3.-Human Osteological Methods

7/27/2019 3.-Human Osteological Methods

1/30

ADBOU, University of Southern Denmark

Version

HUMAN OSTEOLOGICAL METHODS


2/30

Human Osteological Methods ADBOU 1/29

19. december 2011

CONTENTS

HEAD OF THE FORM

Location/site number

Grave number

Context

Coordinates

Arm position

Grave type

Height

Age

Sex

THE FORM

Questionable features

PRESERVATION

Quantitative preservation

Qualitative preservation

SEX ESTIMATIONCranium

Pelvis

Postcranial skeleton

AGE ESTIMATION

Limbus acetabula

Proximal tibia

Femur linea aspera

Femur fossa trochanteria

Femur caput fovea

EPIPHYSEAL FUSION

DENTITION

Dental developmental age

Enamel hypoplasia

Dental conditions

CRANIAL MEASUREMENTS

POSTCRANIAL MEASUREMENTS

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

67

7

7

10

11

11

11

12

12

13

15

15

17

18

20

22


3/30


JOINT CHANGES

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH)

TRAUMATIC CHANGES

LOG

OTHER DESCRIPTIONS AND COMMENTS

REFERENCES

23

24

25

27

27

28


4/30


HEAD OF THE FORM

Location/site number

It is crucial that the identification of the skeleton is unambiguous and

correct. It is therefore important that both the location/site number

and grave number are entered carefully and readable in their respec-

tive textboxes on the form. Several excavations/sites have been given

different names over the course of time (for instance Tirup is the same

location as Bygholm). As long as the site designation is unambiguous it

is acceptable to use all synonyms, but it is most practical to use the

same name on all registration forms from the same site. The site num-

ber is the excavating authoritys registration of the actual excavation.

The site number is relevant to use where several excavations, dis-

persed in time, have taken place on the same site.

Grave number

The numbering of the graves and the skeletons in them is often not con-

sistent. Many cemeteries were excavated during the course of several

independent digs and thus have different systems of numbering for each

dig. As a main rule, a skeleton found in a grave must get a number

starting with G followed by a number (1, 2, etc.). Both in the field

and in the anthropological lab, it is not uncommon to find remains from

additional skeletons intermixed with the bones of the primary skeleton

of the grave. If the additional bones can be assigned to the skeleton of a

neighboring grave, they are transferred. If this is not the case, an inde-

pendent registration of the additional bones is made.

Context

The grave numbers of additional skeletons are entered in the textbox

context. These skeletons are given the same G-numbers as the prima-

ry skeleton in the grave they were found in. The only difference is that

the number is followed by a letter. The letters A, B,.. are used for the

skeletal parts that were identified as being different doing excavation

and the letters X, Y, .. are used for the skeletal parts that were recog-

nized as being from another person during examination in the lab. Such

additional skeletons must always get their own skeletal registration form


5/30


so at least one form exists for each recognized individual of a cemetery

excavation.

If it is logical and possible, other numbering systems should be convert-

ed to the Gnumbering system mentioned above. To be able to relate

to the archaeological registrations, the original number is written on the

registration form in brackets on the form.

Coordinates

In order to keep track of the position of finds doing an archaeological

excavation a system of coordinates is put down in the excavation field.

The space termed coordinates in the registration form refers to the

points of the position of the grave in the system of coordinates. The two

coordinates of the position of the cranium are entered on the form. The

information about coordinates is found in the archaeological field form.

Arm position

Arm positionis entered for the right and the left side respectively. The

information about arm position is found in the archaeological field form.

Grave type

Six possible scores are used to describe the grave types. The infor-

mation about grave type is found in the archaeological field form.

/: No information about grave type

1: Grave without coffin

2: Wooden coffin grave - seen as traces of wood in situ, nails in situ or

handles and mountings in situ in the grave.

3: A stone cist made of either natural stones or bricks.

4: A stone grave the grave is framed with either headstones, foot-

stones or both.

5: Other grave types for instance ship burials.

Height

The length of the skeleton is measured in the grave (using definitions

presented in Boldsen, 1984). The measurements are taken on skeletons

found undisturbed in situ in the graves and the length of the skeleton is

measured from the top of the skull to the distal point of the talus. It is

important that all sources (the box, excavation forms, notes from the

field osteologist, previous journals and field reports) are all examinedboth to maximize the sample size and to check for validity. The method


6/30


of measuring the height as described above was not used on all excava-

tions. If another method was used or if there are uncertainties about

which method was used the measurement is given in brackets in the

registration form. The height is given in centimeters. The information

about height measured in the grave is found in the archaeological field

form.

Age

In the textbox age in the head of the registration form the final subjec-

tive estimation of the age at death is given. Together with the space

sex this is the last to be filled out in the form.

Age is entered as an interval in years. Concerning children, it is possible

to estimate the age within a narrow interval using the dentition and

measurements of the long bones. The age is given as a decimal fraction

of a year (for instance a child with an age at death of one and a half to

two is written as 1.5 2). Concerning adults, an appropriate interval of

years is given. The age is put down as the closest whole year and not to

the next birthday (the interval 30 35 years is a span of 6 years from

30.00 35.99 years).

Sex

In the textbox sex in the head of the registration form the final subjec-

tive estimation of the sex of the individual is given. This is a score given

according to a 5-point scale (see table 3) and is a joined assessment of

the sex estimation scores of the cranium, pelvis and postcranial skele-

ton. Together with the textboxage this is the last to be filled out in the

form.

THE FORM

Questionable features

If a given trait cannot be registered a / is entered in the textbox on the

form. This will usually occur if the bone is not preserved at all or if the

bone is insufficiently preserved to make relevant observations. At least

25 % of a bone has to be preserved in order to score a given trait.

PRESERVATION

The preservation of the skeleton is given as a quantitative and a qualita-tive assessment (see table 1 and 2).


7/30


Quantitative preservation

The quantitative preservation describes how much of the skeleton is

preserved. The scores 1, 2 and 3 are used. If less than 1/3 of the bones

of the skeleton are preserved the score 1 is given. If approximately half

of the bones are preserved the score 2 is given. If more than 2/3 of the

bones are preserved the score 3 is given.

Table 1 Quantitative preservationScore Description

1 Maximum 1/3 of the bones is preserved

2 Between 1/3 and 2/3 of the bones are preserved

3 Minimum 2/3 of the bones are preserved

Qualitative preservation

The qualitative preservation describes how well the bones of the skele-

ton are preserved. The erosion of the bone surface and the degree of

fragmentation are considered. If the skeleton is poor preserved and

more than 2/3 of the bones of the skeletons have a pronounced degree

of erosion and fragmentation the score 1 is given. If the skeleton is in-

termediately preserved and 1/3 - 2/3 of the bones have a pronounced

degree of erosion of surfaces and fragmentation the score 2 is given. If

the skeleton is well preserved and less than 1/3 of the bones have a

pronounced degree of erosion of surfaces and fragmentation the score 3

is given.

Table 2 Qualitative preservationScore Description

1 Poor

2 Intermediate

3 Well

SEX ESTIMATION

Sex is estimated according to the 5-point scale seen in table 3. In

children the sexual characteristics have not developed and an estimation


8/30


of sex is not possible to make. The sex is estimated only when os ilium,

os ischii and os pubis are fused in acetabulum or when the

synchondrosis spheno-occipitalis (S.S.O.) is fused (table 4) both

features are fused by the age of approximately 16 years. When neither

the pelvic nor the cranial bones are preserved the degree of epiphyseal

fusion of the long bones is assessed - the degree of fusion then has to

correspond to an age older than 16 years in order to estimate the sex.

Note: Only one sex estimation score is given for the cranium, pelvis and

postcranial skeleton separately.

Table 3 Sex estimation scores

Score Description

/ Sex cannot be estimated - the relevant skeletal parts arenot preserved

1 Distinctly male morphology

2 Slightly male morphology

3 The sex is indeterminable/children

4 Slightly female morphology

5 Distinctly female morphology

Cranium

When estimating sex the following components of the cranium are

assessed: the shape ofArcus superciliaris, the morphology of margo

supraorbitalis, the size ofprocessus mastoideus, the relief of linea

nuchalis superior, angulus mandibula and the shape ofprotuberantia

mentalis. The features are compared with the illustrations in ill. 1 and an

overall sex estimation score for the cranium is given.

Pelvis

When estimating sex the following two components of the pelvis are

assessed: incisura ischiadica major and angulus subpubicus. The

features are compared with the illustrations in ill. 2 and an overall sex

estimation score for the pelvis is given.

Postcranial skeleton

An overall sex estimation score is given based upon the robusticity and

length of the postcranial skeleton.


9/30


MALE FEMALE

ill. 1. U. Freund


10/30


MALE FEMALE

ill. 2. U. Freund


11/30


AGE ESTIMATION

The estimation of age at death has been one of the main topics within

biological anthropological research for the past 150 years. The first

systematic studies of cranial sutures took place in the 1860s and age

estimation based upon dental attrition originates back to the late 19th

century.

A general development in society, where focus has been on

expanding the implementation of technological features in all aspects of

human life, has taken place throughout the past decades. This

development is also reflected in the efforts of generating new knowledge

about age at death estimated in skeletal material within the field of

anthropology. Statistical based computer software has been developed

(e.g. transition analysis) and other methods that use X-ray technology,

microscopic analysis and chemical analysis have been introduced to

improve the methods. In this way new methods of analyzing the age of

death in skeletal material using scientific methods will be applied in the

future.

A new method named CEI (Calibrated Expert Inference) has been

developed within the last couple of years. The method was introduced

by a collaboration of researchers from the University of Southern

Denmark, the Max Planck Institute of Demographic research in Rostock

and Pennsylvania State University. The use of the method requires basic

training in osteology and is based upon both observations made of

skeletons from reference samples (skeletal material where age at death

and sex is known) and statistical methods (logistic regression analysis

and Bayestheorem).

The following anatomical components can be used to estimate the age

at death of individuals in European medieval and post-medieval periods.

The indicated age marks the midpoint of the transition from a young to

an old stage and the 95% confidence intervals.


12/30


Limbus acetabula

Young Old

The edge is rounded The edge is sharp

K: 30 [-11;73]. Photo: P. Tarp M: 28 [-7;60] Photo: P. Tarp

Proximal Tibia

Young Old

The features are rounded The features are sharp

K: 42 [-13;92] Photo: P. Tarp M: 24 [-19;66] Photo: P. Tarp

Femur linea aspera

Young Old

Linea aspera is rounded Linea aspera is sharp and irregular

K: 30 [15;38] Photo: P. Tarp M: 21 [-19;61] Photo: P. Tarp


13/30


Femur fossa trochanteria

Young Old

The area is smooth One or more exostoses are seen

K: 54 [8;102] Photo: P. Tarp M: 42 [2;82] Photo: P. Tarp

Femur caput foveaYoung Old

Fovea is smooth Fovea is pointed and irregular

K: 35 [8;63] Photo: P. Tarp M: 33 [21;45] Photo: P. Tarp


14/30


EPIPHYSEAL FUSION

The degree of epiphyseal fusion is scored according to the descriptions

seen in tables 4 and 5.

Epiphyseal fusion is registered for the proximal ends of the right

and left humeri, claviculae and radii. Furthermore the fusion of the

epiphyses of the right and left crista iliaca are registered. The ages of

epiphyseal fusion of the bones in the skeleton are given in ill. 3.

Table 4 Epiphyseal fusion

Score Description

/ No information - the relevant bone is not preserved

0 The epiphysis is loose

1 The epiphysis is partly fused

2 The epiphysis is fused but the epiphysis line is visible

3 The line of the epiphysis is erased

Table 5 Spheno-occipitalis Synchondrosis (S.O.S. / S.S.O.)

Score Description

/ No information - the relevant bone is not preserved

0 The synchondrosis is open

1 The synchondrosis is partly fused

2 The synchondrosis is fused


15/30


ill. 3

Ill. Kuussmann 1988


16/30


DENTITION

Dental developmental age

In the textbox age the age that corresponds closest to the dental

developmental stage is entered using the drawings in ill. 4 and ill. 5. It is

the degree of mineralization that is important not the degree of dental

eruption. The age is given as a decimal fraction of a year. A 6 months

old child will get a scoring of 0.5 years. Likewise, a 4 months old child

would give a score of 0.3 years. Only one decimal is used. For a fully

developed set of teeth when the third molar has erupted and is in

occlusion - the score 25+ (years) is given.

In the textbox information the number of dental groups, used for

age estimation is entered. A full set of deciduous teeth contributes six

dental groups: Three groups in both the maxilla and the mandibular.

The four incisors form one group, the two canines form one group and

the four deciduous molars form one group. One group only has to be

represented by a single tooth in order to get a positive score. The

deciduous dental formula is given as follows:

Deciduous dental formula: i 2/2 c 1/1 m 2/2 = 10 x 2 = 20

A full set of permanent teeth contributes eight dental groups: Four

groups in both the maxilla and the mandibular. The four incisors form

one group, the two canines form one group, the four premolars form

one group and the six molars form one group. The dental formula for

the permanent teeth dentition is given as follows:

Permanent dental formula: i 2/2 c 1/1 pm 2/2 m 3/3 = 16 x 2 = 32

In cases where a child is in an age where both deciduous and permanent

teeth are present the number of remaining deciduous groups and

permanent erupted groups are counted separately. Afterwards the

number of groups of the two types of teeth are added to get the final

result to be entered in the informationtextbox.


17/30


ill. 4


18/30


ill. 5

Enamel Hypoplasia

Enamel hypoplasia is irregularities in the dental enamel seen as an

impressed band on the tooth. Hypoplasia is coursed by physiological

disturbances and is formed while the tooth is developing. Enamel

hypoplasia is only scored on permanent canines (see table 6). The upper

left canine is preferred, but if it is missing the right canine is scored

instead. Only hypoplasia visible to the naked eye is scored.

Table 6 Enamel hypoplasia on +3

Score Description

/ No information - the tooth is not preserved

0 Normal tooth without enamel hypoplasia

1 One or more enamel hypoplasia


19/30


We use the dental table of Haderup but others exist, see for instance

Lynnerup et al. (2008) or Hillson (1996).

Haderups dental table (Lynnerup et al 2008):

right MAXILLA left

Permanent 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 + 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Deciduous 05 04 03 02 01 + 01 02 03 04 05

MANDIBULA

Permanent 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Deciduous 05 04 03 02 01 - 01 02 03 04 05

Dental conditions

In all categories only the 12 permanent teeth are scored. The tooth has to

be in occlusion in order to be scored. Only teeth that with certainty can be

identified are scored.

Table 7 The presence of the tooth

Score Description

/No information - neither the tooth nor the relevant piece of jaware preserved.

0 Tooth found in the jaw

1 Tooth has fallen out after death

2 Tooth has fallen out before death

3 Loose tooth tooth without the matching piece of jaw.

4 8. molar not formed

5 The tooth is formed but not in occlusion


20/30


Table 8 Dental attrition

Score Description

/ No information the tooth is insufficiently preserved

0 Unworn tooth

1 Attrition only in enamel

2 Attrition has exposed the dentine in one cusp

3 Attrition has exposed the dentine in two cusp

4 Attrition has exposed the dentine in three cusp

5 Attrition has exposed the dentine in four cusp

6 Attrition has exposed the dentine so the dentine is visibleinterconnected in two or more cusps

7 Attrition has removed the enamel of the mastical surface

8 Attrition has removed the entire crown of the tooth

Table 9 Caries

Score Description

/ No information the tooth is insufficiently preserved

0 Normal tooth without caries

1 Initial caries seen as a dark shadow on the enamel

2 Caries in the enamel

3 Caries in the dentine but the pulp is not open

4 The pulp is open due to caries

5 Caries has destroyed the crown of the tooth


21/30


Fistula/abscess is scored in the bone of the jaw. The tooth does not

have to be present in order to score a fistle.

Table 10 Fistula/abscess

score Description

/ No information the relevant piece of jaw is not preserved

0 Normal jaw, no fistulae

1 One or more fistulae by the root of the tooth

CRANIAL MEASUREMENTS

The frontal bone (os frontalis) is a very robust bone this is the reason

why this bone is used for morphometric analysis. When working with

skeletons excavated from soil the state of preservation is an important

factor. The frontal bone is frequently preserved even though the rest of

the skull is destroyed by external factors such as pressure from the soil.

Seven measurements are used that reflect the form, size and general

appearance of the frontal bone: Six chords (measured with a sliding cal-

iper) and one arch. Five of the measurements were described by Martin

and Saller (1957) and the names of the measurements presented in that

publication are given in brackets after the title of the measurements.

The last two measurements 6 and 7 - were created to be able to de-

scribe the maximal curvature of the frontal bone and the size of arcus

supraciliaris.

1. Outer biorbital width (M431)

This measurement reflects the width of the upper face. It is measured

between the most anterior points on the suture between os

zygomaticum and os frontalis in both sides. This point is called the

frontomalare temp. It is marked as number 1 on ill. 6.

2. Minimal frontal width (M9)

This measurement reflects the minimum width of the frontal bone

behind arcus superciliaris. It is marked as number 2 on ill. 6.

1 Anthropometric parameters such as M43 refer to the measurements defined by R. Martinin Martin and Saller (1957).


22/30


3. Maximal frontal width (M10)

This measurement reflects the maximum width of the frontal bone on

sutura coronalis. It is marked as number 3 on ill. 6.

4. Frontal chord (M29)

This measurement reflects the length of the frontal bone from nasion to

bregma. It is marked as number 4 on ill. 7.

5. Frontal arch (M26)

This measurement also reflects the length of the frontal bone but as an

arch from nasion to bregma. The midpoint between nasion and bregma

is marked with a pen. This dot defines the measurement point called

mesomethopion. It is marked as number 5 on ill. 7.

6. Lower frontal chord

The nasion mesomethopion chord. This measurement reflects the dis-

tance between nasion and mesomethopion. It is marked as number 6 on

ill. 7.

7. Upper frontal chord

The bregma mesomethopion chord. This measurement reflects the

distance between mesomethopion and bregma. It is marked as number

7 on ill. 7.


23/30


3

2

1

ill. 6. U. Freund

5

7

46

ill. 7. U. Freund

POSTCRANIAL MEASUREMENTS

Femur length

The maximal length of both the right and left femora are measured on

the measuring table. Length is entered millimeters with one decimal. In

the case of children with unfused epiphyses the femur is measured with-

out epiphyses. Where one epiphysis is fused, the other is held in place

and measured thus with both epiphyses. If the unfused epiphysis is

missing the score / is given as is the case if the entire bone is missing.

See ill. 8.

Femur epicondyle width

The maximal width across both the right and the left femora epicondyles

measured with a sliding caliper in millimeters with one decimal. In chil-

dren the loose epiphyses are measured. See ill. 8.

Humerus length (M1)

The maximal length of both the right and the left humeri are measured

on the measuring table. Length is entered in millimeters with one deci-mal. In the case of children with unfused epiphyses the humerus is


24/30


measured without epiphyses. Where one epiphysis is fused, the other is

held in place and measured thus with both epiphyses. If the unfused

epiphysis is missing the score / is given as is the case if the entire

bone is missing. See ill. 8.

Humerus epicondyle width

The maximal width across both the right and the left humeri epicondyles

measured with a sliding caliper in millimeters with one decimal. In chil-

dren the loose epiphyses are measured. See ill. 8.

ill. 8

JOINT CHANGES

In these textboxes the changes to the largest joints of the skeleton are

entered. The joint rims of all bones of the joint of interest are scored as

one entry. In the shoulder the humerus, scapula and clavicula are

scored. In the ankle the tibia, fibula and talus are scored. In the knee

the femur, tibia and patella are scored. In the pelvis the femur and

acetabula are scored. At least half of the relevant bone has to be

preserved in order to score it. Examples of joint changes are seen on ill.

9 and 10.


25/30


Table 11 Joint changes

Score Description

/The joint rim is not sufficiently preserved for it to be regis-tered.

0 Normal joint rim

1Lipping (osteophytosis): at least 10 mm long and 1 mmtall.

ill. 9. Photo: P. Tarp ill. 10. Photo: P. Tarp

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH)

DISH is a joint disease without known etiology but genetic heredity and

diabetes are considered as possible causative agents. The

paleopathological diagnosis requires an anterolateral fusion of at least

four vertebrae. That is a fusion of the part of the vertebral column that

is turned towards the inside of the body and towards the right. This is

also known as dripping candle wax. The disease must not be mistaken

for the condition pelvospondylite (Morbus Becterew) which is seen as

symmetric and complete calcification of the longitudinal ligaments of the

vertebral column. DISH does in most cases not cause any severe symp-

toms other than stiffness and unspecific pain to the back. Modern epi-

demiological studies show that DISH is found most frequently among

Caucasoid in Europe and North America, that it is found primarily among

persons in ages between 50 and 75 years and that it is more frequently

found among males (65%) than females (35%). (Leden 2008; Verlaan

et al. 2007)

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/388973-overview.

Historical studies have tried to show a connection between DISH and

monastic life as they assume a higher frequency of well nutriment and
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/388973-overviewhttp://emedicine.medscape.com/article/388973-overviewhttp://emedicine.medscape.com/article/388973-overview


26/30


thus diabetes among monks than others in the surrounding society (see

ex. Verlaan et al. 2007).

Ill. 11 shows changes to the vertebral column related to DISH.

Table 12 DISH

Score Description

/ The vertebrae are not sufficiently preserved to be scored

0 Normal vertebrae

1 Minimum four vertebrae are fused

ill. 11. Photo: P. Tarp

TRAUMATIC CHANGES

The presence of trauma in four regions of the skeleton is scored: The

cranium, the upper extremities, the lower extremities and a collective

group of the rest of the skeleton (ribs and vertebral column).

Trauma can be divided into two different types of fractures high

impact and low impact fractures.

The high impact fractures occur from sudden arising traumatic

situations such as violent acts and accidents. The person is exposed to

a trauma with such a high impact that the bone will get an immediate

fracture. High impact fractures are seen on ill. 12 - 17.

Low impact fractures are caused by continued pressure or pull on a

bone throughout a long period of time with low energy. In time (up to

years) the pressure will create small fractures to the bone for instance

caused by an unfortunate working position. The low impact fractures are


27/30


most often seen in the vertebral column and the pelvic bones but most

other larger bones can be affected. Low impact fractures are seen on ill.

19 and 20.

Open and unhealed fractures relate to trauma received around the time

of death. However, it can be difficult to differentiate it from postmortem

damage either arising in the soil or during excavation. When a sharp

object strikes the fresh bone it leaves a shiny mark with sharp edges.

When a blunt object strikes a cranium it leaves an impression on it often

with secondary star-shaped fractures seen as beams away from the

primary fracture site. When both unhealed and healed fractures are

found in the same area the score 3 is given.

ill. 12, ill. 13 and ill. 14 show examples of trauma arising due to

sharp edged violence. Ill. 15 shows trauma arising due to a stroke by a

blunt object. In ill. 16, ill. 17and ill. 18trauma arising presumably due

to accidents is shown.

Table 13 Traumatic changes

Score Description

/ No information - the bones are not preserved

0 Normal bones

1 Open, unhealed fracture

2 Healed fracture

3 Both open, unhealed fracture and healed fracture


28/30


Ill. 12-20:Photo: P. TarpLOG

Here the dates, who registered what etc. is entered. Initials on the

person doing the registration are entered in the textbox termed

signature.

OTHER DESCRIPTIONS AND COMMENTS

On the back of the form or on a separate form miscellaneous

observations from the examination of the skeleton are noted. Both

conditions related to human biology and other aspects should be noted.

It is important to write down and describe findings of archaeological

artifacts on or inside the skeleton. The finding of such objects is

reported to the relevant archaeological authority and is turned in or

discarded as soon as possible after an agreement has been made.

ill. 12 ill. 13 ill. 14

ill. 15 ill. 16 ill. 17

ill. 18 ill. 19 ill. 20


29/30


REFERENCES

Boldsen, J. L., 1984. A Statistical Evaluation of the Basis for Predicting

Stature from Length of Long Bones in European Populations. Ameri-

can Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 65: 305-311.

Boldsen J. L. 2001. An epidemiological approach to the paleopathological

diagnosis of leprosy. American Journal of Physical Anthropology

115: 380-387.

Boldsen J. L. 2005a. Leprosy and mortality in the Medieval Danish vil-

lage of Tirup.American Journal of Physical Anthropology126: 159-

168.

Boldsen J. L, Freund U. H. 2006. Osteological leprosy Epidemiology

and diagnosis. Scandinavian Journal of Forensic Science. Scandina-

vian Journal of Forensic Science 12: 54-59.

Boldsen J. L, Milner G. R., Konigsberg L. W., Wood J. W. 2002. Transi-

tion analysis: A new method for estimating age from skeletons. In:

Hoppa R, Vaupel J, editor. Paleodemography:Age distributions fromskeletal samples. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 73-106.

Boldsen J. L, Mollerup L. 2006. Outside St. Jrgen: Leprosy in the medi-

eval Danish city of Odense. American Journal of Physical Anthropol-

ogy. 130: 344-351.

Christensen V. B., Boldsen J. L. 2001. blekassereglementet. Ugeskrift

for Lger. 2001, 51: 7248-7249.

Hillson. 1996. Dental Anthropology. Cambridge University Press

Kuussmann, R. 1988. Anthropolgie. Handbuch der vergleichenden Biolo-

gie des Menschen. Band 1. Stuttgart

Lovejoy, C. O., Meindl, R. S., Mensforth, R. P. and Barton, T. J. 1985

Multifactorial determination of skeletal age at death: A method and


30/30

blind tests of its accuracy. American Journal of Physical Anthropolo-

gy 68:1-14.

Lynnerup, N., P. Bennike and E. Iregren. 2008. Biologisk Antropologi

med human osteologi. Gyldendal.

Mann et al. 1987. Reproducingour ancestors. Expedition: The Universityof Pennsylvania University Museum Magazine of Archaeology. 29: 2-

9

Martin, R and K. Saller 1957. Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Bd. 1.

Stutgart

Massler, Schour and Poncher 1941.

McKern & Stewart 1957.Skeletal age changes in young American males.Massachusetts

Todd 1920. Age change in the pubic bone: I. the white male pubis.

American journal of physical anthropology. 3: 467-470

Verlaan J. J., . F. C. Oner and . G. J. R. Maat, 2007. Diffuse idio-

pathic skeletal hyperostosis in ancient clergymen. European Spine

Journal, vol.16: 1129-1135

Documents

3.-Human Osteological Methods