Volume 1 = Thesis, Volume 2 = Appendices / Asymmetry is a useful tool for osteological analysis as it detects disruptions in the developmental stability of osseous structures attributed to environmental and biomechanical environments. The primary aim of this study is to establish a baseline for normal levels of asymmetry in English archaeological populations in order to distinguish between normal population variation and increased developmental instability or biomechanical stress. Directional and fluctuating asymmetry is assessed through a database of a comprehensive selection of osteological measurements throughout the skeletons of 1753 adults and subadults. The sample is from 11 archaeological sites spanning the Anglo-Saxon to the Victorian periods. The extent of developmental instability is also determined, for the first time, by employing the prevalence of population outliers. The normal range for directional asymmetry was found to be -5.79 to 6.62%, while fluctuating asymmetry was found to be 0 to 6.53%. The extent of asymmetry, however, was found to be trait specific. Deviations from normal population levels of asymmetry were found to be due to a complex mixture of biomechanical and environmental stresses influenced by age, sex, settlement type, socio-economic status, and period-specific origins of the sample populations. Possible causes of asymmetry could be discerned from comparisons of the levels of population asymmetry when placed in the context of physical activity, social networking, health, and environment developed from the historical, archaeological and osteological record. / Andy Jagger Fund and the Francis Raymond Hudson Memorial Fund

No description available.

No description available.

No / I have been eagerly awaiting the publication of this book since 2000, when, as a PhD student, I was lucky enough to be able to visit the St Mary Spital excavations where I knew quite a few of the excavators and osteologists. It was apparent at that early stage in the research of St Mary Spital that this was a very exciting and important excavation and skeletal assemblage. This book does not disappoint.

No / This paper reviews the osteological evidence for execution in Anglo-Saxon England, which, in the cases of modern analysis, can reveal considerable detail about the methods of decapitation, in particular, and it also provides a critical appraisal of the considerably less reliable antiquarian reports. We suggest that secure evidence for execution, principally decapitation, can be identified through modern osteological analysis but it is limited, and we also argue that assertions made in antiquarian excavation reports about apparent examples of execution need to be treated with caution.

The methods of sex determination through skeletons or through objects in graves has been used on and off since the nineteenth century. Most of the osteological methods are however developed on intact bones, and the archaeological method assume that jewelry is female associated and weapons are male associated. A tendency to choose the archaeological sex determination above the osteological sex determination can be spotted as well. The study examines how the osteological sex determination methods could be used on fragmented skeletal remains, and question the archaeological sex determination method with a gender perspective. This will be achieved by analyzing thirteen graves from a burial ground in Lekarehed, Lärbro parish (socken), Gotland. The skeletal remains were excavated in 1878 and 1951 and is dated to late Bronze age–early Iron age and the Viking age. The aim with this study is to get a deeper understanding of how the methods can be used, and to shed light on the stereotypical view on femininity and masculinity that exists. The aim is also to emphasize that the most important and most interesting information comes from the discussion of the problems that exist in these methods, and that the most important thing is not to decide what is feminine or masculine, or to choose one method in front of the other. The analysis resulted in one certain, four uncertain and eight graves without sex determination regarding the osteological method, and two certain, one uncertain and ten graves without sex determination regarding the archaeological method. In the discussion, the problems with putting the woman and the man as pairs of opposition is brought up, because it excludes the graves that cannot be put in one of these two categories. The objects in the graves can represent something other than sex as well, for instance age or status. The cooperation between the osteologist and the archaeologist is important for the knowledge to evolve and to carry on. By looking at the material in a new way, new insights will perhaps come forth. / Denna uppsats handlar om hur det går att använda osteologiska och arkeologiska könsbedömningsmetoder på ett fragmenterat skelettmaterial. Metoderna som används för den osteologiska könsbedömningen är ofta, om inte alltid, utvecklade på intakta ben, och när det gäller fragmenterade ben blir könsbedömningen svårare att utföra. Den arkeologiska könsbedömningen är en könsbedömning gjord via föremålen i gravar och utgår kortfattat ifrån att vapen är manliga och smycken är kvinnliga. Den granskas här genom ett genusperspektiv som ifrågasätter synen på kvinnligt och manligt och hur de tankarna överförs till forntiden. Det finns också problematik i hur osteologin och arkeologin stämmer överens med varandra. För att undersöka problematiken har ett skelettmaterial på 13 gravar från ett gravfält i Lekarehed, Lärbro socken, Gotland analyserats. Resultatet för den osteologiska könsbedömningen blev en säker, fyra osäkra kön och åtta stycken utan könsbedömning. Resultatet för den arkeologiska könsbedömningen blev två säkra, en osäker och tio utan en könsbedömning. Slutsatserna i uppsatsen är att de osteologiska och arkeologiska könsbedömningsmetoderna blev problematiska. Den osteologiska på grund av de fragmenterade benen och svårigheter inom den morfologiska metoden. Den arkeologiska på grund av att det inte fanns könsindikerande föremål i många gravar och även på grund av vad vi sätter in i kvinnligt och manligt associerade föremål. Där både en osteologisk och en arkeologisk könsbedömning fanns, stämde de överens med varandra. Det betyder dock inte att de inte ska problematiseras, eftersom vi inte vet om forntidens människor tyckte att smycken var kvinnliga och vapen var manliga. Vi vet inte heller om föremålen representerar kön, eller vad föremålen hade för användningsområde. Det blir också svårt att dra slutsatser om hur individerna i Lekarehed såg på kvinnligt och manligt, eftersom resultaten av könsbedömningarna i många fall var bristfälliga, och för att gravfältet representerar olika tidsperioder. Ny kunskap kan uppkomma om vi slutar att sätta kvinnan och mannen som motsatspar, och är öppna för en annan syn på genus som inte representerar dagens (västerländska) samhälle, eftersom de gravarna som hamnar utanför de två kategorierna blir osynliga. Det är viktigt att osteologen och arkeologen samarbetar, och inte väljer den ena metoden framför den andra, eftersom den mest intressanta informationen och kunskapen kommer utifrån diskussionen av problematiken, och vilka nya aspekter som kan tillföras om vi inte förutsätter att forntidens människor såg på kvinnligt och manligt på det sättet som det finns en tendens till idag.

01 Abstract Diploma thesis deals with taxidermy techniques of birds and small mammals leading to the production of own taxidermal mounts, which can be afterwards used as suitable didactical tools in the education of biology. Thus the thesis is presenting a comprehensive guide for creation of taxidermal mounts. At the same time, all the the stated procedures are applied at couple of species used for taxidermical purposes. Apart from the techniques itself which are described in methodological part, the thesis is enriched with the description of individual groups and therefore, creates theoretical introduction about the species. The thesis also depicts the production of all described taxidermal mounts. Results of this thesis are in total 8 taxidermal mounts (3 birds and 5 mammals), additionally also osteological material in the form of skeleton of Apodemus sylvaticus and skulls of 3 described small mammals. All the stated taxidermal mounts will serve as didactical tools for needs of Department of Biology and Environmental Studies at Faculty of Education in Prague. Key words: dermoplastic models, taxidermal mounts, osteological material, taxidermy, birds, mammals

No description available.

This essay focuses on how the osteological analysis is carried out in studies of different types of mass graves. The analysis is based on 20 studies of different types of mass graves. The 20 studies were selected because they represent analyses of various types of mass graves and because they all contain a presentation of the methods used in the examinations of the remains. Different types of archaeological mass graves are examined as well as forensically interesting ones. Similarities and differences between aims, questions asked, and methodology in studies of different types of mass graves are examined. The purpose for which the various methods are used is also investigated with the aim of seeing whether the same method can be utilized for different purposes in studies of different types of mass graves.  One conclusion reached is that a tendency can be seen that a certain set of methods is used in most studies of mass graves. Some differences can be seen depending on the main focus of the studies and the type of mass grave that is examined. The main differences can be distinguished between archaeological and forensic investigations. The two disciplines are similar in many ways but the focus in the studies and the purpose of them often differ. In forensic studies the aim is usually identification, while archaeological studies tend to have a broader focus, which is reflected in choices of methods and questions asked.  In all of the studies, largely the same kind of methods are used, however, it appears that different versions of a method can be applied. Researchers have developed various more specific versions of methods and a tendency can be seen that the different studies use different versions of the same kind of methods.  Another conclusion drawn is that although researchers state that at the moment there is no common standard for how investigations of mass graves should be carried out, it appears in this essay that a certain common structure can still be seen. Although there is no stated standard, there seems to be an unspoken one, at least when it comes to methodology in examinations of human remains from mass graves.

In the fall of 1999, human skeletal remains and historic artifacts were discovered on private farmland approximately two kilometres south of the Town of Battleford, Saskatchewan. Document searches and a ground-penetrating radar survey of the property resulted in the discovery that the land was once used as a cemetery for the Catholic Church of St. Vital during the years of 1879 to 1885. Numerous interest groups were brought together in the process of handling this sensitive situation, including the landowners, the Heritage Resource Branch of the Department of Saskatchewan Culture, Youth and Recreation, the Rural Municipality of Battle River, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Prince Albert, and the Battleford Tribal Council. A decision was made to relocate the burials to the current town cemetery. In the meantime, permission was granted for the University of Saskatchewan to play the lead role in the excavation and analysis process. The partial and complete skeletal remains of thirty individuals were recovered, and in addition to a basic osteological analysis of the individuals that included sex determination, age at death and population affinity, a detailed assessment of the pathological conditions was also undertaken. The document and artifact analyses will be the subject of a separate thesis by Colette Hopkins.