the witches of prehistory? Journal of Archaeological Method and
Theory, 5 (3), 245–308.
White, T. D. (1992). Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346 . Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Willey, P. (1990). Prehistoric warfare on the Great Plains: Skeletal analysis of the crow creek
Massacre victims . New York: Garland.
Zejdlik, K. J. (2013). Unmingling commingled museum collections: A photographic method. In A.
J. Osterholtz, K. M. Baustian, & D. L. Martin (Eds.), Commingled and disarticulated human
remains: Working toward improved theory, method, and data . New York: Springer.
Introduction
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
Part I
Long Term Usage Assemblages
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
17
A.J. Osterholtz et al. (eds.), Commingled and Disarticulated Human Remains: Working
Toward Improved Theory, Method, and Data, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-7560-6_2,
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
The Neolithic site of Çatalhöyük in Anatolia, Turkey, is well known for its size
(~13 ha), long occupation (~1,400 years), mud-brick architecture with plastered
house walls and fl oors, decorated buildings (painted walls, elaborate installations),
fi gurines, and intramural burial practices. Dated from 6000 to 7400 b.c.e .,
Çatalhöyük was once a thriving Neolithic village of 3,500–8,000 people who lived
in houses built atop older ones, creating a human-made mound physically linking
one house to another through time (Cessford, 2005 ; Hodder, 2007 ). The dead were
kept close to the living at Çatalhöyük by burying them within the houses. The occu-
pants of the houses continued their daily activities above the fl oors while the dead
occupied the space under the fl oors. The two worlds of life and death coexisted in
Çatalhöyük houses, and through their burial customs and social rituals, the living
continued to interact with the dead post-interment.
The burial customs of the Çatalhöyük people have been the focus of attention
since the late James Mellaart ( 1967 ) famously, but erroneously, suggested that skel-
etal excarnation occurred prior to the interment of the secondary skeletons under the
house fl oors of Çatalhöyük. In fact, the excavations at Çatalhöyük since 1995 dem-
onstrate that the majority of the human remains found in the houses were primary
interments, albeit often disturbed, and fewer were secondary depositions. Less com-
monly, individuals were interred in foundation deposits, middens, and the external
areas near the buildings. Many loose and disarticulated bones have been found in
both grave and non-grave contexts throughout the site.
Making Sense of Social Behavior
from Disturbed and Commingled Skeletons:
A Case Study from Çatalhöyük, Turkey
B a şak Boz and Lori D. Hager
B. Boz (*)
Department of Archaeology , Trakya University , Edirne , Turkey
e-mail: basak.boz@gmail.com
L. D. Hager
Pacifi c Legacy, Inc. , 900 Modoc St. , Berkeley , CA , USA
Archaeological Research Facility , University of California , Berkeley , CA , USA
e-mail: ldhager@gmail.com
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
18
Intramural burial customs were commonly practiced at other contemporary
Neolithic sites around the region, such as Çayönü, Bademağacı, Aşıklı Höyük,
Körtiktepe, and Nevali Çori (Duru, 2005 ; Esin & Harmankaya, 2007 ; Hauptmann,
1999 , 2007 ; Özdoğan, 2007a ; Özkaya et al., 2008 ; Özkaya & San, 2007 ),with a few
exceptions including PPNA Hallan Çemi (Rosenberg, 2007 ). However, at Çayönü and
Abu Hureyra (Moore & Molleson, 2000 ; Özbek, 1986 ; Özdoğan, 2007b ; Özdoğan &
Özdoğan, 1998 ; Talalay, 2004 ), nonresidential buildings were used to bury people. At
other sites such as Ilıpınar and Menteşe, the graves were in a large, nonresidential
space that lacked the regularity and organization of a cemetery (Roodenberg &
Roodenberg, 2007a , 2007b ; Roodenberg-Alpaslan, 2008 ). The burial preferences at
many Anatolian sites have resulted in a great deal of commingled bones, making the
issue of mixed assemblages a general problem for this region during this time period.
Çatalhöyük contains an abundance of commingled remains in large measure
because of their intramural burial customs. For instance, the Çatalhöyük people reused
the same space in the houses for interment on a continual basis, often encountering
previously interred skeletons as they dug the graves. In addition, as part of their burial
customs, they routinely engaged in dismemberment and bone retrieval, actively col-
lecting bones and body parts, and later intentionally depositing some of these partial
skeletons or elements as secondary interments. Some burials were disturbed at a max-
imum level while others were left alone or only mildly displaced. By deciphering the
fl ow of bones in and out of the grave during the life of the house, the interactions of
the Çatalhöyük people with their dead before and after interment can be traced. One
goal of this chapter is to untangle the commingled human remains in order to under-
stand the social responses of the Çatalhöyük community to death and to the dead in
various states of decomposition which they routinely confronted post-interment.
Neolithic activities are one source of disturbance to the burials at Çatalhöyük,
but other factors contribute to the large amount of scattered and mixed bones on the
site. The upper layers of the east mound at Çatalhöyük have been altered by consid-
erable erosion, particularly on its slopes, and by the use of the mound as a cemetery
by post-Neolithic people, including Roman, Byzantine, and early Selçuks (Cottica,
Hager, & Boz, 2012 ). Burrowing animals have had a negative impact on the mound,
especially at its core.
Tracing the Movement of Bones
The intramural interment of the deceased at Çatalhöyük did not end the interaction
of the living with their dead. Many locations in the house were used for interment,
but some areas were more heavily used than others. The platforms and central fl oors
in many buildings, for instance, were opened and closed several times for multiple
burial events over the life of the house. When other dead people were encountered
in the same grave area, those digging the grave had to make choices. Once con-
fronted with a body, did they avoid a skeleton or did they disturb it? Did they leave
some or all of the bones in the grave pit or did they take them outside the grave? Did
they put more bones in the open grave, adding secondary skeletal elements, or did
they close the grave immediately after the last interment?
B. Boz and L.D. Hager
annao@unlv.nevada.edu
19
The complicated movement of human bones post-interment by the people at
Çatalhöyük dictated the use of customized depositional categories for the skeletal
remains.
1 Starting with the three depositional categories used by Andrews, Molleson,
and Boz ( 2005 ) for Çatalhöyük burials (primary, primary disturbed, and secondary),
three additional categories were recognized: primary disturbed loose, tertiary, and
an unknown category (Table 1 ) (Boz & Hager, in press ). Primary burials are skele-
tons found undisturbed in situ, primary disturbed burials are found partially in situ
and partially disturbed, and secondary interments are skeletons or skeletal elements
that were intentionally redeposited into a grave after having been originally buried
or curated elsewhere. The primary disturbed loose bone category was created to
identify the bones stemming from the in situ disturbance to primary individuals.
The post-excavation analysis clearly demonstrated that many, if not all, of the loose
bones in the grave fi ll could be refi tted to the primary disturbed skeleton(s) lying
partially articulated in the grave. Large and complicated burial pits with a consider-
able number of loose bones proved more diffi cult to refi t due to time and lab space
constraints. The primary disturbed loose bone category was added to specifi cally
address issues related to the minimum number of individuals in each burial pit.
Tertiary bones are unassigned bones found mainly outside of the grave, mostly in
isolated contexts, buried without intention. This category includes loose bones and,
less frequently, articulated parts of bodies. These bones are scattered in non-burial
contexts including midden deposits, building fi ll deposits, and in-construction materi-
als. Some of the loose bones in grave fi lls may have reentered the grave pit as tertiary
bones. An unknown was also included for the small number of bones without contex-
tual data, mainly due to issues of erosion or Post-Neolithic disturbance.
The archaeological context and post-excavation analysis of the human remains
clarify the fl ow of the human bones in and out of the graves during the life of the
typical Çatalhöyük house (Fig.
1 ). When a primary interment was disturbed, the
body/skeleton or its parts were moved and/or taken, but the partial skeleton, still
articulated, often stayed in the grave, becoming a primary disturbed interment. The
skeletal elements disarticulated from the body or skeleton moved in two directions
Table 1 Depositional categories at Çatalhöyük
Primary A complete or nearly complete articulated skeleton found in its original
place of interment
Secondary A partial or complete skeleton moved from its original interment
location, then redeposited in a different location
Tertiary Loose, scattered, disarticulated human bones unrelated to burial contexts
Primary disturbed A complete or partially articulated skeleton found in its primary location
but disturbed from its original position during another interment or
during bone retrieval event(s)
Primary disturbed
loose
Loose, scattered, and disarticulated human bone that is found in contexts
related to interment
Unknown Inadequate contextual data for determination of deposition
1 Recovered from 1999 to 2010.