ACADEMIA Letters

Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological

Paradox of Commingled and Fragmented Human Remains
Charalampos Georgakis

The constant curiosity of humanity, whether to understand religious and cultural themes of its
past or even for academic purposes (Gaston 2018), has highlighted the importance of Archae-
ology and the archaeological research itself. What the meticulous and constant archaeological
research of past life has revealed, is that all discoveries matter. Objects of major or minor im-
portance have their value, as well as human osteological remains. Especially skeletal remains
constitute a substantial tool to perceive past human activity in all its various forms. From a
basic inventory, where researchers determine the number of individuals and the presence of
their bones, to various microscopic studies, ancient human remains can provide answers to a
multitude of questions.
Therefore, acquiring new scientific methods and designingauxiliarytools has become para-
mount for the research of osteological remains (Ubelaker 1989), as their study is steadily grow-
ing (Buikstra and Beck 2017). With the integration of Osteoarchaeology, researchers could
create a more concise picture of the past populations and their daily life. Data about their sex,
age, stature, and pathological conditions are requisite about the palaeodemographic study of a
population, the circumstances surrounding their death (White and Folkens 2005), along with
the socioeconomic conditions of the society itself (Follér 1992).
The origin, development, and progress of disease in past generations, as to how these indi-
viduals adapted to environmental changes can be investigated through the study of palaeopathol-
ogy (Nesse and Williams 1994; Aufderheide and Rodriguez – Martin 1998). Palaeopathology
can be considered as a sub-discipline of osteoarchaeology – biological anthropology, focusing
on primary evidence of abnormalities from human osteological remains that could indicate
the presence of a health affliction (Roberts and Manchester 2007).

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

1
 Even though in the past, understanding of pathologies was problematic, due to the failure
in interpreting the nature of the disease itself, significant improvements have been made in
medical diagnostic procedures over the last century (Metcalfe 2007). A palaepathologist of
modern days is able to investigate and diagnose traces of pathologies on human skeletal re-
mains regardless of their condition (complete or fragmented). With several techniques, which
have been applied to previous populations, palaeopathologists can formulate data and infor-
mation for a wide range of medical problems and indicate how these might have affected their
living conditions.

The Impact of Fragmentation and Commingling

During an archaeological excavation where human osteological remains are discovered, they
could be the result of organized graveyards, as well as combing parts of several individuals
from commingled (multiple individuals in the same burial), or disturbed burials (White et al.
2012; Osterholtz et al. 2014). The commingling of the remains could be the consequence of
various factors, such as manipulation of the deceased (Gerdau Radonić and Herrera 2010),
the way they were placed (Ubelaker 2014), and animal scavenging (Roksandic 2002; Ube-
laker 2002). On many occasions, due to harsh environmental conditions, skeletal remains
might be unearthed in a fragmented state, raising more questions regarding their usefulness
for osteoarchaeology.
Researchers could face problems to analyze them properly since standard osteological
protocols might not be fully applicable in commingled assemblages. In comparison with
traditional osteological research, a thorough analysis of commingled skeletal elements usually
requires long term study, so to fully extract and analyze the data thoroughly.
It is necessary at first to address any problems in relation to the reason behind the com-
mingling, the number of the present elements, and, subsequently, the number of individuals in
total (Ubelaker 2002). By identifying the amount and the variations of the bone elements, the
osteoarchaeologist will gain sufficient information that will help reconstruct the demographic
patterns and mortuary behavior of a population (Ubelaker and Rife 2008; Gerdau Radonić
and Herrera 2010).
Another obstacle in analyzing osteological remains is whether the studied health status
of the population is characteristic of the original living population’s health. There is a great
possibility that postmortem damage might have occurred, and the discovered human remains
could be the only one left, something that can affect the effective recording. Researchers
should be aware of these limitations, or else they might fell in false conclusions (Roberts
2016).

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

2
Applied Techniques and Methodologies
Despite the problems that may arise from recording a collection of commingled and frag-
mented human remains, they are important for the osteoarchaeological research as they can
provide a wealth of data. The collected fragments that were initially recovered should be di-
vided preliminary between human and non – human, so to limit the possibility of including
elements from an animal, pottery, or rock (Osterholtz 2019).
A methodology that is used as a common next step involves sorting the cataloged sample
in similar elements (i.e. humeri, femora, etc.) and the side of the body they come from,
where the most represented element could assist in determining the MNI (Minimum Number
of Individuals) in the studied sample (Buikstraet al. 1994; Adams and Byrd 2006; Konigsberg
and Adams 2014). For example, six right tibiae would indicate the presence of six different
individuals. A researcher could enhance the accuracy of the method about MNI by applying
osteometrics on the long bones. Measurements could be taken for similarities in robusticity
and bilateral symmetry, as they can determine if any skeletal elements are a pair (Byrd 2008;
Nikita and Lahr 2011; Byrd and LeGarde 2014).
Another way to assess not only the minimum estate but the original number of individuals
from whom the skeletal elements come from is the MLNI (Most Likely Number of Individ-
uals) (Adamset al. 2008; Nikitaet al. 2019). In order to use this technique, two paired bones
should be analyzed whether they pair together as part of one individual. With the completion
of assessing pair matches, hypergeometric probability functions could be used to support with
a confidence interval that estimate.
The estimation of the biological profile of human skeletal remains, even from commin-
gled and fragmented, is crucial for the osteoarchaeological research. Thus, when the MNI
is known, every element that contains diagnostic features for sexing and aging should be
recorded. Those can include applicable traits from pubic and cranial bones for sex assess-
ment (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994) and clear indication of juvenile attributes like epiphysial
fusion, presence of deciduous teeth or the alveolar, and the size of the long bones for age es-
timation (Rissech et al. 2003; Schaefer et al. 2009; Cardoso et al. 2017). In regards to the
stature estimation, commingled remains are often in fragmentary condition, which limits the
potential for accurate calculation. Besides their limitations, regression equations have been
proposed for fragmented remains for the height evaluation (Bidmos 2008).
As for the presence of pathological markers on the bones, each element should be assessed
for abnormalities and peculiarities that could suggest diagnostics of possible maladies. De-
spite the difficulty to estimate the actual prevalence of pathological conditions, since malfor-
mations and traits are identified on individual skeletal elements, palaeopathological analysis

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

3
of commingled and fragmented human remains is still of great value and importance for the
reconstruction of the biological profile (Brickley and Buckberry 2015).
Except for the macroscopic methods, former microscopic techniques like using X-ray
fluorescence spectrometry have revealed promising results in an attempt to determine the
number of individuals that are associated with an elemental concentration of human remains
(Gonzalez-Rodriguez and Fowler 2013; Stevens 2016). It should be noted that this kind of
scientific technique could provide data without destroying the bones, compared to the macro-
scopic analysis.
Another microscopic approach that is being gradually employed, in cases with multiple
human skeletal remains, is DNA analysis. (Mundorff et al. 2014; Verdugo et al. 2017) How-
ever, because of its high cost for implementation and the need to destroy part or whole of
the bone, it could only provide information when used in conjunction with the macroscopic
osteological analysis (Puerto et al. 2014; Geigl and Grange 2018).

Conclusion
The palaeopathological examination of human skeletal remains has seen substantial growth
and has increased the knowledge of diseases occurring in various periods with the presence of
human activity. In some cases, it has been feasible to provide biological responses to questions
regarding traits of possible diseases, their social and economic transformation process, and
their transition through the age with data that were extracted from complete, disarticulated,
and commingled osteological remains.
The study of commingled human skeletal remains has been approached with less interest
in the past, because of the complexities and challenges facts that those samples pose to the
osteoarchaeologists. Nonetheless, their value to the archaeological research is of major impor-
tance as it may form a far more comprehensive understanding of past peoples’ life. With the
advancement of technology and the integration of alternative techniques in conjunction with
the macroscopic analysis, researchers have managed to yield fruitful results and add more to
the known information.

References
Adams, B.J. and Byrd, J.E. (2006) Resolution of small-scale commingling: A case report
from the Vietnam War. Forensic Science International 156: 63–69.

Adams, B. J. and Konigsberg, L. W. (2008) “How Many People? Determining the Number

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

4
 of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains.” In Adams, B.J. and Byrd,
J. E. (editors) Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled Human Remains.
Humana Press: 241-255.

Aufderheide, A. C. and Rodriguez-Martin, C. (1998) The Cambridge encyclopedia of human

paleopathology. Cambridge: University Press.

Bidmos, M.A. (2008) Stature reconstruction using fragmentary femora in South Africans of
European descent. Journal of Forensic Sciences 53: 1044-1048.

Brickley, M.B and Buckberry, J. (2015) Picking up the pieces: Utilizing the diagnostic po-
tential of poorly preserved remains. International Journal of Paleopathology 8: 51–54.

Buikstra, J. E. and Beck, L. A. (editors) (2017) Bioarchaeology: the contextual analysis of

human remains. Routledge.

Buikstra, J. E. and Ubelaker, D. H. (editors) (1994) Standards for Data Collection from Hu-
man Skeletal Remains. Volume 1. Fayetteville, Arkansas: Arkansas Archaeological So-
ciety.

Byrd, J.E. and LeGarde, C.B. (2014) Osteometric sorting. In Adams, B.J and Byrd, J.E. (ed-
itors) Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification.
Academic Press, 167-192.

Byrd, J. E. (2008) Models and Methods for Osteometric Sorting. In Adams, B.J and Byrd, J.E.
(editors) Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled Human Remains. Humana
Press, 199-220.

Cardoso, H. F. V., Vandergugten, J. M., and Humphrey, L. T. (2017) Age Estimation of

Immature Human Skeletal Remains from the Metaphyseal and Epiphyseal Widths of the
Long Bones in the Post-Natal Period. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 162(1),
19–35.

Follér, M. L. (1992) Social determinants of health and disease: the role of small-scale projects
illustrated by the Koster health project in Sweden and Ametra in Peru. Cadernos de Saúde
Pública 8(3), 229-239.

Gaston, A. (2018) Human Life in Early Bronze Age I Jericho: A Study of the Fragmented
Human Skeletal Remains from Tomb A61. University of Sydney.

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

5
Geigl, E. M. and Grange, T. (2018) Ancient DNA: The quest for the best. Molecular ecology
resources 18(6), 1185-1187.

Gerdau Radonić, K. and Herrera, A. (2010) Why dig looted tombs? Two examples and
some answers from Keushu (Ancash highlands, Peru). Bulletins et Memoires de la Societe
d’Anthropologie de Paris 22, 145–156.

Gonzalez-Rodriguez, J. and Fowler, G. (2013) A study on the discrimination of human skele-

tons using X-ray fluorescence and chemometric tools in chemical anthropology. Forensic
Science International 231, 407.

Konigsberg, L. W., and Adams, B. J. (2014) Estimating the number of individuals represented
by commingled human remains: A critical evaluation of methods. In Adams, B. J. and
Byrd, J. E. (editors) Commingled human remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and
Identification. Academic Press, 193-220.

Metcalfe, N. H. (2007) In what ways can human skeletal remains be used to understand health
and disease from the past? Postgraduate medical journal 83(978), 281-284.

Mundorff, A.Z., Shaler, R., Bieschke, E.T. and Mar-Cash, E. (2014) Marrying anthropol-
ogy and DNA: essential for solving complex commingling problems in cases of extreme
fragmentation. In Adams, B. J. and Byrd, J. E. (editors) Commingled human remains:
Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification. Academic Press, 257-273.

Nesse, R. M. and Williams, G. C. (1994) Why we get sick. The new science of Darwinian
medicine. New York, Vintage Books.

Nikita, E. and Lahr, M.M. (2010) Simple algorithms for the estimation of the initial number of
individuals in commingled skeletal remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology
146, 629-636.

Nikita, E., Karligkioti, A., Lee, H., Marklein, K. and Moutafi, I. (2019) Excavation and Study
of Commingled Human Skeletal Remains. The Cyprus Institute Science and Technology
in Archaeology and Culture Research Center (STARC).

Osterholtz, A. J. (2019) Advances in documentation of commingled and fragmentary remains.

Advances in Archaeological Practice 7(1), 77-86.

Osterholtz, A. J., Baustian, K. M. and Martin, D. L. (editors) (2014) Commingled and disar-
ticulated human remains. Springer.

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

6
Puerto, M.S., Egaña, S., Doretti, M. and Vullo, C.M. (2014) A multidisciplinary approach to
commingled remains analysis: Anthropology, genetics, and background information. In
Adams, B. J. and Byrd, J. E. (editors) Commingled human remains: Methods in Recovery,
Analysis, and Identification. Academic Press, 307-335.

Rissech, C., García, M. and Malgosa, A. (2003) Sex and Age Diagnosis by Ischium Morpho-
metric Analysis. Forensic Science International 135(3), 188–196.

Roberts, C. A. (2016). Palaeopathology and its relevance to understanding health and disease
today: the impact of the environment on health, past and present. Anthropological review
79 (1), 1-16.

Roberts, C. A., and Manchester, K. (2007) The archaeology of disease. Cornell University
Press.

Roksandic M. (2002) Position of skeletal remains as a key to understanding mortuary be-

havior. In Haglund, W.D and Sorg, M.H. (editors) Advances in Forensic Taphonomy:
Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 99-117.

Schaefer, M., Scheuer, L. and Black, S.M. (2009) Juvenile Osteology: A Laboratory and
Field Manual. Academic Press, London.

Stevens, W.D. (2016) Enslaved Labor in the Gang and Task Systems: A Case Study in Com-
parative Bioarchaeology of Commingled Remains. Doctoral dissertation, University of
South Carolina.

Ubelaker, D. H. (1989). Human skeletal remains. Excavation, analysis, interpretation. Al-

dine Publishing Company. Washington DC.

Ubelaker, D.H., 2002. Approaches to the Study of Commingling in Human Skeletal Biology.
In Haglund, W.D. and Sorg, M.H. (editors) Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method,
Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 355–378.

Ubelaker, D.H. (2014) Commingling analysis: Historical and methodological perspectives.

In Adams, B. J. and Byrd, J. E. (editors) Commingled human remains: Methods in Recov-
ery, Analysis, and Identification. Academic Press, 1-6

Verdugo, C., Kassadjikova, K., Washburn, E., Harkins, K.M. and Fehren‐Schmitz, L. (2017)
Ancient DNA clarifies osteological analyses of commingled remains from Midnight Terror
Cave, Belize. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 27, 495-499.

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.

7
White, T. D. and Folkens, P. (2005) The human bone manual. Elsevier.

White, T D., Black, M.T. and Folkens, P. A. (2012) Human Osteology. Massachusetts, USA:
Advanced Press.

Academia Letters, July 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Charalampos Georgakis, char.georgakis@gmail.com

Citation: Georgakis, C. (2021). Approaches in Past Human Life: The Osteological Paradox of Commingled and
Fragmented Human Remains. Academia Letters, Article 2036. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL2036.