Full text of "Bioarchaeology of the late prehistoric Guale : South End Mound I, St. Catherines Island, Georgia"

See other formats

Bioarchaeology of the Late Prehistoric Guale 


a2" SOUTH END MOUND I, 


“"F 


. ied 


te «=©0d SS. TP. CATHERINES ISLAND, 
GEORGIA | 


Clark Spencer Larsen 


American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers, Number 84 


BIOARCHAEOLOGY OF THE 
LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE: 
SOUTH END MOUND I, 

ST. CATHERINES ISLAND, GEORGIA 


CLARK SPENCER LARSEN 


Research Associate, Department of Anthropology 
American Museum of Natural History 
Distinguished Professor of Social and Behavioral Sciences and 
Chair, Department of Anthropology 
The Ohio State University 


WITH CONTRIBUTIONS BY 


Andrew Creekmore, Dale L. Hutchinson, Caroline Joyce, Scott S. Legge, 
Jessica McNeil, Elizabeth Moore, Anastasia Papathanasiou, Elizabeth J. Reitz, 
Christopher W. Schmidt, Margaret J. Schoeninger, Leslie E. Sering, 
Amy Sullivan, David Hurst Thomas, Randy R. Townsend, 
and Daniel C. Weinand 


This monograph is the sixth in the series titled 
The Anthropology of St. Catherines Island 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS OF 
THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 
Number 84, 104 pages, 22 figures, 27 tables 
Issued July 24, 2002 


Copyright © American Museum of Natural History 2002 ISSN 0065-9452 


CONTENTS 


Abstract ........9¢. 3 ne. F8 FOR a ee ee eee 5 
Introduction: -. 0... Soot ee Wn oe 8 ee ie eee ee een 5 
ACKBOWlEGRMEDES oo one ne ee bow ie gis Sua Se Rte wed ee Sle ee 6 
The Setting .... 2.2.2.4. 0.8 0423 Be Pegs Be Be oe 7 
Previous: Work at South End Mound [ . 52:2): 0. o¢50 2. : 32s oe 8 
Later Excavations and Bioarchaecological Study; . 2. sas. 4-%-22. 29-4 ee se ee ee 9 
Methods of ‘Analysis -.. .2..2. 0000 Re Sete ti See ee eee 2 
Individual Identification: ; . ....... 2. 222. Sok 5 es been ce 12 
Age Estimation and Sex Determination . 5.) ..04.Aoabe ds. eee 13 
Pathology Identification: and Health . 22 2.2... 2.00. % sen Oe es ce 14 
Skeletal and Dental Measurement... |: s.c.25 20nd 24. sti as Be ee 14 
Dietary Reconstruction and Nutritional Inference: Food Remains and Stable Iso- 
LOPES 22... od cw en PRR eaesd) RR ee ce ae Se 15 
The South End Mound I Individuals .) 2. 22 2. ..3.. - 125.» ieee he oe ee eee 16 
Artifacts. DAvip HURST THOMAS AND JESSICA’ WICNEIL? 020 22: 2. ees oe 38 
Ceramic Artifacts... 2200-2 0). 3 VE, A 38 
Shell Artifacts: Whelk Beads: «4.25 - iat ste. oo Poke = Genk oes See ee ee 38 
Shell Artifacts: Modified "WhelkKs. ...; j25 22 te oe oe oe snes Bee Ce ee ee 40 
bathic Artifacts 9. . is. Siete Ave os sce he sie ee re eee ee 40 
Miscellaneous Artifacts... 420A (03%. Fethee  e e e 41 
Resource Utilization and Dietary Reconstruction. ELIZABETH J. REITZ, CLARK SPEN- 

CER LARSEN, AND MARGARET J. SCHOENINGER: 2. 25 S05 555 «.2+4 «2025 ee 4] 
ZOOMCHACOIOLY oo. os chess oe G Re oe se ny ee Se te ee ee 4] 
Stable Isotopes .......55. "31.2 4047. WB Se eee oo 

Patterns of Community Health: Pathology ;- ..... .2s.4-5.4236 000 22 Be oe 46 
Periosteal Reactions” 0050... Ao ed es ee ae eee ee 46 
Cribra Orbitalia and Porotic Hyperostosis: 2). 2 fc SUIS PR 48 
Dental Caries). ..!.o.050. ohne’. 1 lag seebe el oie. 2 ee 50 
Community Health in Transition: Prehistoric and Historic Guale from St. Cath- 

ermmes Island 22 20:54. 25 pm one ee ae Pe ee A ee ee 51 

Dental and Skeletal Size and Morphology ...« . . 2 40.645 5-% 5 56.60 x ee ee 54 
PVCU oe oe anne ncoctne ws rte lace Wid Scie ee rare gases emes (eG ew kd a ha eae a 54 
of a ol || are a ei MOM aren NEM eGR 33 

Conclusions—=........080 000.05 co Sd ee OR SP EE i ae ee 61 

INOTES noe noe eee a eR RE A OR Fd ads PE 66 

3 oo) | ete Me re TM NR CN ee 66 

Appendix 1. South End Mound ft Human Remains...... .. 2. ...¢0...2..45 1a oe ee 70 

TABLES 
lL. Long Bone Maximum Lengths; Juveniles’). 05.7.0. 6 <-> 0p ren ee ee 13 
2. South End Mound,!] Individual- Summary «4: 2.:: $6034 £05 202 A RE Oe a ee ee 17 
353i; Juvenile Dental Preservawons 60s. su. 2 wise date oe eee kw ee 18 
4; Agnit Dental PreservatiOn .. 22.0. cd a ks Sra waa ek 5s eres on ee ae 20 
5. Juvenile Skeletal Element Preservation )/.ein!. dawgds «odes. soak ok eee 22 
6.. Adult Skeletal Element Preservahion® .-..0.4 060.05 os sa Sa oe ee ee 24 
(Pie Oa ceo) ) (el ee er ee ere eee mri ee em 39 
8; Witelle Beads: oo cinsecc occ 5 oes ip Seichte wcocew 0.5 a, °5: 5 ee cna ne 40 
9. Modified Whelk Artifacts. ..°as.<cicpin ay 0 wots 4 +-5 on eet penne nnn pee 40 
LO. Lithic Artifacts. ... no soos wee spanens Boe avelns tie, » Se: ain: 0 prea aie area og 41 
V1. Species List of Fauna ........5 656s 06 es se wcele ede oe ee Ce ee 42 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


Daal eee ee ane ey MCIVIGAL (oe ee yee boli ek ee clones Aue eae 
[skeletal ements wit Femostcal Reactions i... Mssewl. ji eee. oo ea eek. 
[acme ee eine Lent Pemales 202004. doesent ee ees ee ll. 
ae eee te Servicio) Peat Wiales: 7) oe ilo he tine esp ee ec Ue. 
io. Dental Canes: individual Juveniles.and Unsexed Adults ..:.24-2.0:.2..0.4 0.00%. 
Pf. ieee anes Suiminacy Mecquency by Tooth Type: ois .2 25 22 2s nek cclae.. 
18. Periosteal Reactions and Dental Caries: Individual Summary ................... 
19. St. Catherines Island Guale: Prehistoric and Historic Dental Caries and Peri- 
DERE TBO SE Be pee ee ee Re) 9 ae ee er 
20. Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Females .................. 
21. Permanent Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Males .......... 
22. Permanent Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics, Total Sample ......... 
23. Deciduous Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics .......-.-..22-..../.-. 
24. Postcranial Measurements: Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Females 
25. Postcranial Measurements: Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Males ...... 
ee ON ON RPS ONO MUNN A Ng Ho Sh 8 roy ansng sist oe Sp sche ade us od Ra sadn andy mn SACRE A 
27. Adult Femur Midshaft Index and Total Subperiosteal Area ..................... 


FIGURES 


Location of South End Mound I (9L13) on St. Catherines Island ............... 

(is Wioere s excavations. oO; South End Mound Tm. tdi. ceot) ssc ret... 
Topographic map of South End Mound I, with outline of Moore’s (1897) ex- 
cavation, Larsen and Thomas’s (1986) excavation, and Larsen’s (this volume) 

eee EO eee ee CN SL alent 2 oC Se eS BS iikis ob ae Se oa ale Ss 

Excavation une 6S showing extent of Moore's excavation... .2:).. 2... 05.5.5 
Map showing locations of bones and teeth recovered in the 1991—1993 exca- 

ne Sra WAOURG foe te. 2 CE Se Fe DIORA So ele ee 

Remea or sliveutles represented by tooth types, .. 2.55... shes. eae eva se eed. 

peteene Gr Guia Trepresenica by tooth Types 2. 2.) 24. 205% eee. oe ns es 
Percent of juveniles represented by midline axial skeletal elements, upper body 

eM ee MWe DOUY CICMICHES  2~ 2... SDN EO ee Pe 
9. Percent of adults represented by midline axial skeletal elements, upper body 

on eee wen medy Clomenmls«..\... 2 :2¥Ssi. Soe. el aw ee 
10. Anterior and posterior views of proliferative periosteal reaction on proximal 
humerus diaphysis of individual 15 compared with nonpathological anatom- 

ee ene Cte ee. a). AS Le See ess, 2a Ete al ws 

11. Concentration of disturbed skeletal remains in excavation unit C10 ............. 
12. Overall and closeup of proliferative periosteal reaction on distal right ulna 
diaphysis from individual 16 compared with nonpathological anatomical 

eee eee te Oi e  re ee. ... Dee’. Jos lh Bese e led « FERRE as 
13a. Lateral view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of 
left tibia of individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical speci- 

nner: 2a ieee Sime ee oe owen e ee cu se ew bh oe See tee 
13b. Medial view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of 
left tibia of individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical speci- 

ia ote Pe eR hie aS. os Gea he La bw Ses PR wei oY os 

Pome hinged Aree ariiiacts {70m Souih End Mound I... ...2.:......-...22.-0.--.-- 
15. Bivariate plot of mean stable carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios comparing 
Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers, Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, 
South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal 

mission farmers 


ncn baa 


00 SIO) 


i eee ee a ee wa es 2 eh Se ee Se Sf SS) fees e & © Stee) 6. 6. s = @ 'e © ce 2 t “Se 8 we 


16. 


20. 


28. 


ae 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


Periosteal reactions of the tibia showing comparisons of frequencies from Geor- 
gia coastal prehistoric foragers, Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South 
End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission 


TAFMETS” -.. 6 cos eR a 


Dental caries comparison of frequencies from Georgia coastal prehistoric for- 
agers, Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia 


coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmers ............. : 


Bar graph showing dental caries and tibial periosteal reaction frequencies from 
prehistoric and historic St. Catherines Island and descendant (Amelia Island) 


Guale |... cobs. os SOS Se ee eee 


Bar graph showing femoral midshaft anterior-posterior diameter and femoral 
midshaft medial-lateral diameter for Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers, 
Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal 


mission farmers, and Florida\coastal mission farmers 775222 -2 oe eee 


Bar graph showing adult heights for Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South 
End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission 


PAPIVISTS ooo concn a: o. oces obec ane sano viewer ac dig necob ine cto hee URE cents Dhl ae ee 


Bar graph showing femoral midshaft index for Georgia coastal prehistoric farm- 
ers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal 


mission fariierS’ 6.363 6 vee ea a a eee 


Bar graph showing femoral total subperiosteal area (standardized) for Georgia 
coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission 


farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmiets =. 5 2) aoe eee 


NO. 84 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


ABSTRACT 


South End Mound I is one of more than 50 mortuary sites (mostly burial mounds) excavated 
by Clarence Bloomfield Moore (1897) during his five-month expedition to the Georgia coast, 
and it is one of seven mounds he described on St. Catherines Island. The mound was subse- 
quently tested by Larsen and Thomas (1986), who reported on a small sample of fragmentary 
human remains left at the site by Moore. This monograph reports on human remains recovered 
from a large-scale excavation undertaken by Larsen. This excavation revealed that Moore 
disturbed skeletal remains, but these remains were left in the general location of their origina! 
discovery. Our conjoining of fragmentary bones and teeth allowed identification of 26 of the 
50 skeletons encountered by Moore. Importantly, this sample provides the only late prehistoric 
(Irene period) skeletal series from St. Catherines Island, allowing for the first time temporal 
comparisons with both earlier prehistoric populations (e.g., Johns Mound) and later historic 
populations (Santa Catalina de Guale) from the island. 

Analysis of faunal remains and stable isotope ratios of carbon and nitrogen indicates that 
the population consumed a variety of terrestrial and marine fauna, along with significant 
amounts of maize in diet. Analysis of dental caries prevalence is consistent with this recon- 
struction. In addition, presence of skeletal infections indicates poorer health in general relative 
to prehistoric St. Catherines Islanders. At least some of the periosteal reactions displayed on 
tibiae reflect treponematosis (nonveneral syphilis). The overall pattern of health is strikingly 
similar to contemporary late prehistoric populations from the Georgia coast in particular and 
to the Eastern Woodlands of North America in general. Lastly, study of body size and post- 
cranial skeletal morphology indicates a similar pattern of activity and lifestyle as for other 
groups from the Georgia Bight during the late prehistoric era. Overall, this bioarchaeological 
analysis reveals that the shift from a foraging lifeway to one that incorporated maize agriculture 


likely had a profound impact on health and lifestyle. 


INTRODUCTION 


This is the sixth scientific monograph in 
the series presenting the anthropology of St. 
Catherines Island, Georgia. The previous five 
monographs presented the natural and cul- 
tural history of the island (Thomas et al., 
1978), the Refuge-Deptford mortuary com- 
plex and bioarchaeology (Thomas and Lar- 
sen, 1979), analysis of Georgia coastal bio- 
cultural adaptation and stress in early prehis- 
toric and late prehistoric populations (Larsen, 
1982), the St. Catherines period mortuary 
complex (Larsen and Thomas, 1982), and the 
mortuary archaeology and bioarchaeology of 
the South End Mound complex (Larsen and 
Thomas, 1986).' An earlier monograph de- 
scribed the comparative mortuary archaeol- 
ogy and bioarchaeology of three pre-Civil 
War burials, including two African-American 
enslaved adults from St. Catherines Island 
and one Euroamerican planter’s teenage son 
from nearby Colonels Island (Thomas et al., 
1OY7). | 

Since 1981, the American Museum of 
Natural History and cooperating institu- 
tions—with support from the Edward John 


Noble Foundation and the St. Catherines Is- 
land Foundation—have focussed on the ar- 
chaeology, bioarchaeology, and ethnohistory 
of mission-era Guale, the tribe who lived on 
St. Catherines Island. Out of that research, 
four monographs have appeared, including 
an overview of the historical and archaeo- 
logical context for Spanish missionization 
(Thomas, 1987), the bioarchaeology of Santa 
Catalina de Guale (Larsen, 1990), and the 
documentary context derived from the study 
of mission records and firsthand accounts of 
life in the Spanish missions (Bushnell, 1994; 
Worth, 1995). 

More than two decades of archaeological 
and bioarchaeological research have been 
completed on the prehistoric and historic pe- 
riod Guale. The bioarchaeology itself is 
among some of the most comprehensive for 
native New World populations, with a fund 
of data now available on aspects of health, 
disease, lifestyle, and population history (see 
Larsen, 1990, 2001; Larsen et al., 1992a; 
Larsen et al., 2002). For the Georgia coast in 
general, there is a nearly unbroken record of 
past human biological history and adapta- 
tion. 


6 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


For St. Catherines Island, the human bio- 
logical record is especially comprehensive. 
However, the Irene period—the time corre- 
sponding to the late Mississippian period in 
eastern North America (ca. A.D. 1300— 
1550)—is poorly represented by human re- 
mains. In fact, only one mortuary site con- 
taining a substantial sample of Irene period 
individuals is known from St. Catherines Is- 
land, from South End Mound I (site 9L13, 
AMNH 114). This site was originally exca- 
vated by Clarence Bloomfield Moore (1897) 
in his late nineteenth century expedition to 
the Georgia coast. Larsen and Thomas 
(1986) later tested the site and reported on a 
small sample of human, animal, and cultural 
remains they found. However, the remains 
were few in number, and given the need to 
have a more solid grounding in the bioar- 
chaeology of the late prehistoric period, ad- 
ditional excavations and recovery of human 
remains from the site were undertaken. 

The present volume reports on the most 
recent excavations at South End Mound I 
(what Moore called the “‘Mound Near South- 
End Settlement’? [Moore, 1897: 74—81]) on 
St. Catherines Island, Georgia, excavated un- 
det my direction in 1991, 1992, and 1993. 
Laboratory research was conducted on the 
human remains at the Biological Anthropol- 
ogy Research Laboratory at Purdue Univer- 
sity and the Bioarchaeology Research Lab- 
oratory at the University of North Carolina, 
Chapel Hill, with additional analysis per- 
formed at the University of Wisconsin, Mad- 
ison. Animal remains were identified at the 
Zooarchaeology Laboratory, University of 
Georgia, Athens, and cultural materials (ce- 
ramic and nonceramic artifacts) were ana- 
lyzed at the American Museum of Natural 
History Archaeology Laboratory, St. Cath- 
erines Island, Georgia. 


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 


This monograph is a contribution to the La 
Florida Bioarchaeology Project and the St. 
Catherines Island Archaeological Project. 
The excavation and study of South End 
Mound I was made possible by generous 
support for field research provided by the St. 
Catherines Island Foundation. I am especial- 
ly grateful to Mr. and Mrs. Frank Y. Larkin 


NO. 84 


for the interest that they have shown in the 
bioarchaeology of St. Catherines Island and 
for their personal interest in the anthropolog- 
ical and archaeological program overall over 
the last 30 years. Their support has translated 
directly into advancements in our under- 
standing of human adaptation in this region 
of the world. Mr. John Toby Woods, Jr., for- 
mer superintendent of St. Catherines Island, 
showed us the location of Moore’s excava- 
tion at South End Mound I. His help, along 
with the kind assistance of the present su- 
perintendent, Mr. Royce Hayes, and his staff 
made it possible to undertake and complete 
excavations in a timely manner. Royce and 
Betsy Hayes also provided their kind hospi- 
tality, extending their home, pool table, and 
poker chips to the field crews for their relax- 
ation after long days in the field and during 
ihe Bhizzard of 1993: 

The research presented in this monograph 
is part of an archaeological program directed 
by David Hurst Thomas, Division of Anthro- 
pology, American Museum of Natural His- 
tory. I thank him for his collaboration over 
the last three decades on St. Catherines Is- 
land. 

Thanks are extended to Margaret Schoen- 
inger (University of Wisconsin, Madison) for 
her analysis of stable isotopes and to Daniel 
Weinand and Elizabeth Reitz (Zooarchaeo- 
logical Laboratory, University of Georgia) 
for analysis of the animal remains. David 
Hurst Thomas and Jessica McNeil prepared 
the report on both ceramic and nonceramic 
artifacts. Camile Licate assisted them in the 
artifact analysis. Dale Hutchinson (East Car- 
olina University) also helped in many ways, 
including consultation on analysis of human 
remains and their archaeological context. 

I am especially grateful to my bioarchaeol- 
ogy field crews, who spent their spring 
breaks digging on St. Catherines Island: Da- 
vid Barondess, Molly Donovan, Jonathan 
Gray, Dale Hutchinson, Hong Huynh, Julie 
Kihlstrum, Christine Larsen, Scott Legge, 
Elizabeth Moore, Anastasia Papathanasiou, 
Shawn Phillips, Christopher Schmidt, and 
Leslie Sering. In addition to her field and ex- 
cavation responsibilities, Christine Larsen 
served as the cook extraordinaire and helped 
to keep the operation running smoothly. 


2002 


Bioarchaeological study was especially 
challenging due to the mixed and fragmen- 
tary nature of the human remains from South 
End Mound I. Students in my human oste- 
ology classes—first at Purdue University 
(1991, 1992) and then at the University of 
North Carolina (1993)—and I spent many 
hours in the laboratory conjoining bones, 
matching dentitions, and identifying skeletal 
individuals that had been scattered over sev- 
eral meters in some instances by Moore dur- 
ing his excavation of the site a century before 
our work. I especially acknowledge the con- 
tributions of osteology students Scott Legge, 
Elizabeth Moore, Anastasia Papathanasiou, 
Christopher Schmidt, and Leslie Sering at 
Purdue University, and Andrew Creekmore 
and Caroline Joyce at the University of North 
Carolina. Laura Dominkovic helped in the 
statistical analysis of the human remains and 
manuscript preparation. I thank Marianne 
Reeves and Amy Sullivan for their work in 
helping me to organize the massive skeletal 
database listing all of the bones and teeth, 
and Randy Townsend and Christopher Rod- 
ning for preparation of the computer-gener- 
ated map showing the locations of skeletal 
and dental remains in figure 5. Amy Sullivan 
prepared the figures that contain graphs. R.P. 
Stephen Davis kindly provided his expertise 
in the use of the high-resolution digital cam- 
era (Kontron Progres 3012) in preparing the 
photographs of pathological long bones. Jar- 
rod Burks prepared figure 4, and Dennis 
O’Brien prepared the maps for figures 1, 2, 
and 3. The comments of two anonymous re- 
viewers greatly improved the clarity of the 
manuscript. 

This volume is dedicated to Clarence 
Bloomfield Moore (1852—1936), whose in- 
choate field and laboratory bioarchaeological 
research on St. Catherines Island provided 
the first glimpse of the mortuary practices 
and biology of its original inhabitants. 


He SETTING 


St. Catherines Island is one of a series of 
Atlantic coastal barrier islands in the Georgia 
Bight, a large embayment extending from 
Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, to Cape Ca- 
naveral, Florida. The region is subtropical and 
contains a plethora of animal and plant species 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 7 


that inhabit the immediate marine environ- 
ment, the coastal barrier islands, the marsh is- 
lands, and the nearby mainland. Today, as cer- 
tainly in the past, the marine and estuarine wa- 
ters contain an abundance of food resources, 
among the most diverse and economically pro- 
ductive in the world (Reitz, 1988). 

Prehistorically, the mid-region of the 
Georgia Bight—the northern Georgia 
coast—was occupied by the ancestors of the 
Guale Indians. Prior to about A.D. 1000, the 
populations were exclusively hunters and 
gatherers, subsisting on a variety of terrestri- 
al and marine animals and terrestrial, non- 
domesticated plants. Archaeological evi- 
dence indicates that these populations were 
relatively small, dispersed, and mobile (see 
Larsen, 1982). Stable isotope analysis of hu- 
man remains from the Georgia Bight reveals 
that some time after A.D. 1000, maize was 
adopted (Hutchinson et al., 1998; and see be- 
low). Accompanying this dietary shift, native 
populations became more sedentary, and, at 
least in some settings, more socially and po- 
litically complex (e.g., Irene Mound site; 
Caldwell and McCann, 1941). It is this pe- 
riod of later prehistory of the Georgia Bight 
that forms the temporal and cultural back- 
drop for the present monograph, the bio- 
archaeology of South End Mound I. 

During the late sixteenth century, the 
Spanish Crown took political control of the 
region as part of their larger effort to colo- 
nize La Florida (see Thomas, 1987). By the 
1580s, a mission (Santa Catalina de Guale) 
was established on St. Catherines Island, 
serving as the center of native activity on 
the island until 1680. In that year, the native 
population and Spaniards were forced off 
the island by invading British troops and In- 
dian allies. By 1684 or so, the Guale from 
St. Catherines Island resettled on Amelia Is- 
land, Florida. The new settlement of Santa 
Catalina lasted until 1702, when yet again 
British military and allies forced the aban- 
donment of the mission. Isotopic, biome- 
chanical, and paleopathological evidence in- 
dicates that maize played an increased role 
in native diets, populations were less mobile 
than were their prehistoric predecessors, and 
health declined overall (Larsen et al., 1992a; 
Larsen eét-al.,. 2002). 


8 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


PREVIOUS WORK AT SOUTH END 
MOUND I 


Located on the southern end of the Pleis- 
tocene section of St. Catherines Island (fig. 
1), South End Mound I has been the focus 
of intermittent archaeological research for 
more than a century, beginning with Moore’s 
(1897) comprehensive excavation at the site 
in the winter of 1896, continuing with Larsen 
and Thomas’s (1986) test excavation, and 
culminating in a large excavation by the pre- 
sent author in the 1990s. The mound was 
only one of more than 50 archaeological 
mortuary sites partially or completely exca- 
vated by Moore in his five-month expedition 
on the Georgia coast in the fall and winter 
of 1895—1896. In that short time, he encoun- 
tered about 1350 burials (see Thomas and 
Larsen, 1979: Larsen and Thomas, 1986). 
This work provided an important perspective 
on the prehistoric Indians who lived on the 
Georgia coast. Moreover, his findings were 
rapidly published in a high profile, widely 
available serial by the Philadelphia Academy 
of Natural Sciences (Moore, 1897; Larson, 
1998). The skeletal remains found by Moore 
were described in some instances, and vir- 
tually all of the sites received detailed dis- 
cussion. The descriptions of human remains, 
cultural materials, and mound construction 
are certainly limited by today’s standards of 
archaeological and bioarchaeological re- 
search, but for the time, Moore’s work rep- 
resented state-of-the-art science. An assess- 
ment of Moore’s research on St. Catherines 
Island and elsewhere on the Georgia coast 1s 
presented in L. H. Larson’s (1998) introduc- 
tory essay to the reprinted Certain Aborigi- 
nal Mounds of the Georgia Coast. 

By his account, Moore excavated seven 
burial mounds on St. Catherines Island, ex- 
posing the remains of some 120 individuals 
(see Larsen and Thomas, 1986). Moore was 
careful to note locations of burials, unusual 
artifacts (e.g., well-preserved ceramic ves- 
sels), and in some instances he listed burials 
with identifications of individual age, sex, 
pathology, artifact associations, and other 
characteristics. The bioarchaeological record 
was made vastly richer by the presence of 
Moore’s friend and confidant, surgeon M.G. 
Miller, on the expedition. The quality of the 


Location of South End Mound I (9L13) 
on St. Catherines Island. 9L1273 is South End 
Mound II, a St. Catherines Period mound (from 
Larsen and Thomas, 1986: fig. 1). 


Fig. 1. 


2002° 


skeletal descriptions indicates that Dr. Miller 
was versed in human osteology and skeletal 
identification. As will be discussed below, 
his descriptions, along with the publication 
of a detailed map showing locations of buri- 
als (Moore, 1897: 74), made it possible for 
us to identify burials excavated by Moore 
and his archaeological crews a century ago. 

Moore only retained a few selected crania 
and pathological bones, discarding the re- 
mainder of skeletal remains in his backdirt 
piles. Some ceramic vessels were also kept 
by him, and in the case of St. Catherines Is- 
land, the South End Mound vessels are de- 
scribed more fully elsewhere (Peter, 1986). 

In Moore’s (1897) report on South End 
Mound I, he described 50 burials, comprising 
nearly half of the remains he encountered on 
St. Catherines Island. The remains from 
South End Mound I included the following: 
one cremation burial containing many “‘cal- 
cined fragments of human bones”’ and locat- 
ed high enough in the mound to have been 
disturbed by agricultural plowing; four sec- 
ondary (disarticulated) urn burials; 45 pri- 
mary burials that were flexed and mostly on 
their right sides. The pottery descriptions in- 
cluded in Moore’s report, along with our 
analysis of ceramics in our 1979-1981 test 
excavation (see Peter, 1986), indicate that the 
mound dates to the Irene period, ca. A.D. 
1300-1550. Moore excavated most of the 
mound, except for a small area at the extreme 
western margin (fig. 2). 

Archaeological research did not occur 
again at South End Mound I until John T. 
Woods, Jr. showed D.H. Thomas the location 
of the site in 1974. A detailed topographic 
map was made of the mound’s surface, and 
in 1979 and 1981, a half-dozen 1 m X 1 m 
test units were placed along the margins of 
the large depression left in the wake of 
Moore’s excavation (Larsen and Thomas, 
1986). These test units identified the location 
of at least one of the burials Moore had en- 
countered. We designated this person as in- 
dividual A, an adult female, which we were 
able to identify as Moore’s burial 22 (and see 
below). Three other individuals (B, C, and 
D) were also identified, including the denti- 
tion of a two-year-old, one tooth from an old- 
er child (deciduous second molar), and most 
of the skeletal elements of a newborn. With 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 9 


the exception of the feet of individual A, all 
remains were in highly disturbed contexts. 

In addition to the human remains, ceram- 
ics, other material culture, and animal re- 
mains were found and described. A large 
number of oyster and clam shells were en- 
countered in the excavation, which almost 
certainly represents the large concentration 
of oyster deposit originally described by 
Moore (1897). Importantly, we were able to 
locate our excavation in relation to that of 
Moore, including the mound’s periphery and 
burial features. 


LATER EXCAVATIONS AND 
BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY 


Following the preliminary testing of South 
End Mound I in May 1981, bioarchaeologi- 
cal work on St. Catherines Island turned to 
the mission cemetery at Santa Catalina de 
Guale (Larsen, 1990). As the fieldwork and 
follow-up research progressed at Santa Cat- 
alina throughout the 1980s, it became clear 
to me that an understanding of patterns of 
health, disease, and lifestyle that were being 
pieced together from the study of the skeletal 
remains from Santa Catalina would be im- 
proved if we had a substantially larger late 
prehistoric human biological record from St. 
Catherines Island than just the several indi- 
viduals we had earlier recovered from South 
End Mound I. Numerous other prehistoric 
skeletal remains had been studied from sites 
located elsewhere on St. Catherines Island 
(e.g., Johns Mound, South End Mound I, 
Seaside Mounds), but these remains dated to 
periods of occupation earlier than the Irene 
period. Our preliminary test excavations in 
South End Mound I suggested that it would 
be a worthwhile endeavor to recover addi- 
tional human remains from the site, espe- 
cially since the bone preservation was good 
(albeit fragmentary) and Moore apparently 
discarded most of the skeletons in his backfill 
at the site. 

We undertook a series of three excavations 
in 1991, 1992, and 1993 that resulted in a 
large exposure extending from the western to 
the eastern margin of the mound as well as 
in the central portion and the southern half 
of the mound (fig. 3). Several test units from 
the 1979 and 1981 field seasons were incor- 


10 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


XX 


Charcoal 


884 29 923 Fa,b. 
40 127 19g 


Fig. 2. 


Extent of excavation 


\Mound outline 


\ 
\ 
\ 


le 


to 13@ / 10% 


Charcoal and sand 


C.B. Moore’s excavations of South End Mound I; numbers indicate burials and letters in- 


dicate ceramic vessels (adapted from Moore, 1897; fig. 49; from Larsen and Thomas, 1986: fig. 2). 


porated into this larger excavation, especially 
a short north—south trench located to the east 
and south of the mound center. 2 m X 2 m 
meter excavation units were laid out in a 
north—south grid. Each unit was excavated 
from the surface to sterile subsoil. The test 
units were named on the basis of letters run- 
ning east-west and numbers running north— 
south (e.g., unit F1O). In total, and including 
the aforementioned north—south test trench, 
19 units and a single | m X 2 m unit were 
excavated. Although the depth of the dis- 


turbed mound fill varied, the average depth 
of most units was about | m. 

The 1990s excavations confirmed our ear- 
lier finding that we had located our excava- 
tion in relation to that of Moore. In particular, 
in unit B8 the margin of his excavation was 
revealed in the south profile and horizontal 
excavation surface, helping us to locate our 
excavation with relation to his (fig. 4). Sim- 
ilarly, the pit associated with Moore’s exca- 
vation in the far southeastern corner of the 
site was clearly displayed in the profile of 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 1] 


Extent of 
excavation- 1897 


TONS 

carat a 

NZ eit 
Ee 


mM Mound outline 


AN magnetic north qp Tree 


Test pits — 1979 
0 p 


contour interval 10 cm. ra Excavation — 1981 V | Excavation — 1991-1993 


Fig. 3. Topographic map of South End Mound I, with outline of Moore’s (1897) excavation, Larsen 
and Thomas’s (1986) excavation, and Larsen’s (this volume) excavation (adapted from Larsen and 
Thomas, 1986, fig. 5). 


12 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Unit B8 South Profile 


, Undisturbed 
Mound Fill 
" 


noo Moore’s 
: -"> «* Excavation Pit: - 
Oa ae 


Unit B8 Plan View 

Fig. 4. Excavation unit B8 showing extent of 
Moore’s excavation. The southeast corner of the 
unit is mottled fill from Moore’s excavation pit, 
contrasting with the undisturbed mound fill in the 
remainder of the unit (bottom). The south profile 
of unit B8 shows undisturbed mound fill in the 


western corner and Moore’s excavation fill in the 
remainder (top). 


our test pit V in the 1979-1981 excavation 
(fig. 6 in Larsen and Thomas, 1986: 12). The 
matching of our excavation with that of 
Moore in these two locations aided us in 
identifying disturbed skeletal remains we en- 
countered (see below) with the burial num- 
bers shown on Moore’s map (Moore, 1897: 
74, fig. 49). Moreover, it revealed that al- 
though Moore’s published map appears 
rough, it 1s accurate. 

The mound fill was hand-troweled in ar- 
bitrary 20-cm levels and subsequently passed 
through %-in.-mesh window screen. All hu- 
man remains and artifacts were exposed in 
situ, mapped on a unit record form in relation 
to the site datum, drawn on the form, pho- 
tographed, and removed to the laboratory on 
St. Catherines Island for initial processing. 
Some of the more fragile human remains 
were treated with a consolidant consisting of 
a 5% solution of polyvinyl acetate dissolved 


in acetone. Additional small fragments of 
bones, teeth, and artifacts (mostly potsherds) 
were recovered in screening. Each bone or 
tooth encountered in the excavation was giv- 
en a field number and identified as to skeletal 
element or tooth type. 

Owing to the manner in which Moore ex- 
cavated the site, it is not possible to recon- 
Struct the sequence of mound construction 
based on stratigraphic interpretation, such as 
was done at other burial mounds on the is- 
land (e.g., Thomas and Larsen, 1979). Nor 
was it possible to identify intact features, 
such as pits or intrusions, seen at other 
mound sites on St. Catherines. We encoun- 
tered an abundance of oyster shells in the 
disturbed fill, which is consistent with 
Moore’s observation that the mound con- 
tained a dense deposit of shell matrix at its 
center. The presence of a large amount of 
Shell neutralized an otherwise acidic soil typ- 
ical of this island, resulting in the excellent 
state of skeletal preservation, albeit fragmen- 
tary. Very soon into the excavation, we lo- 
cated scattered human remains. The scatter- 
ing of bones and teeth, however, was not 
haphazard. Rather, human bones were gen- 
erally concentrated close to the burial loca- 
tions shown on Moore’s map (fig. 5). The 
bones were mostly fragmentary, but estima- 
tion of age and identification of sex and close 
proximity to burials shown on his map al- 
lowed us to match these remains with 
Moore’s burials (and see below). 

Once skeletal remains were brought back 
to the St. Catherines Island laboratory, they 
were washed with tap water using soft brush- 
es. The remains were then air-dried and cat- 
alogued according the archaeological grid 
and numbering system. All remains were 
transported to my home institution (Purdue 
University, followed by the University of 
North Carolina) for study. 


METHODS OF ANALYSIS 
INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFICATION 


Skeletal remains were described according 
to skeletal element and other characteristics 
that might facilitate their identification (ap- 
pendix |). Bones and teeth were matched ac- 
cording to excavation unit, color, texture, and 
other physical characteristics. Given the large 


2002 


Fiz. 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 13 


o7 ‘IC.B. Moore's 


tae [Burial 22 


ve 


28 3 bones/teeth from a numbered individual 
28 1 bone/tooth from a numbered individual 


Map showing locations of bones and teeth recovered in the 1991—1993 excavation of South 


End Mound I. The articulated feet of Moore’s burial 22 were exposed in the 1981 excavation. The 
numbers refer to the skeletal individuals and show the distribution of elements following Moore’s ex- 
cavation. The 1897 outline refers to the western margin of Moore’s excavation in the mound. See table 
2 and appendix | for corresponding Moore burial numbers. Note that the number in large font represents 
three bones or teeth and the number in small font represents a single bone or tooth. 


volume of fragmentary remains in South End 
Mound I, the process of piecing together in- 
dividuals and matching them with Moore’s 
burial numbers took much time. When the 


TABLE 1 
Long Bone Maximum Lengths, Juveniles 


Individual 

Bone 8 11 25 
Femur, left — — 296.7 
Femur, right — 80.3 292.5 
Tibia, left — 69.7 244.3 
Tibia, right 106.3 69.2 245.1 
Clavicle, left a 47.2 - 
Clavicle, nght as 46.9 103.0 
Ulna, left — 63.9 -= 
Ulna, right 100.2 64.0 — 
Radius, left —_ 55:7, — 
Radius, night 79.4 55.9 — 
Humerus, left 107.0 66.8 — 
Humerus, right — 67.7 — 
Ilium, left a — — 
Ilium, right — 31.3 


conjoinment of the thousands of bones and 
teeth was completed, however, nearly all of 
the remains could be matched with Moore’s 
burial numbers described in his 1897 mono- 
graph. 


AGE ESTIMATION AND SEX DETERMINATION 


Age was estimated and sex (for adults) 
was determined following standard osteolog- 
ical procedures (Ubelaker, 1989; Buikstra 
and Ubelaker, 1994; White, 2000). Age for 
juveniles was derived mostly from observa- 
tions of dental development (Ubelaker, 
1989). Several juveniles had long bones that 
were complete enough for measurement, 
thereby providing information for estimation 
of age at death (Ubelaker, 1989; table 1). 

Sex was mostly determined from degree 
of robusticity, cranial morphology, and pel- 
vic indicators of the postcranial remains. The 
relatively high degree of sexual dimorphism 
in size and morphology documented in other 
Georgia coastal remains (and see Larsen, 
1982; Ruff et al., 1984; Larsen and Ruff, 


14 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


1994) made sex identification §straightfor- 
ward for most adults. 


PATHOLOGY IDENTIFICATION AND HEALTH 


The following pathological conditions 
were identified for their presence or absence: 
periosteal reactions, cribra orbitalia/porotic 
hyperostosis, and dental caries (Ortner and 
Putschar, 1985; Larsen, 1997). Owing to the 
fragmentary nature of the remains, observa- 
tions were not made on osteoarthritis. Enam- 
el hypoplasias—growth-arrest markers on 
the teeth—were noted. The data were not 
subjected to formal analysis, but will be pre- 
sented elsewhere (Hutchinson and Larsen, 
2001). 

Periosteal reactions (also called periostitis) 
are inflammatory responses involving the 
outer bone surface. In the unhealed form, the 
bone surface shows areas of loosely orga- 
nized, newly formed woven bone giving a 
coarse or porous surface. In the healed form, 
the bone is less coarse and the surface is 
smooth, undulating, and oftentimes expanded 
in comparison with the original contour of 
the bone. Periosteal reactions result from two 
primary causes, either infection or trauma, 
such as a blow to the leg. Sometimes, the 
pathological involvement can be extensive, 
involving much of the cortical bone and the 
medullary cavity. In these instances, there is 
exuberant proliferation of the endosteal (in- 
ner) and periosteal surfaces and drainage 
holes (cloacae) for pus. These reactions are 
clearly caused by infection, such as by the 
microorganism Staphylococcus aureus. 

In eastern North America, various workers 
have documented an increase in frequency of 
periosteal reactions in later prehistory (see 
review in Larsen, 1997). This pattern appears 
to be related to population increase, seden- 
tism, and the increase in spread of infectious 
disease due to more crowded living circum- 
stances. Most periosteal reactions are non- 
specific; that is, it is not possible to identify 
the exact cause, such as the specific patho- 
genic agent responsible. However, for many 
examples of skeletal inflammation in_ the 
American southeast and midwest, the pattern 
of skeletal involvement suggests some form 
of treponematosis, the group of diseases that 
includes four modern disease syndromes— 


venereal syphilis, nonveneral (endemic) 
syphilis (also called bejel), yaws, and pinta 
(Ortner and Putschar, 1985)—all of which 
are caused by spirochetes of the genus Trep- 
onema. The presence of skeletal inflamma- 
tion, especially involving the tibia, was first 
identified in prehistoric southeastern Native 
Americans by J. Jones (1876) in his study of 
skeletal remains from prehistoric sites in 
Tennessee. He attributed the disease to 
‘syphilis’. The pattern of bone involvement 
in a wide range of late prehistoric settings 
suggests that the disease in eastern North 
America was likely the nonvenereal form of 
the disease. 

Cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis 
are lesions characterized by a high degree of 
porosity of the roof areas of the eye orbits 
(cribra orbitalia) or flat bones of the cranium 
(porotic hyperostosis). These lesions are 
caused by iron-deficiency anemia and have 
also been linked with scurvy, rickets, and in- 
fection (see~Schultz, 1993: Schulezeer sar 
2001; Ortner, 1999). 

Dental caries is a disease process caused 
by bacterial fermentation of dietary carbo- 
hydrates on exposed tooth surfaces. The bac- 
terial fermentation produces lactic acid, 
which dissolves the enamel and underlying 
dental tissue, resulting in what is commonly 
called ‘“‘cavities’’. In prehistoric Native 
Americans, caries 1s highly prevalent in pop- 
ulations who ate maize. Maize is a carbo- 
hydrate that is especially cariogenic (Larsen 
et‘ ali, 1991). 

For dental caries and periosteal reactions, 
the respective percentages of teeth and bones 
affected were calculated. Crania were too 
fragmentary and incomplete to allow calcu- 
lation of prevalence of cribra orbitalia or po- 
rotic hyperostosis. 


SKELETAL AND DENTAL MEASUREMENT 


Although the skeletal series from South 
End Mound | is highly fragmentary, conjoin- 
ing of skeletal elements resulted in the re- 
constructions of a number of postcranial re- 
mains, thus allowing some measurements. 
Where possible, standard measurements of 
long bones were taken following procedures 
outlined in a previous monograph (Larsen, 
1982). From maximum lengths of adult fem- 


2002 


ora, individual statures were estimated using 
regression formulae (Sciulli et al., 1990). 
Calculation of the femur midshaft index (ra- 
tio of mediolateral to anteroposterior diame- 
ters) is used as an indicator of “shape” of 
the diaphysis and for drawing inferences 
about activity (Ruff, 2000; Larsen, 1997). 

Several crania were partially reconstruct- 
ed, but none were complete enough for 
meaningful measurement. Several hundred 
teeth were recovered in the 1991—1993 ex- 
cavations. From these teeth, in addition to 
pathology (especially dental caries; see be- 
low), size (mediodistal and buccolingual di- 
mensions; Larsen, 1982) was recorded and is 
reported here. 


DIETARY RECONSTRUCTION AND NUTRITIONAL 
INFERENCE: FOOD REMAINS AND STABLE 
ISOTOPES 


Diet is a fundamental part of human 
health. Reconstruction of diet from archaeo- 
logical materials offers insight into earlier 
foodways from which to draw inferences 
about nutrition. For most of the history of 
archaeology, diet has been identified by the 
analysis of plant and animal remains recov- 
ered from domestic or other settings. For the 
subtropical Georgia coast, plant remains 
rarely survive in archaeological settings, and 
thus they have provided limited perspective 
on past foodways. Animal remains are far 
more abundant, and their analysis and study 
have presented important information on the 
kinds of fauna that prehistoric and historic- 
era native groups exploited (e.g., Reitz, 1988, 
1993). Indeed, for South End Mound I, ani- 
mal remains are well preserved (see below). 
However, owing to the complete mixture of 
mound fill, the context of the animal remains 
is missing. Some of these animal remains 
likely do not derive from human activity, but 
rather represent later intrusions. On the other 
hand, there are animal remains from species 
that were eaten by humans. The presence of 
butchering cutmarks indicate that the fauna 
had certainly been processed by late prehis- 
toric populations for food (and see O’Brien, 
1986). 

In the last 20 years or so, stable isotope 
analysis of human bone has become an es- 
sential tool for paleodietary research. Stable 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 15 


isotopes of carbon ('3C and !?C) and nitrogen 
(‘SN and !'4N) have received extensive atten- 
tion in regard to dietary reconstruction and 
nutritional inference in North America and 
elsewhere. Field and laboratory studies of 
modern plants and animals have shown that 
ratios of stable isotopes of carbon and nitro- 
gen found in their tissues reflect the ratios in 
the foods animals eat (see Schoeninger, 
1995). This means that the bones and teeth 
of humans should also retain these ratio dif- 
ferences. The amounts of isotopes differ very 
little between foods. As a result, the ratios 
are expressed in parts per thousand (called 
““per mil’’, or %o) as lower case Greek delta 
(5) values in relation to an international stan- 
dard (Pee Dee belemnite, or PDB.. for car 
bon, and atmospheric nitrogen [ambient in- 
halable reservoir], or AIR, for nitrogen). 
2C/BC ratios (6'°C values) vary depending 
on the photosynthetic pathway of the plants 
consumed. For St. Catherines Island, the eco- 
nomically important plants eaten by late pre- 
historic populations followed either one of 
two types of photosynthetic pathways, C; or 
C,. The pathway is determined based on how 
efficiently carbon is extracted from atmo- 
spheric carbon dioxide (CO,) and utilized by 
the plant during photosynthesis. As a rule, C, 
plants discriminate less against the isotopical- 
ly heavier °C from the atmosphere. Thus, C, 
plants, and the people consuming these plants, 
have higher (less negative) isotope ratios than 
do C, plants. For St. Catherines Island, the 
only major economically significant C, plant 
eaten by native populations was maize. 

Nitrogen isotopic variation, measured as 
ratios of N/'*N (6!°N values), distinguishes 
terrestrial and marine foods and their con- 
sumers, owing mostly to the fact that nitro- 
gen enters the ecological domain of these set- 
tings in different ways. Because of the dif- 
ferences in how nitrogen is acquired by ter- 
restrial and marine organisms, there is a 
tendency for marine organisms to have more 
positive 6!°N values than do terrestrial or- 
ganisms, and these differences are ultimately 
reflected in the human consumers and their 
bone tissues. 

For St. Catherines Island and other coastal 
settings, carbon isotope ratios for maize and 
for marine organisms overlap, precluding 
clear dietary reconstruction and the relative 


16 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


importance of maize versus marine foods. 
However, use of bivariate plots of stable iso- 
tope ratios of carbon and nitrogen helps to 
distinguish the two food sources, terrestrial 
(maize) and marine (Schoeninger et al., 
1990). Therefore, for this study we have de- 
termined stable isotope ratios for both carbon 
and nitrogen in order to track the use of 
maize and seafood in native populations. 

Our determination of carbon- and _ nitro- 
gen-stable isotope ratios from human bone 
from South End Mound I followed proce- 
dures developed earlier (Schoeninger et al., 
1990; Larsen et al., 1992b, 2001: Hutchinson 
et al., 1998, 2000). In brief, bone samples 
were cleaned in the laboratory and the or- 
ganic component (collagen) was extracted 
and analyzed by mass spectrometry. The 
quality of samples and appropriateness for 
this study were assessed by examining the 
collagen weight yield and the carbon-to-ni- 
trogen ratios (Schoeninger et al., 1990; Am- 
brose and Norr, 1992), which determine if 
the results are true biogenic signals of diet or 
artifactual due to post depositional factors. In 
total, 10 samples from South End Mound I 
were analyzed, of which five produced mean- 
ingful, biogenic information (for individuals 
5, 6, 16, 24, and 27). Stable isotope ratios 
were determined following standard equa- 
tions,? and the ratios were compared with 
other individuals from St. Catherines Island 
and the Georgia Bight (coastal Georgia and 
northern Florida). 

In addition to presenting findings on the 
South End Mound I remains, we draw com- 
parisons with other Georgia Bight skeletal 
series in order to place this series in a larger 
temporal and spatial context, especially iden- 
tifying key changes in skeletal morphology 
and pathology in relation to adaptive shifts 
that took place in this region (e.g., shift from 
foraging to farming). The comparative sam- 
ples are from various mortuary localities rep- 
resenting four temporal groups, namely 
Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers, Georgia 
coastal prehistoric farmers, Georgia coastal 
early mission farmers, and Florida coastal 
late mission farmers.’ These temporal groups 
represent prehistoric Guale and their mis- 
sion-era descendants who lived on St. Cath- 
erines Island and other Georgia coastal lo- 


calities, and later on Amelia Island, Florida 
(see Larsen, 1982; Larsen et al., 1992, 2002). 


THE SOUTH END MOUND I 
INDIVIDUALS 


The individual human remains encoun- 
tered in the excavations at South End Mound 
I are described. The summary of skeletal re- 
mains by individual is presented in table 2. 
All of the skeletal and dental remains are pre- 
sented in appendix 1, including the individ- 
ual number assigned in the laboratory, the 
corresponding Moore burial number, exca- 
vation unit, level, catalog number, sex, age, 
element type, side, portion of element pre- 
sent, and relevant comments. Some fragmen- 
tary elements could be matched in the labo- 
ratory, and they are so indicated in the com- 
ments in appendix 1. 

During the analysis of the remains recov- 
ered in 1991—1993, it became clear that the 
remains representing individuals 1—3 (A—C 
in Larsen and Thomas, 1986) are part of in- 
dividuals 5—28 and are combined with them. 
The only individual from the 1979-1981 ex- 
cavation that remained as a distinct skeleton 
and not part of any one of the individuals 
recovered in 1991-1993 is individual 4 
(called D in Larsen and Thomas, 1986) and 
is redescribed below, along with individuals 
5-28. 

The locations of the remains from South 
End Mound I are shown in figure 5. All ob- 
servations, Comparisons, and discussion re- 
garding the South End Mound I human re- 
mains in this monograph combines the 
1979-1981 and the 1991-1993 skeletal re- 
mains into a single dataset. Comments on an- 
imal remains refer only to remains recovered 
in the larger 1991—1993 excavation of the 
site (see O’Brien, 1986, for report on 1979— 
1981 fauna). 

Representation of human dental and skel- 
etal elements by individual is highly variable, 
ranging from a few teeth or bone fragments 
for some to nearly complete dentitions and 
skeletons for others. For juvenile dental re- 
mains, the maxillary deciduous molars are 
represented in higher frequency than are oth- 
er tooth types (table 3, fig. 6). In adults, the 
teeth are evenly distributed across the differ- 
ent tooth types (table 4, fig. 7). The skeleton 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 17 


TABLE 2 
South End Mound I Individual Summary 


Individual Moore’s 
no.* burial no. Unit no. Age Sex 
l 22 G10-G11 adult 2 
2 ? G9 2 indet 
3 a G9 8 indet 
4 ? G9 birth indet 
5 32 E8 25 3 
6 39 D8 18+ 2 
7 31 C8, D8 6-12 mo indet 
8 42 (or 35) C8 2-3 indet 
9 30 A8-F8, C9 adult? indet 
10 28 F8 6-9 mo indet 
11 18 E8 birth-3 mo indet 
12 23 H9 40+ 2 
13 DT G9-G11, H9 1-3 indet 
14 38 D9 17-25 3 
15 45 C10 30+ 3 
16 46 C10 17-23 2 
17 47 C10 17-23 3 
18 49 Cll 40+ y 
19 50 Ci 35-45 = 
20 29 G9-G10 1-3 indet 
21 16 I9-J9 adult 3 
22 13 J9 adult z 
25 44 Fil 5 indet 
24 34 F10 sos 2 
2 41 F10, G10-G11 7-8 indet 
26 25 G10 1-3 indet 
ag 24 G10-G11 38+ 2 
28 ae G10-G11 adult 3 
29 43 F111 adult z 


Key: indet, sex indeterminate; mo, months. 


4 Individuals 1-4 were previously described in Larsen and Thomas (1986). Based on the new remains 
found in the 1991-1993 excavations and conjoining of these materials with skeletal and dental elements 
recovered from the earlier excavations (1979, 1981), most of individual | is probably the same as individ- 
ual 27 (or individual 28), most of individual 2 is probably the same as individual 26, and individual 3 is an 
unassociated tooth. Only individual 4 remains a viable number from the 1979-1981 excavation. Individual 
numbers 1, 2, and 3 (A, B, and C in Larsen and Thomas, 1986) are, therefore, dropped from the roster of 


persons recovered from South End Mound I. 


shows a predictable pattern of denser and 
larger bones having the best representation 
(tables 5, 6; figs. 8, 9). For example, the rep- 
resentation of numbers of long bones for 
adults is around 60% (radius, ulna, humerus, 
femur, tibia) (table 6, fig. 9). A similar pat- 
tern is present for juveniles, although juve- 
nile remains are less well represented by el- 
ement than are adult bones (table 5, fig. 8). 
The poorer representation of juvenile re- 
mains reflects their smaller size and greater 


vulnerability to post-depositional deteriora- 
tion. 

INDIVIDUAL 4: This person is represented 
by the partial cranial and postcranial remains 
of a newborn or slightly older (possibly sev- 
eral months into life). Age at death was de- 
termined on the basis of long bone length 
(Ubelaker, 1989), since no teeth are repre- 
sented. There is no obvious pathology. It was 
not readily apparent which individual of 
those excavated by Moore is represented in 


18 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 3 
Juvenile Dental Preservation® 


Left Right Unsided Total> 
Tooth NM N % N % N % 
Maxilla 
dil + "50 Z. -20 —_- — 2 gee | 
dI2 2 “20 —- — —_- — Z- 20 
dC >. 30 3s. SO —_—- — s- 50 
dM1 8 80 4 40 —_- — 6 60 
dM2 5 50 4 40 —- — 6 60 
Il 4 40 1 10 —- — 4 40 
12 2 20 By 120 —- — 4 40 
Cc 2 20 1 10 —- — gees | 
P3 1 10 L* +10 —- — ae) 
P4 —- — el | —- — ae ae | 
M1 4 40 2° =20 —- — 4 40 
M2 1 10 Lb? 10 —_- — ae 
M3 —- — —- — —- — —- — 
Mandible 
dll 4 40 1 10 —- — 3: 30 
di2 —- — £4 A —_—- — i, skG 
dC L.. 10 bo We 3 . 30 
dM1 4 40 a, 1 630 —- — > «50 
dM2 4. 30 3.” 30 —_- — 3, 30 
Il eee | r. “16 —_- — Z” :20 
I2 —_- — 2 20 —_—- — 2.20 
C 310 —- — —- — bh 0 
P3 bas 10 —_- — —_—- — 1, 40 
P4 —- — —- — —_—- — —_- — 
M1 ae me, —_- — 322530 
M2 hen AD 2.) «20 —_—- — pete 
M3 —_- — —_- — —_-_ — —_-_ — 


* Includes teeth that are part of associated individuals (N = 
10 juveniles). 

> Total refers to the number of individuals represented by the 
tooth type, regardless of side. 


this skeleton. It is likely that he did not as- 
sign a number to this person. 

INDIVIDUAL 5: The remains of this person 
include a partial skeleton and dentition. The 
very pronounced skeletal robusticity and nar- 
row sciatic notch indicate that this person is 
a male. The amount of occlusal surface tooth 
wear, the appearance of the auricular surface 
of the innominate, and closure of cranial su- 
tures indicate that the person was at least in 
his mid-20s at the time of death. No pathol- 
ogy was observed by us. The location and 
characteristics of the skeleton indicate that he 
was likely Moore’s burial 32. 

INDIVIDUAL 6: This person is represented 
by few skeletal remains. The very gracile na- 


ture of the skeletal elements suggests that the 
person is female. Based on the fact that 
epiphyses for the medial epicondyle and the 
proximal epiphysis of the ulna are complete- 
ly fused, the person was at least 18 years old 
at the time of death. No pathological condi- 
tions are present. Location and description of 
the remains in Moore’s report indicate that 
the individual was his burial 39. 

INDIVIDUAL 7: This individual is represent- 
ed by cranial (most of the mandible without 
rami) and postcranial fragments and a partial 
dentition. The age at death is younger than 
individual 8. However, there could be mix- 
ture of cranial and postcranial elements be- 
tween the two. The left and right maxillary 
first deciduous incisors and the mandibular 
lower left deciduous incisor show initial root 
formation, the maxillary and the mandibular 
deciduous canines show about two-thirds 
crown formation, and mandibular deciduous 
left first molar and maxillary left second mo- 
lar crowns are approximately completed. 
These characteristics of dental formation in- 
dicate that the individual was less than one 
year of age at the time of death, but was 
probably not less than six months of age 
(Ubelaker, 1989). 

The location and age at death of this in- 
dividual suggests that he or she corresponds 
with Moore’s burial 31. 

INDIVIDUAL 8: Individual 8 consists of cra- 
nial fragments (including a left mandibular 
ramus with a crypt for a molar), postcrania, 
and a partial dentition. Although this individ- 
ual is older than individual 7, there is likely 
mixture of cranial and postcranial elements 
for the two individuals. The dental develop- 
ment indicates that the age at death was be- 
tween two and three years: the deciduous 
central mandibular incisor shows complete 
root formation (with some occlusal surface 
wear); the permanent first and second left 
maxillary incisors are about one-third devel- 
oped; and the maxillary first deciduous molar 
is in functional occlusion (or nearly so) and 
the maxillary second deciduous molar is in 
its crypt and unerupted. Lengths of long 
bones are consistent with this age estimation 
(table 1; see Ubelaker, 1989). 

Based on the presence of periosteal reac- 
tions on the diaphyses of the left humerus, 
left femur, and right tibia, this individual ap- 


2002: ~ LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY Lo 


Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Maxillary Tooth Type 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Ten Juveniles) 


So 
® 
= 
= 
o 
” 
® 
he 
roe 
o 
ao 
= 
= 
cy 
Oo 
& 
o 
ou 


ai sdi2 "dc dm) amz2 ce - PS. P4. Mi MZ 
Tooth Type 


a Right (%) Ei Left (%) 


Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Mandibular Tooth Type 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Ten Juveniles) 


AGO 


Percent Represented 
O1 
io) 


Bho tot rh tt otony 
hyta ty estes ey, 


20 4 
10 : ox 
Gis Giz dc dmi-dm2 | I2 CC Fao Pe Mie NZ M3 
Tooth Type 


MRight (%) BiLeft (%) E1Unsided (%) 


Fig. 6. Percent of juveniles represented by tooth types. The frequencies are in relation to 10 juve- 
niles. 


20 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 4 
Adult Dental Preservation? 


Left Right Unsided Total> 
Tooth N % N % N % N % 
Maxilla 
Il 7 43.8 6 375 — — 7 43.8 
I2 5 . 31:3 4 250 — — G) 37.5 
Cc G 375 4 2.0 — — Or SHS 
P3 5. 313 5 313 — — 7 4338 
P4 > - 31.3 4 250 — — 7 43.8 
M1 67 35 5 313 — — 9: 36.3 
M2 7h Sa-3 4 2.0 — — > Bas 
M3 3 18.8 2 125 ~-— — 4. 25.0 
Mandible 
I] 3 18.8 5 313 — — 6 Sho 
I2 » S03 4 2.0 — — 5. S83 
ec a 43 3 188 — — G6. SRS 
P3 6. 375 5 313 — — 7 43.8 
P4 a 313 5 313 — — T A438 
M1 3 18.8 3 188 — — 6) 83755 
M2 4 25.0 5 313 — — 8 50.0 
M3 3 18.8 6 375 — — 7 43.8 


* Includes teeth that are part of associated individuals (N = 
16 adults). 

> Total refers to the number of individuals represented by the 
tooth type, regardless of side. 


pears to have suffered from a major systemic 
infection. The inflammation was most pro- 
nounced in the metaphysis of the left proxi- 
mal femur. 

The age at death of this person indicates 
that it is probably Moore’s burial 42, a two- 
year-old described by him. Alternatively, the 
burial may be Moore’s number 35, another 
individual he identified as an “‘infant’’. 

INDIVIDUAL 9: Individual 9 is represented 
by calcined bone fragments scattered across 
a number of excavation units. The bones 
range in color from dark black to deep gray. 
Some cortex fragments were burned white. 
The fragments are very small, and neither 
age estimation or sex identification is possi- 
ble. The general location and burned nature 
of these bone fragments indicate that they are 
from the single cremation identified as burial 
30 by Moore. 

INDIVIDUAL 10: The remains of this juve- 
nile are represented by the dentition only. It 
is also possible that some of the rib frag- 
ments assigned to individuals 7 and 8 are 
part of individual 10. The dental develop- 


ment shows the following characteristics: the 
left maxillary deciduous lateral and central 
incisors show the beginnings of a root for- 
mation; the left mandibular deciduous central 
incisor has a root which is 25% complete; 
the crown of the right maxillary deciduous 
canine is about 75% complete and has a large 
linear enamel hypoplasia; and the crowns of 
the maxillary deciduous left and right first 
molar and right mandibular deciduous sec- 
ond molars are complete. The crowns of the 
left and right mandibular and maxillary de- 
ciduous second molars are about half formed. 
These characteristics indicate an age of about 
six to nine months at the time of death. In- 
dividual 10 probably corresponds with the 
infant that Moore described in the northeast 
corner of unit F8 (burial 28). 

INDIVIDUAL 11: This individual is repre- 
sented by a disturbed, but remarkably com- 
plete skeleton (the most complete skeleton 
recovered by us in the mound). Most cranial, 
mandibular, and postcranial bones and teeth 
are present. Based on dental development, 
the individual was a newborn to a few 
months of age at the time of death: the 
crowns of the deciduous maxillary and man- 
dibular first incisors are nearly fully formed, 
and the crowns of the deciduous mandibular 
canine and maxillary first molar are about 
half formed. The length of the long bones is 
consistent with this age at death (table 1; see 
Ubelaker, 1989). 

The upper deciduous first incisors have 
unusually large lingual tubercles, extending 
nearly the height of the tooth crowns. No pa- 
thology is present. 

Individual 11 is probably Moore’s burial 
18. His monograph describes a “‘very young 
infant’ buried 4 feet below the surface as- 
sociated with shell beads. Individual 11 was 
interred with small shell beads and was 
found more than 80 cm below the surface. It 
is also possible that individual 11 is Moore’s 
burial 21. However, Moore reported that the 
base of the pit associated with burial 21 ex- 
tended into a layer of oyster shells, which we 
did not observe in our excavation of individ- 
ual 11. 

INDIVIDUAL 12: Individual 12 is a large 
cluster of bones and highly worn teeth. 
Moore indicated the presence of two adult 
female skeletons in the general area of the 


2002 


So 
o 
to 
= 
oT) 
”) 
o 
tee 
2. 
® 
ao 
Sl 
c 
om) 
oO 
he 
o 
oO 


100 


Percent Represented 


Fig. 7. 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 21 


Percent of Adults Represented by Each Maxillary Tooth Type 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Sixteen Adults) 


P3 P4 


Tooth Type 
‘Right (%) EiLeft (%) 


Percent of Adults Represented by Each Mandibular Tooth Type 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Sixteen Adults) 


1 12 C P3 P4 M1 M2 M3 


Tooth Type 


‘Might (%) BiLeft (%) 


Percent of adults represented by tooth types. The frequencies are in relation to 16 adults. 


22 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 5 
Juvenile Skeletal Element Preservation® 


Left Right Unsided Axial Total> 
Element N % N % N % N % N % 

Cranium — — — — — — Z 70 T 70 
Mandible — —_ — — — as 6 60 6 60 
Hyoid — — — a _- — — Ses ‘= as 
Vertebra(e) 

(unidentifiable) — — — —— a — 3 30 3 30 
Cervical vertebra(e) — — — — = — Pe 20 2 20 

Cl — — = = = = = — — os 

C2 Je es =a == — — 1 10 10 
Thoracic vertebra(e) — — — ass = 2S 2 Bt. == ie 
Lumbar vertebra(e) — — — — — — 2 as = fe. 
Sacrum — — — — — — — — — aie 
Rib(s) — — — —_ 4 40 — — 4 40 
Sternum — — — — — — — — == a= 
Clavicle 3 30 1 10 Z 20 — — 4 40 
Scapula 2 20 10 2 20 — — 3 30 
Humerus ] 10 3 30 _— — — a 3 30 
Radius Zz 20 3 30 Z 20 _ — 5 50 
Ulna 2 20 l 10 ] 10 — — 3 30 
Carpal(s) — — — — re 10 —- - ] 10 
Metacarpals — —_ — a — = — = an! = 
Hand phalange(s) — — — — — — — — — = 
Proximal hand 

phalange(s) — — — — 1 10 = ae 1 10 
Intermediate hand 

phalange(s) --- — —- “= 1 10 — — 1 10 
Terminal hand 

phalange(s) — — == — — — — — — — 
Ilium ] 10 Z 20 — = = = 2 20 
Ischium 2 20 1 10 — os _ — Z 20 
Pubis l 10 1 10 l 10 — -— 2 20 
Femur 4 40 3 30 — — — — 5 50 
Patella 1 10 _ — = = — — 1 10 
Tibia 4 40 3 30 1 10 — — 4 40 
Fibula l 10 1 10 2 20 — — 2 20 
Calcaneus 2 20 — — — — —_ 2 20 
Cuboid — = — = — a — — — — 
Intermediate 

cuneiform a —- — -— — a — — —_ — 
Lateral cuneiform — = ] 10 _ — _ — | 10 
Medial cuneiform _ — — os —— _ — — — — 
Navicular -— — -- a= —_ — — — — —_ 
Talus _ —— ] 10 — a —- — l 10 


Metatarsal(s) =o — — — —_ — a =e oo i 
Foot phalange(s) — — _— ar ae: —_ = — eee ae 


* Includes postcranial elements that are part of associated individuals (N = 10 juveniles). 
> Total refers to the number of individuals represented by the element, regardless of side. 
© Unidentifiable carpal. 


2002 


mound. One of the adult female skeletons 
(burial 19) was located in the southeast quad- 
rant of unit H9, and the other adult female 
skeleton (burial 23) was located in the north 
half of unit H9. The remains representing in- 
dividual 12 are probably from Moore’s burial 
23 because of its location. In addition, a se- 
ries of potsherds, which appear to be from 
the same vessel, were found adjacent to in- 
dividual 12. Moore reported that burial 23 
was associated with a burial jar that was 
‘“‘very badly crushed”’ (Moore, 1897: 78). 

The skeleton of individual 12 is gracile, 
which is suggestive of a female. The cranial 
sutures are largely obliterated, and the occlu- 
sal surfaces of teeth are severely worn, show- 
ing a great deal of dentine exposure. Age at 
death is at least 40, and probably older. The 
tooth wear is similar to that of individual 27/ 
28A. There may be some mixture of the den- 
titions from these two individuals (and see 
below). 

One maxillary right fourth premolar is ro- 
tated approximately 90° clockwise from the 
normal position. Aside from this unusual 
condition, no other pathology was observed. 

INDIVIDUAL 13: This individual is repre- 
sented by cranial and postcranial bones and 
numerous teeth (mostly deciduous). Dental 
development suggests an age of one to three 
years (permanent first molar crowns either 
complete or show initial root formation). 
Based on their location and Moore’s descrip- 
tion, these remains are probably from his 
burial 27. The individual, some of which was 
found in association with a submound pit, is 
about the same age at death as another ju- 
venile located nearby (individual 20). How- 
ever, the occlusal surface wear on individual 
13’s deciduous maxillary canine is slightly 
less than on individual 20’s canine. Given the 
similarity in the ages of individuals 13 and 
20, some of the remains may be mixed be- 
tween the two individuals. No pathology was 
observed. 

INDIVIDUAL 14: This individual is com- 
prised of cranial and postcranial fragments 
and a partial dentition. The overall robustic- 
ity, especially involving a prominent supra- 
orbital torus, suggests that this individual is 
a male. Occlusal surface wear on the maxil- 
lary left third premolar and right second mo- 
lar is very minimal, suggesting that the per- 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY PA 


son’s age at death is from 17 to 25 years. 
Moreover, the major cranial sutures are dis- 
tinctive and largely unfused. There is no ob- 
vious pathology for this person. 

The location of the remains and Moore’s 
description indicate that individual 14 is 
probably his burial 38. 

INDIVIDUAL 15: This individual is repre- 
sented by cranial and postcranial elements 
and a partial dentition. Based on the relative- 
ly high degree of robusticity and the lack of 
preauricular sulci, the person is probably a 
male. All of the epiphyses are completely 
closed (distal left humerus, proximal clavi- 
cle, proximal ulna; medial clavicle), suggest- 
ing that age at death is at least 30 years. 
Moreover, occlusal surface wear is pro- 
nounced, with significant dentine exposure 
on most teeth. 

The skeletal remains of this individual are 
in close association with the remains of an- 
other more robust adult male and an adult 
female. Bones attributed to this individual 
were in size intermediate to the other male 
and the female. The other male, individual 
17, was much larger than individual 15 and 
was represented by only a few bones. 

Individual 15 exhibited an extensive pro- 
liferative periosteal response on a proximal 
humerus diaphysis (fig. 10) and a periosteal 
reaction on the diaphysis of the right tibia. 
Both distal humeri displayed septal aper- 
tures. In addition to pronounced occlusal sur- 
face wear, he had lost six teeth antemortem 
Gi.e., the mandibular right first and second 
molars, left first and third molars, and max- 
illary left and right fourth premolars). Adja- 
cent teeth are carious, especially in the ce- 
mentoenamel junctions. These lesions were 
most often on the side of the tooth adjacent 
to a lost tooth, although some lesions were 
found on the lingual side of the tooth. Cari- 
ous teeth include the mandibular right first 
incisor and left third premolars, and maxil- 
lary right first molar. 

Moore described burial 45 as an adult 
male in association with burial 46, an adult 
female disarticulated skeleton, and with buri- 
al 47, an adult male represented by only a 
few bones (“‘a cranium, a femur, and a hu- 
merus’’). Most of the remains of individual 
15 were found in unit C10 with its bones 
scattered intermittently among those of buri- 


24 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


TABLE 6 
Adult Skeletal Element Preservation® 


NO. 84 


Unsided 


Element 


Cranium 

Mandible 

Hyoid 

Vertebra(e) 
(unidentifiable) 


Cervical vertebra(e) 


Cl 
€2 


Thoracic vertebra(e) 


Lumbar vertebra(e) 
Sacrum 
Rib/s 
Sternum 
Clavicle 
Scapula 
Humerus 
Radius 
Ulna 
Capitate 
Hamate 
Lunate 
Pisiform 
Scaphoid 
Trapezium 
Triquetral 
Metacarpals 
MC] 
MC2 
MC3 
MC4 
MC5 
Hand phalange(s) 
Proximal hand 
phalange(s) 
Intermediate hand 
phalange(s) 
Terminal hand 
phalange(s) 
Innominate 
Femur 
Patella 
Tibia 
Fibula 
Calcaneus 
Cuboid 
Intermediate 
cuneiform 
Lateral cuneiform 
Medial cuneiform 
Navicular 
Talus 


J ennn-- | ww | NNN OR NNW | 


| | newer anean-ao | 


Jenne | 


12.5 


N Jo 
10 62.5 
2 125 
5 313 
5 SNES) 
6 6 4 fe 
2 L235 
2 125 
6 315 
] 6.3 
5 S15 
4 25.0 
4 25.0 
3 18.8 
5 a1 
6 37.9 
9 56.3 
| 43.8 
2 ee 
3 18.8 


Ue BRWE XIE WWNANWSE ODO ON | STH NWKWWAN 


Rw | 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 25 
TABLE 6 
(Continued) 
Left Right Unsided Axial Total> 
Element N % N % N % N % N Jo 

Metatarsal(s) l 6.3 1 6.3 3 18.8 _— — 4 25.0 

MT! — — — — — — _- — — =e 

MT2 — — — — 1 6.3 — — ] 6.3 

MT3 — _— — — — —_ a — = = 

MT4 _ — — — ] 6.3 — — ] 6.3 

MTS5 — a = a = — — _ 1 6.3 
Foot phalange(s) — — = = 2 2S — = 2 135 
Proximal foot 

phalange(s) 1 6.3 1 6.3 3 18.8 — — 4 25.0 
Intermediate foot 

phalange(s) — — 1 6.3 3 18.8 on — 3 18.8 
Terminal food 

phalange(s) —— — l 6.3 — — a os l 6.3 


4 Includes postcranial elements that are part of associated individuals (N = 16 adults). 
b Total refers to the number of individuals represented by the element, regardless of side. 


als 46 and 47. Some bones from unit D9 
were assigned to individual 15. These bones 
were found at shallow depths in the south- 
eastern corner of that excavation unit. They 
closely matched individual 15’s skeletal ro- 
busticity. Individual 15 is probably Moore’s 
burial 45. 

INDIVIDUAL 16: This individual is repre- 
sented by a partial skeleton, including a cal- 
varium, other cranial fragments, postcrania, 
and dentition. The calvarium consists of a 
complete frontal, left and right parietals, left 
and right temporals, and occipital. The cal- 
varium is the only measurable portion of a 
Skull in the South End Mound I series (max- 
imum length, 175 mm; maximum cranial 
breadth, 150 mm; minimum frontal breadth, 
99.7 mm; interorbital breadth, 103.2 mm: 
frontal chord, 123.1 mm; parietal chord, 
105.3 mm; bi-asterionic chord, 115.6 mm). 
The cranium is short anteriorly-posteriorly 
(cranial index of 85). The mastoid process is 
small, the supraorbital torus is gracile, and 
there is a distinctive preauricular sulcus. The 
cranium and postcranium are generally grac- 
ile. These characteristics suggest that the per- 
son is a female. All major epiphyses are 
closed, the sutures show very little closure, 
and all teeth are erupted and have slight to 
moderate occlusal surface wear. These char- 
acteristics suggest that the person was be- 


tween 17 and 23 years of age at the time of 
death. 

Moore indicated that the skeleton of an 
adult female, burial 46, was present in this 
area of the mound. The only other adult fe- 
male in the area was found in the adjacent 
unit Cll. However, the skeletal remains of 
the two females, from units C10 and Cll, 
are distinctive in their degree of gracility, 
color, and texture. These differences in lo- 
cation and other characteristics indicate that 
the adult female bones comprising individual 
16 are likely the same as Moore’s burial 46. 
Our 1992 excavations revealed a concentra- 
tion of bones that matches Moore’s location 
of his burial 46 (fig. 11). 

This individual possesses a number of 
pathological conditions, including healed cri- 
bra orbitalia, and periosteal reactions on the 
right ulna, fibula, and right distal tibia. The 
periosteal reaction on the right ulna repre- 
sents a large proliferative infectious lesion 
active at the time of death and is located on 
the distal third of the diaphysis (fig. 12). The 
lesion may be associated with a fracture. The 
presence of periosteal reactions on multiple 
bones suggests some type of systemic infec- 
tion, such as treponematosis. Carious lesions 
are present on the mandibular left second and 
third molars and right canine (called individ- 
ual 16/17A since the teeth could not be as- 


26 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Midline Axial Element 
(Based on the Identification of Ten Juveniles) 


Cranium 


Mandible 


Vertebra/e 
(Indet.) 


Cervical 
Vertebra/e 


VY) 
—_ 
Cc 
® 
E 
o 
LL 
3 
chee! 
2 
® 
x 
op) 
S 
x< 
<= 
o 
£ 
3 
= 


C2 


20 40 


60 80 


Percent of Individuals Represented 


‘MTotal % (Axial) 


Fig. 8. 


Percent of juveniles represented by (a) midline axial skeletal elements, (b) upper body 


elements, and (c) lower body elements. The frequencies are in relation to 10 juveniles. 


signed to one or the other individual). The 
canine and third molar crowns had been 
completely destroyed due to caries. 


INDIVIDUAL 17: The skeletal remains of 


this person are represented by few cranial 
and postcranial fragments and a partial den- 
tition. The overall degree of robusticity sug- 
gests that the individual is a male; a complete 
closure of epiphyses indicates that he was a 
mature adult. The occlusal surface wear on 
the teeth is minimal to moderate and is about 
the same degree of wear as in individual 16. 
The incisors and canines show slight wear, 
and the first molars have some dentine ex- 
posure. These features suggest that the indi- 
vidual was a young adult at the time of death 
(less than 23 years). Because of the similarity 
of occlusal surface wear between individuals 
16 and 17, the dentitions are mixed. 


Pathology is represented by periosteal re- 
actions on the right tibia. 

Individual 17 is likely Moore’s burial 47 
because it was found in the same cluster of 
bones as burial 45, an adult male, and burial 
46, an adult female, in a concentration of 
skeletal elements in unit C10. 

INDIVIDUAL 18: This person is represented 
by cranial and postcranial fragments and a 
partial dentition. The skeleton is very gracile, 
and the greater sciatic notch is wide. These 
characteristics suggest that the individual 
was a female. Her tooth wear is excessive, 
with a large amount of dentine exposure and 
severe crown height reduction. She was like- 
ly more than 40 years of age at the time of 
death. 

The assignment of skeletal elements to this 
individual was difficult because of the pres- 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY pA 


Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Upper Body Element 
( Based on the Presence of Ten Juveniles) 


Radius 


Clavicle 


Rib/s 


UlIna 


Humerus 


Scapula 


Upper Body Elements 


Middle Hand 
Phalange/s 


Proximal Hand 
Phalange/s 


Carpal/s 


First Rib 


20 40 60 80 


Percent of Individuals Represented 


@ Total % (Any Side) 


Fig. 8. Continued. 


28 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


C 
Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Lower Body Element 
(Based on the Identification of Ten Juveniles) 

Femur 

Tibia 

Calcaneus 

Fibula 
g 
Cc 
® 

= Pubis 
Ww 
> 
oD 
° 

= Ischium 
® 
S 
) 
s 

lium 

Talus 

Lateral 
Cuneiform 
Patella 


0 20 40 60 80 100 


Percent of Individuals Represented 
@ Total % (Any Side) 


Fig. 8. Continued. 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 29 


Percent of Adults Represented by Each Midline Axial Element 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Sixteen Adults) 


Cranium 

Mandible 
Vertebra/e (Indet.) 
Cervical Vertebra/e 
C2 

C1 

Thoracic Vertebra/e 


Lumbar Vertebra/e 


2) 
~ 
= 
® 
= 
2 
Lu 
6 
_ 
= 
® 
a4 
“” 
& 
x 
= § 
® 
= 
3 
= 


Sacrum 


Hyoid 


20 


40 


60 80 


Percent of Individuals Represented 


Bis. 9. 


‘Mi Total % (Axial) 


Percent of adults represented by (a) midline axial skeletal elements, (b) upper body elements, 


and (c) lower body elements. The frequencies are in relation to 16 adults. 


ence of a minimum of four individuals in the 
general location of this person. However, this 
female has distinctively greater cortical bone 
thickness than do two other females in the 
immediate vicinity. Her mandibular third 
molars are missing (agenesis). 

Several pathological conditions are present 
for this person, including well-healed peri- 
osteal reaction on the midshafts of the right 
femur and right tibia and pronounced hypo- 
plasias on a maxillary right central incisor. 

The location of individual 18 in the mound 
and the description by Moore indicate that 
this person is probably Moore’s burial 49. 

INDIVIDUAL 19: Individual 19 is represent- 
ed by a few cranial and postcranial bones and 
a partial dentition. The bones were found in 
a discernable pit extending into the sterile 
submound horizon. The skeletal remains are 
generally gracile, suggesting that this person 
is a female. The teeth are highly worn, in- 


dicating an age at death of 35 to 45 years. 
The right mandibular third molar is carious. 

The location and description provided by 
Moore indicate that individual 19 is probably 
his burial 50. 

INDIVIDUAL 20: This individual is com- 
prised of the poorly preserved cranial and 
postcranial remains and a dentition of an in- 
fant. The size of the bones and dental devel- 
opment suggests that the person was between 
one and three years of age. In particular, the 
roots of the first deciduous molars are about 
three-quarters developed, the roots of the 
second deciduous molars have open apices, 
the crowns of the first permanent incisors are 
about half formed, and the crowns of the first 
permanent molars are nearly complete. There 
is no obvious pathology. 

The remains were found in a submound pit 
extending into the sterile horizon. The loca- 
tion and description from Moore’s report 


es) 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Percent of Adults Represented by Each Upper Body Element 
(Estimates Based on the Presence of Sixteen Adults) 


UlIna 

Rib/s 

Radius 

Humerus 

Scapula 

Clavicle 
Metacarpal/s 

Hand Phalange/s 
Middle Hand Phalanx 
Proximal Hand Phalanx 
MC3 

Lunate 

Scaphoid 


Distal Hand Phalanx 


Upper Body Elements 


MC4 

MC2 
Capitate 
Trapezium 
Pisiform 
Hamate 


Triquetral 


MC5 


MC1 


0 20 40 60 80 100 


Percent of Individuals Represented 


@ Total % (Any Side) 


Fig. 9. Continued. 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


Percent of Adults Represented by Each Lower Body Element 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Sixteen Adults) 


Tibia 


Femur 


Fibula 


Innominate 


Talus 


Patella 


Proximal Foot Phalanx 


Metatarsal/s 


Navicular 


Middle Foot Phalanx 


Lower Body Elements 


Foot Phalange/s 


Calcaneus 

Distal Foot Phalanx 
MT2 

MT4 

Medial Cuneiform 


Intermediate Cuneiform 


0 20 40 60 80 100 


Percent Represented 


‘MTotal % (Any Side) 


Fig. 9. Continued. 


32 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Fig. 10. 


suggest that this person is probably his burial 
29. This individual is located near another 
submound pit juvenile, individual 13. Indi- 
vidual 13 is roughly the same age as indi- 
vidual 20, although the wear on the decidu- 
ous maxillary canine 1s slightly less than on 
individual 20’s canine. 

INDIVIDUAL 21: This person is represented 
by postcranial fragments only. The bones are 
relatively robust, and the epiphyses are 
closed. The person is probably an adult male. 
The left tibia diaphysis displays periosteal re- 
actions. The location of the skeleton and gen- 
eral description provided by Moore indicate 
that the remains are probably part of his buri- 
al 16. 

INDIVIDUAL 22: 
mains found representing this person are 
gracile, indicating that the person is probably 
a female. She was probably an adult (full 


The few postcranial re- 


Anterior (left) and posterior (right) views of proliferative periosteal reaction on proximal 
humerus diaphysis of individual 15 compared with nonpathological anatomical specimen. 


epiphyseal closure). She has no pathology. 
The location of the remains of this individual 
suggests that she is from Moore’s burial 13. 

INDIVIDUAL 23: This person is represented 
by several bone fragments and two incom- 
pletely formed permanent teeth. The length 
of the ilium indicates an age at death of about 
five years (table 1); the dental development 
is consistent with that age (root half formed 
on right maxillary second incisor; crown 
three-quarters formed on mandibular pre- 
molar) (Ubelaker, 1989). No pathology was 
observed. 

Some or all of the remains may be from 
individual 25, which is located nearby and 
has a similar size and texture of skeletal el- 
ements. However, the bones from this person 
appear to be younger in age at death, and 
therefore, is distinct from individual 25. 

The location of the remains and age-at- 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


eS) 
Oo 


Fig. ii. 


Concentration of disturbed skeletal remains in excavation unit ClO. Based on Moore’s 


descriptions and location of remains, these elements are probably part of his burial 46 (individual 16). 


death description from Moore’s report sug- 
gest that this person may be his burial 44. 

INDIVIDUAL 24: This person is represented 
by cranial and postcranial remains and a par- 
tial dentition. All mandibular teeth are artic- 
ulated in a partial mandible, and some of the 
maxillary teeth are articulated in a partial 
maxilla. The teeth, mastoid processes, and 
cranial and postcranial elements are gracile 
and generally diminutive in size. These fea- 
tures suggest that the person is a female. The 
excessive tooth wear (extensive dentine ex- 
posure; no remaining enamel on the occlusal 
surfaces of the first molars) and presence of 
numerous carious lesions suggest that she 
was a fully mature, perhaps older adult 
(greater than 35 years). 

The location of this person in the mound 
and the general description provided in 
Moore’s report suggest that she is his burial 
34. 

The skeleton and dentition display a num- 
ber of pathological conditions. There are a 
series of periosteal reactions on two long 
bone diaphyseal fragments (lower limb) and 
right ulna. The presence of periosteal reac- 
tions on multiple elements suggests a sys- 
temic infection. Carious lesions are present 


on the following teeth: maxillary right sec- 
ond incisor, left canine, and left and right 
third premolars. There.is an alveolar abscess 
associated with the carious maxillary right 
third premolar and left canine. 

INDIVIDUAL 25: This person is represented 
by a nearly complete cranium, complete 
mandible (with articulated left permanent 
first incisor, canine, first molar, second molar, 
right first molar, second molar, left deciduous 
first molar, second molar, right canine, first 
molar, and second molar), two left maxilla 
fragments (with articulated left first and sec- 
ond incisors, third premolar, and first molar), 
five complete or nearly complete long bones 
(eft and right femora, left and right tibia, 
right clavicle), many postcranial fragments, 
and most of a mixed (deciduous and _ per- 
manent) dentition. The dentition shows the 
left and right deciduous first and second mo- 
lars and right deciduous canine and left and 
right mandibular permanent first incisors, left 
maxillary first and second incisors, and first 
molars in functional occlusion; the perma- 
nent canine, premolars, and permanent sec- 
ond molars are unerupted. The root shows 
initial formation for the permanent second 
molars. This developmental stage indicates 


34 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Fig. 12. Overall (left) and closeup (right) of proliferative periosteal reaction on distal right ulna 
diaphysis from individual 16 compared with nonpathological anatomical specimen. The lesion may 


represent an infection associated with a fracture. 


an age at death of around seven or eight 
years (Ubelaker, 1989). The lengths of the 
long bones are consistent with this age esti- 
mation (table 1; see Ubelaker, 1989). No pa- 
thology was observed. The location and de- 
scription from Moore’s report suggest that 
this skeleton is Moore’s burial 41. 
INDIVIDUAL 26: This person is represented 
by miscellaneous cranial and postcranial 
fragments and a partial juvenile dentition 
(permanent and deciduous teeth). The teeth 
had been found previously in 1979 and were 


originally assigned to individual B (individ- 
ual 2) by Larsen and Thomas (1986: 13). 
Conjoining of dental elements indicates that 
the teeth found in 1979 are part of individual 
26. Based on dental development, this person 
is between one and three years of age (closer 
to two years): crowns of permanent maxil- 
lary left first incisor, right second incisor, left 
and right canines about half formed, roots of 
deciduous maxillary second molars are about 
three-quarters formed. We observed no pa- 
thology. 


2002 


Given the similarity in age and close prox- 
imity in the mound of individuals 13, 20, and 
26, some of these teeth may be part of these 
other individuals. However, comparable teeth 
are different in size, color, and texture be- 
tween the three juveniles. The location of the 
remains of individual 26 indicates that he or 
she may be from Moore’s burial 25. 

INDIVIDUAL 27: This partial skeleton (cra- 
nial and postcranial fragments, teeth) was re- 
covered in close proximity to individual 28. 
The location of both individuals suggests that 
they are from Moore’s burials 24 and 22, re- 
spectively, which he referred to as an adult 
female and male. Many of the remains of the 
two individuals were different in size and 
texture. With regard to size, in particular, in- 
dividual 27 includes remains of a gracile 
adult, whereas individual 28 includes re- 
mains of a robust male. Given their location 
and distinctive differences, the association 
with his burials 24 and 22 seem likely. The 
ilium possesses a distinctive preauricular sul- 
cus with pronounced and multiple parturition 
scars, indicating it is a female. The auricular 
surface possesses a morphology that is con- 
sistent with a person who is in his or her late 
30s or older (Lovejoy et al., 1985). The cra- 
nial sutures are mostly obliterated, which is 
consistent with an age at death in the mature 
range. 

The skeletal remains are similar in age and 
other characteristics to individual A (individ- 
ual 1) described by Larsen and Thomas 
(1986). Visual inspection of the right femur, 
left humerus, and left ulna from individual A 
recovered in 1981 and the left femur, right 
humerus, and right ulna from individual 27 
recovered in 1992 presents a perfect match 
of all elements; that is, the limb bones re- 
covered in 1981 and 1992 are from the same 
person as those recovered in 1992. There- 
fore, our earlier assessment presented an in- 
correct attribution of the disturbed remains 
from unit G10 to burial 22. Rather, individual 
27 may be from Moore’s burial 24. 

The area of excavation containing individ- 
uals 27 and 28 yielded teeth from a minimum 
of two adults. One of the adult dentitions in- 
cludes three mandibular molars with moder- 
ate occlusal surface wear (small patches of 
dentin exposure on first molar) recovered 
from the 60-80 cm level. The other adult 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


eS) 
N 


dentition includes most of a set of highly 
worn (enamel on occlusal surface entirely 
missing for some teeth) mandibular and max- 
illary teeth. Most of the teeth from the latter 
person were loose and found in the 80-cm to 
sterile level. Four of the teeth, however, are 
in their original anatomical position in the 
right half of a mandible corpus (right canine, 
fourth premolar, first and second molars). In 
addition, a left half of a mandible containing 
six teeth and identified as individual A (in- 
dividual 1) by Larsen and Thomas (1986: 13) 
conjoins perfectly with this right half man- 
dible. Because of the uncertainty of associ- 
ation, the two adult dentitions are from either 
individual 27 or 28, but it is not possible to 
say which dentition is associated with which 
individual. For purposes of data collection, 
we refer to the two dentitions as 27/28A 
(highly worn teeth) and 27/28B (less worn 
teeth). The 27/28A tooth wear is quite sim- 
ilar to that of individual 12. The teeth from 
27/28A and 12 are derived from bone con- 
centrations some distance apart: individual 
dentition 27/28A is in the north half of unit 
G11, and individual 12 dentition is in the 
north half of unit H9. It is likely that there 
is significant mixture-of the teeth and bones 
of individuals 12, 27, and 28. 

The only pathological condition present in 
this individual is periosteal reaction of the 
right tibia diaphysis and multiple carious le- 
sions (mandibular left third premolar, right 
canine, maxillary left and right first and sec- 
ond incisors and left first molar). 

INDIVIDUAL 28: The remains of this person 
consist of cranial and postcranial fragments 
and teeth. The remains are in close associa- 
tion with individual 27. The remains are ro- 
bust and are thus distinctive from the remains 
of individual 27. The overall degree of ro- 
busticity indicates that the remains of this 
person are probably from an adult male, 
which is likely Moore’s burial 22. 

Larsen and Thomas (1986) described two 
articulated adult feet (a right and a left) from 
a single individual they found in situ in 
South End Mound I and a series of postcra- 
nial remains in the near vicinity, which they 
called individual A (individual 1), attributing 
it to Moore’s burial 22. Morphology of pel- 
vic bones from individual | indicated that the 
skeletal remains were likely female. Moore 


36 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


NO. 84 


Fig. 13a. 
individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical specimen. Left, overall bone; right, closeup. 
Note the presence of erosive lesions with uneven cortex and vascular tracks characteristic of chronic 
infection involving the entire element. This is a likely an example of endemic (nonvenereal) syphilis. 


attributed his burial 22 to the remains of an 
adult male, which we viewed with some 
skepticism. However, reassessment of the re- 
mains from individual 28 suggests that his 
remains may more likely be from Moore’s 


burial 22. If this 1s the case, then the feet of 


individual | may be from individual 27, or 
Moore’s burial 24, an adult female. Alterna 
tively, the feet may belong to Moore’s burial 


Lateral view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of left tibia of 


22, and the other postcranial remains we 
identified in the excavation fill are from his 
burial 24. The position of the articulated feet 
in relation to other burials in South End 
Mound I and the edge of Moore’s excavation 
in the south profile of unit B8 argue that the 
feet are likely part of Moore’s burial 22. It is 
not possible to determine sex from the foot 
bones. Therefore, the correct attribution of 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 37 


Pre, J1 36. 
individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical specimen. The left shows the bone overall and 
the right shows a closeup. 


the feet to one or the other of Moore’s burials 
(22 or 24) is ambiguous. We conclude that 
the articulated feet documented by Larsen 
and Thomas (1986) are more likely part of 
Moore’s burial 22 than his burial 24. This 
suggests, then, that the postcranial remains 
found in the fill of the Larsen and Thomas 
1981 excavation are part of Moore’s burial 
24, the remains of an adult female we have 
called individual 27. 

A number of pathological conditions are 


Medial view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of left tibia of 


present for individual 28, including a single 
carious tooth (mandibular right third molar), 
and healed porotic hyperostosis is present on 
a parietal and occipital squamous. Periosteal 
reactions are present on the diaphyses of the 
left distal femur diaphysis and diaphyses of 
the left tibia and left and right fibulae. The 
entire diaphysis of the left tibia has periosteal 
proliferation accompanied by erosive lesions 
with an uneven cortex from a severe chronic 
infection (fig. 13a—13b). A distal half of a 


38 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


right adult radius we associated with individ- 
ual A and found in 1981 has periosteal re- 
action and may be from this individual. The 
pattern of widespread periosteal reactions af- 
fecting multiple bones suggests systemic in- 
fection, probably treponematosis (endemic, 
nonvenereal syphilis). 

INDIVIDUAL 29: This individual is repre- 
sented by very fragmentary postcranial skel- 
etal elements. The remains are from a rela- 
tively gracile person, suggesting that they are 
from a female. No pathology was observed. 
The location of the remains and description 
in Moore’s report suggest that the skeleton is 
the same as his burial 43. 

SUMMARY: The skeletal series at South 
End Mound I is represented by the fragmen- 
tary remains of 10 juveniles and 16 adults. 
The ages range from neonate (newborn) to 
mature adulthood. Both males and females 
are represented. Our excavation and analysis 
indicates that about half of the number of 
individuals identified by C.B. Moore in his 
excavations in the 1890s are present in the 
series (and see Moore, 1897). 


ARTIFACTS 
David Hurst Thomas and Jessica McNeil 


Various ceramic and nonceramic artifacts 
were recovered during the 1991—1993 exca- 
vations in South End Mound I; all are from 
disturbed mound fill. These materials, de- 
scribed below, confirm our earlier assessments 
that the mound was constructed during the Ir- 
ene period. Most of the artifacts represent the 
general period associated with mound con- 
struction and its use as a mortuary locality. 
However, a small number of artifacts pre-date 
mound use (relatively early ceramic fragments) 
and postmound use (historic-era artifacts). 


CERAMIC ARTIFACTS 


C.B. Moore collected complete ceramic 
vessels from the South End Mound I exca- 
vations, donating two each to the Peabody 
Museum (Harvard University), Heye Foun- 
dation (New York), and the AMNH. All six 
vessels have been described by Peter (1986: 
14—15, figs. 8-10): 


Vessel A (Heye Foundation 17/4479): Ir- 
ene Complicated Stamped 


Vessel Ca (Peabody Museum 48334): Ir 
ene Complicated Stamped 

Vessel Cb (Peabody Museum 48335): Ir- 
ene Plain 

Vessel E (Heye Foundation 18/413): Irene 
Plain 

Vessel Fa (AMNH 20/1565): Irene Com- 
plicated Stamped 

Vessel Fb (AMNH 20/1566): Irene Bur- 
nished Plain 


During the 1979 AMNH excavations, nu- 
merous isolated sherds were recovered from 
the mound fill (Peter 1986: 15, table 1). 
Roughly three-quarters of these sherds (86 of 
113) belonged to the Irene series; St. Cath- 
erines, Wilmington, and Refuse series were 
also represented in small numbers. 

No whole or reconstructable vessels 
were encountered during the 1991-1993 
excavations, and table 7 presents counts 
and weights for the sherds recovered. Ce- 
ramic terminology follows conventions set 
out in DePratter (1979; see also Saunders, 
2000). 

A single fragment (28.3/2740) of blue 
transfer-printed pearlware was found in unit 
F11, at a depth of 60—80 cm. 


SHELL ARTIFACTS: WHELK BEADS 


Moore’s (1897) excavation report men- 
tions that ‘“‘numerous”’ shell beads accom- 
panied burials 3, 5, 18, 19, 21, 30, 40, 41, 
42, and 44; six of these were infant inter- 
ments. In several cases, the beads were found 
in the neck and wrist area. Beads were also 
found in the burial urns. The 1979 AMNH 
excavations at South End Mound I recovered 
six additional whelk beads, as described by 
Pendleton (1986b: 20-21, fig. 11). 

The 1991-1993 excavations turned up 
eight additional whelk beads from South End 
Mound I (table 8). Three of these beads are 
made from cut columella, generally taken 
from the axis end of the whelk. This axis has 
been left intact and the whorls and spirals are 
visible on the side of the beads. These long 
bead blanks were then conically drilled and 
cut into various lengths. The ends have been 
smoothed and abraded around the perfora- 
tion, but are not further modified. The other 
beads are shell discs. 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 39 
TABLE 7 
Ceramics 
Type/series N Weight (g) Type/series N Weight (g) 
Altahama series Grit tempered (continued) 
Check Stamped 2 28.5 Burnished exterior | 4.3 
Circle in Square ] 6.4 Check stamped 2 ie fa 
Line Block Stamped with rosette 3 16.1 Complicated incised 2 8.2 
Line Block Stamped with square 4 24.3 Complicated stamped 14 147.2 
Punctated rim 3 20.9 With circle 6 45.5 
Circle in square 9 223.9 With rosette 3 49.7 
Burnished interior 2 44.0 Folded, punctated flat rim l 29.2 
Folded incurvate flat rim l 15.9 Reed punctated, node rim l 16.4 
Reed punctated node rosette rim 6 71.6 Rim 2 26.5 
Irene series Impressed (?) 3 45.6 
Plain 7 77.0 incised 4.1 
Burnished 10 62.1 Linear incised 3.3 
Burnished (?) p) 16.9 Linear stamped I Pe 
Burnished interior and exterior 2 23.6 Plain . I 3.9 
Rigs a) 102.5 Shell scraped exterior l 4.4 
Shell scraped interior 1 6.2 Folded rim I 1.4 
Complicated Stamped 151 1159.7 Punctated 0.2 
Rim 2 19.9 Shell scraped interior l 10.6 
Reed punctated l 1.4 
St. Catherines series Stamped 719 806.1 
Plain 3 25.7 Folded punctated rim 3 13.4 
Plain (?) I 11.3 Folded rim 7 17.3 
Stamped (7) ] 0.8 Incised 2 286 
Rim I 6.7 Reed rosette, possible Altahama 
Savannah series Line Block Stamped | 6.1 
Plain Reed punctated 0.2 
Burnished interior and exterior 1 a Rosette rim 1 24 
Plain rim 1 21.8 Folded rim ] 0.6 
Folded rim 1 4.5 Node rim 1 13.9 
Plain (7) 2 14.3 Rim 8 67.0 
Misc. 2 ee Rim, Flared | i He 
Wilmington series Misc. small sherds 5 72 
Heavy Cord Marked 1 11.7 Gnit and clay tempered l 1.8 
Stamped nm 1 2.4 Decorated, punctated ] 3.4 
Wilmington (?), very thick l 172.1 Shell scraped interior l 3.9 
Misc. 1 105.8 Grit and sand tempered 2 11.4 
Deptford series Grit, clay, and sand tempered 
Check Stamped 4 24.0 Burnished, interior and exterior 2 16.2 
Folded Rim ] a Stamped | 67.2 
Pin 4 26.6 
Clay and sand tempered 
aetniped : oe Rosette decoration l 0.1 
Misc. 1 5.6 
Deptford (?) l 2.9 Sand and grit tempered 
Plain 1 4.9 
Refuge series 
Plain 3 51.5 fam tealy) se 
Simple Stamped 1 4.6 ISS 4 
Refuge (7) 1 6.9 Sand and grog tempered 
Refuge, late(?) 2) 16.8 Stamped, with punctated nodes, 
Walthour 2 20.1 pid sind oss Se 
Ga Misc. unidentified small sherds 425 634.7 
rit tempered 
Burnished interior 3 13.3 Misc. unidentified ceramics 8 46.1 
Burnished interior, shell scraped 
exterior 1 5:2 


a 


40 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


TABLE 8 
Whelk Beads 


Specimen Length Width Perforation Weight 
no. (mm) (mm) diameter(mm) (g) 
28.3/2732a P12 4.07 2.04 0.4 
28 .3/2732b 4.32 2.34 1.11 0.1 
28.3/2747 32.58 19.11 Si? 1237 
28.3/2769 32.94 19.50 4.71 12/9 
28.3/2676a 6.32 235 1.60 0.2 
28.3/2676b 4.58 6 be — 0.1 
28 .3/2676c 4.62 1.71 1.78 a 


28.3/2787 10.54 4.78 1.40 0.6 


SHELL ARTIFACTS: MODIFIED WHELKS 


Ten modified whelk shell artifacts were 
found in the South End Mound I artifacts and 
the attributes are presented on table 9. In 
each case, the pointed end of the anterior ca- 
nal was damaged from use, and the outer lip 
was often broken as well. One of these has 
a hole in the outer whorl. 


LITHIC ARTIFACTS 


Only a handful of lithic artifacts were re- 
covered from the South End Mound I exca- 
vations, 28 of which are discussed here. This 
number consists of two bifaces, one unifa- 
cially flaked artifact, and 25 pieces of debi- 
tage (see table 10 for summary statistics of 
flaked lithic artifacts). All of the artifacts dis- 
cussed below were analyzed in accordance 
with the procedures set forth by McNeil 
(1999). These artifacts are analyzed as a sep- 
arate grouping from those which were previ- 
ously described from the South End Mound I 
excavations (see Pendleton, 1986b: 15—20). 

Both of the bifacially flaked artifacts are 
Pinellas projectile points, as defined by Bullen 
(1975: 8). Pinellas points are a local variation 
of the Middle Mississippian Cluster which are 
common throughout eastern North America, 
and date to between ca. A.D. 1250 and 1600 
(Bullen, 1975: 4, 8; Justice, 1995: 227). 

Artifact 28.3/2760 (fig. 14) 1s a small, 
asymmetrical projectile point, the blade mar- 
gins of which are slightly incurvate—excur- 
vate. One of the basal corners extends below 
the basal plane of the point whereas the other 
does not, giving the impression that it had 
been fractured. The basal margin on this 


NO. 84 
TABLE 9 
Modified Whelk Artifacts 
Specimen Height Width Lip Weight 
no. (mm) (mm) (mm) (g) 

28.3/2665 82.88 99.02 — 98.9 
28.3/2664 128.33 80.88 3.02 182.1 
28.3/2617 180.03 106.31 1.44 448.0 
28 .3/2690 118.51 94.09 1.09 161.2 
28.3/2623 126.19 97.24 0.75 8.9 
28.3/2675 103.09 75.74 0.99 119.9 
28.3/2715 119.19 96.94 0.63 165.9 
28.3/2716 133.32 109.33 1.02 345.8 
28.3/2718 121-15 93.31 jaa 1935 


28.3/2721 99:97 69.51 0.83 97.1 


point is incurvate—excurvate and is sharply 
beveled. It exhibits a rhomboid cross-section 
and is produced from a tan-colored chert. 

Projectile point 28.3/2776 (fig. 14) is 
roughly equilateral in plane view; it exhibits 
primarily straight-sided blade margins and a 
concave basal margin. In cross-section it is 
concave—median ridged, and random pres- 
sure flake scars are visible on both faces. 
This artifact was also produced from a tan- 
colored chert, although the two points do not 
appear to have been produced from the same 
raw material. Three groupings of parallel 
striations are evident. Two of the groups are 
located on one face and the third is on the 
opposite face. These striations, however, may 
have occurred during the manufacture of the 
point rather than during use. 

Artifact 28.3/2642a is a fragment of a 
chert uniface and was also produced from a 
tan-colored chert (fig. 14). The only unbro- 
ken margin of this artifact exhibits steep re- 
touch. With the exception of this small 
amount of retouch, this artifact remains rel- 
atively unmodified. 

In addition to the retouched artifacts, 25 
pieces of debitage were analyzed with this 
grouping of artifacts from South End Mound 
I. Two of these artifacts were produced from 
basalt, while the remainder were produced 
from chert. Cortex remains on the dorsal fac- 
es of three of the chert flakes and on one 
piece of shatter. Of the chert flakes, six ap- 
pear to have been produced from the same 
raw material. Two of these flakes were found 
in excavation unit G11, while the other four 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


4] 


TABLE 10 
Lithic Artifacts 


Length, Length, Width, Width, 
Specimen maximum axial maximum basal Thickness Weight 
no. Type (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (g) 
28 .3/2760 Projectile point 18.6 16.4 15.7 7 3.5 0.2 
28.3/2776 Projectile point 23:3 21.9 20.9 20.9 4.9 1.5 
28 .3/2642 Uniface — = = — — 1.0 


were found in unit 19. None of the debitage 
flakes appears to have been produced from 
the same raw material source as the uniface 
or projectile points. 


MISCELLANEOUS ARTIFACTS 


Several other artifacts were recovered in 
the 1991-1993 excavations. Artifact 28.3/ 
2653 is a .30-caliber lead shot (7.67 mm in 
diameter, 2.6 g); found in the upper 20-cm 
level (unit B8). A porcelain button (10.74 
mm in diameter, 0.4 g) was recovered in the 
20—40-cm level of unit A8. A heavily cor- 
roded nail fragment (28.3/2616; 24.39 mm 
long, 4.61 mm wide, 1.6 gm) came from the 
40—60-cm level of unit C10. 

Two kaolin pipe stem fragments were 
found. Artifact 28.3/2631 (35.45 mm long, 
7.31 mm in diameter, 1.89 mm stem hole di- 
ameter) came from the 20—40-cm level of 
unit C8. Artifact 28.3/2648 (21.12 mm long, 
7.47 mm in diameter, 1.89 mm stem hole di- 
ameter) was found in the 20—40-cm level of 
unit A8. Both fragments may derive from the 
same tobacco pipe. 

A number of glass fragments were found. 
Four sherds of a clear glass rounded bottle 
(28.3/2646) came from the 20—40-cm level 
of unit A8; a very similar glass sherd (28.3/ 
2651a) was found in the O0—20-cm level of 
B8 and three more pieces (28.3/2654), from 
the 20—40-cm level of the same unit, may all 
derive from the same bottle. The 20—40-cm 
level of unit A8 also contained a small, 
heavily eroded green glass bottle fragment. 

A roundish white calcium carbonate pebble 
(no catalog number) was found in the 20—40- 
cm level of unit E9 (11.14 X 9.01 X 7.55 
mm, 0.8 g). This unmodified pebble is similar 
to several others found clustered together near 


burials 2, 14, and 15 (Moore, 1897: 76—77), 
probably interred inside a rattle. 


RESOURCE UTILIZATION AND 
DIETARY RECONSTRUCTION 


Elizabeth J. Reitz, Clark Spencer Larsen, 
and Margaret J. Schoeninger 


ZOOARCHAEOLOGY 


A large number of animal remains were 
recovered during the 1991—1993 excavation 
of South End Mound I (NISP = 1722 frag- 
ments; in addition, 442 fragments were re- 
covered in 1979-1981, see O’Brien, 1986, 
for description). The unusually large size of 
the sample reflects the fact that there is a 
significant midden deposit in the mound, 
which Moore (1897) described and we en- 
countered. 

Standard zooarchaeological methods were 
used to identify animal remains recovered in 
the excavations at South End Mound I (see 
Reitz and Wing, 1999). Analysis of animal 
remains revealed the presence of a diverse 
fauna, including large and small-bodied 
mammals, birds, reptiles, fishes, and shellfish 
(table 11). The list of taxa from the 1979— 
1981 and 1991-1993 excavations are iden- 
tical. 

Some of the faunal remains are commen- 
sal taxa, representing casual (nondietary) in- 
clusions in the mound fill. For example, toad 
and mouse were likely not part of native diet. 
Most of the remains we recovered from the 
mound fill have a dietary origin, however. 
The dietary origin of these remains is indi- 
cated both by the type of animal (e.g., deer) 
and the presence of butchering marks and 
burning. 

By far, the greatest contributor to edible 


42 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Fig. 14. Stone artifacts from South End 
Mound I: top, partial projectile point (28.3.2760); 
middle, projectile point (28.3.2776); bottom, uni- 
face (28.3.2642). 


biomass (calculated following Reitz and 
Scarry, 1985) was unidentifiable mammal 
(13.49 kg, 43.4%) and deer (Odocoileus vir- 
ginianus, 14.66 kg, 47.2%). All other taxa 
contributed 2% or less to the biomass. 


TABLE 11 
Species List of Fauna 


Individual 

Bone 8 11 Ex) 
Femur, left — — 296.7 
Femur, right — 80.3 292.5 
Tibia, left — 69.7 244.3 
Tibia, right 106.3 69.2 245.1 
Clavicle, left — 47.2 — 
Clavicle, right — 46.9 103.0 
Ulna, left a 63.9 — 
Ulna, nght 100.2 64.0 — 
Radius, left — 5557 — 
Radius, nght 79.4 55.9 --- 
Humerus, left 107.0 66.8 — 
Humerus, right — 67.7 — 
Ilium, left —- — — 
Ilium, right — 30.3 — 


In total, the species list indicates that a 
range of terrestrial and marine animals were 
used by late prehistoric native populations 
living on St. Catherines Island, but with a 
clear preference for terrestrial animals. Com- 
parison of the species list with a contempo- 
rary Irene period site, the North of the Shell 
Ring Drain, on Sapelo Island (Reitz, 1982) 
reveals a striking contrast between the two 
series. Namely, the South End Mound I fau- 
nal assemblage has: far less fish and far more 
deer, other mammals, and reptiles than does 
the North of the Shell Ring Drain site. How- 
ever, the faunal list from Fallen Tree, a late 
prehistoric/mission village midden near San- 
ta Catalina de Guale, is more similar to the 
South End Mound I (Dukes, 1993). The 


TABLE 12 
Stable Isotope Ratios by Individual 


Indi- 8BC SSN 
Lab no. vidual Sex Age (%o) (%o) 
MS4843 5 M 25 — 13.3 13,1 
MS4844 6 F 18+ — 12.5 
MS4847 16 F 21 — 10.4 
MS4850 24 F 35+ — 13.2 12.8 
MS4851 27 F 38+ —12.4 11.7 
Mean —12.9 12.1 


SD 0.49 1.08 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 43 


Plot of Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotopes 


5'°N %o 


<x <--> 


oii 


Georgia Coastal Prehistoric Foragers 
Georgia Coastal Prehistoric Farmers 
South End Mound | 

Florida Coastal Mission 


@ Georgia Coastal Mission 


Fig. 15. Bivariate plot of mean stable carbon and nitrogen isotope ratios comparing Georgia coastal 
prehistoric foragers, Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission, 
and Florida coastal mission. The temporal shift in values to the right indicates increased C, (maize) 
consumption (comparative data from Hutchinson et al., 1998; Larsen et al., 2001). 


overall pattern for late prehistoric sites in 
general for the Georgia coast is strongly ma- 
rine in orientation (Reitz, 1982). The unusu- 
ally high presence of deer and other mammal 
remains at South End Mound I (and St. Cath- 


erines Island generally) may reflect the ritual/ 
mortuary function of the site. The distur- 
bance caused by Moore’s excavation pre- 
vents us from drawing a precise conclusion 
regarding the meaning of the composition of 


44 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 13 
Skeletal Elements with Periosteal Reactions® 


More than 50% of upper and lower limb diaphyses were present for observation. 


ee Total with 
real Femur Tibia Fibula Humerus Radius Ulna periosteal 
vidual Sex Age> L R L R L R L R LE R L R reactions (%) 
4  indet birth — X X x —- > Oe x es 0.0 
5 3 25 X X X x — — X = a= = ae ms 0.0 
6 2 18+ — — — x — — x x = —— = em 0.0 
7 indet 6-12 mo — — — == = pee ie — a ae pas = as 
8 -indet 2-3 pr —- —- pyr -—- —- ,r — — X a x 60.0 
9  indet adult? _ os ae — — — a — ae ee =~ =< a 
10 indet 6-9mo a — — — — — —_ — Ae ~ ae = es 
11 indet 0-3 mo x X Xx x — — x X x X X X 0.0 
12 2 40+ Xx X = X -— i ae we 0.0 
13 indet 1-3 — — oo == —_ = == aa = art a. a: a 
14 3 17-23 — — — — = = — x ome a a EK 0.0 
15 fe) 30+ ik x —- pr —- — —~— pr x — x x 28.6 
16 ? 17-23 x Xx —- pr —- pp — x x a Nee 42.9 
17 3 17-23 -—— Xx a pr oo — — —- = ae = ae 50.0 
18 e 40+ x Yr —- pr —>— — —> — x So) os) 50.0 
19 2 35-45 x — X eae ae i a eee 0.0 
20 indet 1-3 — — os — — = — —_ aan = =— ame ara 
21 fe) adult? x = PR | oS = eS 6S 50.0 
z2 2 adult — — — — — = == = aes ess a a = ae 
23 + indet 5 — — — — — = s ad — as oats ae = 
24 ? 35+ —- —- — prea pr 100.0 
25 indet 7-8 X X x x —_— —- ee ee eee See 0.0 
26 indet = 1-3 — — — — — — =e a = = = = ae 
27 2 38+ X x X pr X X x — X X 11.1 
28 fe) adult pr _ pr a pr pr x - pr -- os oo 88.3 
29 2 adult — — —_-_ — = a ne a 7 
UA indet adult —  o— Xx —- —- Fe ee ee ee eee 0.0 
Total periosteal 
reactions (%) 16.7. 10:0° 25.0 50.0 100.0 100.0 20.0 16.7 00) 33.3) 00%) 3a4 26.0 
Total per element 13.6 40.9 100.0 16:7 11.1 pe 26.0 


Key: L, left; R, right; indet, sex indeterminate; mo, months; x,bone present for study; pr, bone present for study and has periosteal 


reactions; UA, unassociated. 


* Summary: 26.0% (20/77) of long bones have periosteal reactions; 50.0% (9/18) of individuals with at least one long bone have 


periosteal reactions. 
b Ages are given in years except as specified. 


the faunal assemblage at the South End 
Mound I. 


STABLE ISOTOPES 


Because no archaeological plant remains 
were recovered from the excavation and the 
archaeological fauna present only a part of 
the picture of diet in the Irene period, stable 
isotope analysis contributes an important per- 
spective on diet in this setting, especially 


with regard to the relative amount of maize 
consumed (based on carbon-stable isotope 
ratios) and marine foods consumed (based on 
nitrogen-stable isotope ratios). Carbon- and 
nitrogen-stable isotope analysis of five indi- 
viduals (one male and four females) pro- 
duced biogenic information for individuals 5, 
6, 16, 24, and 27 (table 12). The mean ratio 
values for the group are —12.9%e and 12.1%« 
for carbon and nitrogen, respectively. 

In comparison with stable isotope ratios 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 45 


Periosteal Reactions of the Tibia 


100 


Percent of Tibiae Affected 
or 
oO 


Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers 


South End Mound | 


Florida Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Georgia Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Groups 


Fig. 16. Periosteal reactions of the tibia showing comparisons of frequencies from Georgia coastal 
prehistoric foragers, Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission 
farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmers. The frequency is elevated for South End Mound I in 
comparison with these other groups (comparative data from Larsen et al., 2002). 


determined for the prehistoric Guale, South 
End Mound I mean values are relatively high 
(less negative) for carbon and relatively low 
for nitrogen (less positive) (fig. 15). The val- 
ues are Statistically indistinguishable (t-test; 
p = 0.05) from average values for late pre- 
historic Georgia coastal samples for both car- 
bon and nitrogen. Importantly, the carbon 
isotope ratios are higher than those for the 
prehistoric Georgia coastal hunter-gatherers 
(pre-A.D. 1000), indicating an increased C, 
(maize) consumption for the population rep- 
resented by the South End Mound I remains. 
The South End Mound I nitrogen isotope ra- 
tios are slightly lower than for earlier popu- 
lations from the region, reflecting a some- 
what reduced marine signature. However, the 
nitrogen-stable isotope signature shows a 
strong marine orientation. This suggests that 
despite the presence of predominantly deer 
and mammal bone in the faunal remains, ma- 
rine foods figured prominently in the diets of 


the late prehistoric inhabitants of St. Cath- 
erines Island as represented in the South End 
Mound I burial population. This also points 
to the importance of considering both isoto- 
pic and zooarchaeological evidence for diet. 

On the other hand, the carbon isotope ra- 
tios for the South End Mound I individuals 
are lower than for the historic-era Guale from 
the Santa Catalina de Guale missions on St. 
Catherines and Amelia Islands. These find- 
ings are consistent with the trend for the re- 
gion as a whole—late prehistoric populations 
ate more maize than did early prehistoric 
populations, but less maize than did the mis- 
sion-era groups, and late prehistoric popula- 
tions ate somewhat less marine foods than 
did early prehistoric populations, but more 
marine foods than during the mission era 
(and see Schoeninger et al., 1990; Larsen et 
al., 1992b, 2001; Hutchinson et al., 1998, 
2000). 


46 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 14 
Dental Caries: Individual Adult Females 


Individual 
Tooth 12 18 19 24 


27/28A 


Mandible, left 
I] — x —_ — 


x KK 
Cal etal ettat) rat Gora ied 


Mandible, right 
Ii x x —_ -- — 


iar) 
& 
~ eK 


Maxilla, left 
I] x 


Maxilla, right 
Il 


~ 
WwW 
~~ KK KK MK 
| 
| 


P ot on 


M3 se ee = —- oe 


Key: —, tooth missing (unerupted, premortem or post- 
mortem loss); x, tooth present, but no caries; 3, large carious 
lesion (extends into pulp chamber of tooth); 4, crown destroyed 
by caries. 


PATTERNS OF COMMUNITY HEALTH: 
PATHOLOGY 


PERIOSTEAL REACTIONS 
Periosteal reactions are not an uncom- 
mon occurrence in the skeletal remains 
from South End Mound I. Eighteen of the 
26 individuals represented in the series had 


TABLE 15 
Dental Caries: Individual Adult Males 


Individual 
Tooth 5 14 15 


Mandible, left 
Il — aos ae ex 


27/28B 


Mandible, right 
Il x — 4 — 
I2 x _— — — 
(G —- — x 
P3 x --- Xx — 
P4 — = x 
Ml — — —- x 
M2 x x = x 
M3 x — a 3 


Maxilla, left 

Il 

[2 

Gc 

R3 

P4 

Ml 

M2 

M3 


Maxilla, right 
Il 
102 
(e 
P3 
P4 
M1 
M2 
M3 


Pe eo no 
~ 


~~ KK KK KR OK 
| 


Key: —, tooth missing (unerupted, premortem or post- 
mortem loss); x, tooth present, but no caries; 3, large carious 
lesion (extends into pulp chamber of tooth); 4, crown destroyed 
by caries. 


at least one long bone present for identifi- 
cation of periosteal reactions (table 13). Of 
these 18 individuals, 50% (n = 9) dis- 
played periosteal reaction on at least one 
long bone. Two-thirds of the affected in- 
dividuals (n = 6) had multiple (two or 
more) bones affected by periosteal reac- 
tions. Excluding the fibula, where only 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


TABLE 16 


Dental Caries: Individual Juveniles and 
Unsexed Adults 


Individual 


Tooth 16/17A 16/17B 25 VA 


Mandible, left 

I] 

12 

c 

PS 

P4 

Ml 

M2 

M3 


Mandible, right 
Il 
[2 
Gs 
Ps — a — 
P4 — — — oo 
MI os X — 
M2 — — — sos 
M3 —- X — — 
Maxilla, left 
Ii 


RW K KK KK OK 
| 
| 


Kx RK 
| 
* 


Maxilla, right 
Il X = zie x 


Key: UA, unassociated teeth; —, tooth missing (unerupted, 
premortem or postmortem loss); x, tooth present, but no caries; 
3, large carious lesion (extends into pulp chamber of tooth); 
4, crown destroyed by caries. 


three bones are represented, the highest 
percentage of affected elements is the tibia. 
Nearly 41% (9 of 22) tibiae have some kind 
of periosteal reaction. The relatively higher 
frequency in the tibia is a pattern observed 
in most archaeological skeletal samples 
(see Larsen, 1997). 

Most of the lesions were localized on a 


TABLE 17 


Dental Caries: Summary Frequency 


by Tooth Type 
Includes only teeth in or near functional 


occlusion; left and right sides combined. 


Tooth N@ % 
Mandible 
Il 11 9.1 
[2 10 0.0 
€ 11 18.2 
F3 14 14.3 
P4 11 0.0 
M1 11 9.1 
M2 1] | 
M3 9 53.3 
dil l 0.0 
dI2 | 0.0 
dC l 0.0 
dM1 6 0.0 
dM2 4 0.0 
Maxilla 
I] 14 14.3 
[2 11 23 
G: 9 it 
P3 9 222 
P4 9 0.0 
Ml 12 16.7 
M2 9 0.0 
M3 i 0.0 
dil 2 0.0 
dI2 1 0.0 
dC 5) 0.0 
dM1 8 0.0 
dM2 il 0.0 
Permanent teeth 168 11.9 
Deciduous teeth 36 0.0 
TOTAL 204 9.8 


47 


4 Number of teeth observed for presence/absence of dental 


caries. 


skeletal element. In at least one person, the 
periosteal reaction involved a fracture site 
(distal diaphysis of right ulna for individual 
16), and it probably reflects an infectious 
process related to the trauma. However, two 
characteristics of the series point to the pres- 
ence of some kind of systemic infection in 
the population. First, multiple bones are af- 
fected. Second, a number of tibiae display 
extensive involvement of the periosteum. For 
example, the left tibia (the right is missing) 
of individual 28 shows extensive periosteal 
reactions and presence of loosely organized 


48 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 18 
Periosteal Reactions and Dental Caries: 
Individual Summary 


Indi- Periosteal 


vidual Sex Age reactions Dental caries 
4  indet birth none teeth unerupted 
5 3 25 none 0/26 (0.0%) 
6 2 18+ none — 
7 indet 612mo_ none teeth unerupted 
8  indet 2-3 humerus,L 0/2 (0.0%) 
femur, L 
tibia, R 
9  indet adult? none = 
10 indet 6-9mo — teeth unerupted 
11 indet 0-3 mo none teeth unerupted 
12 2 40+ none 0/21 (0.0%) 
13s indet 1-3 none 0/3 (0.0%) 
14 fe) 17-25 none 0/3 (0.0%) 
15 3 30+ humerus 3/15 (20.0%) 
tibia, R 
164 2 17-23 ulna, R 3/21 (14.3%) 
fibula 
tibia, R 
17> fe) 17-23 tibia, R 0/4 (0.0%) 
18 2 40+ femur, R 0/15 (0.0%) 
tibia, R 
19 2 35-45 none 1/3 (33.3%) 
20 _—indet 1-3 none 0/11 (0.0%) 
21 fs) adult tibia, L _- 
22 2 adult none — 
23°” mitet, +5 none teeth unerupted 
24 2 Ss ulna, R 4/16 (25.0%) 
tibia/femur 
25 indet 7-8 none 0/18 (0.0%) 
26 __—sindet 1-3 none 0/7 (0.0%) 
aT 4 38+ tibia, R 7/21 (33.3%) 
284 3 adult femur, L 1/3 (33.3%) 
tibia, L 
fibula, L 
fibula, R 
radius, R 
29 4 adult none — 


UA _ indet juv, adult none 2/14 (14.3%) 


Key: indet, sex indeterminate; mo, months; juv, juvenile; L, 
left; R, mght; UA, unassociated tooth. 

* 16/17A dentition (see text). 

b 16/17B dentition (see text). 

© 27/28A dentition (see text). 

4 27/28B dentition (see text). 


woven bone and erosive lesions characteris- 
tic of systemic chronic infection. The reac- 
tions on the element are healed. This pattern 
of extensive involvement suggests that the 


systemic infection present in the South End 
Mound I population is endemic treponema- 
tosis, a disease that appears to have spread 
into the American Southeast mostly in late 
prehistory (post-A.D. 1000; Larsen, 1997; 
Powell, 1990). The reasons for the presence 
of the disease and generally high levels of 
infection are multiple and complex. Howev- 
er, the record that bioarchaeologists observe 
for the late prehistoric Southeast is likely re- 
lated to population increase, sedentism and 
occupation of more permanent villages, 
changes that occurred concomitant with the 
adoption of maize agriculture (Larsen, 1997; 
and references cited). 

Compared with the region as a whole, the 
prevalence of periosteal reactions is relative- 
ly high (fig. 16). In particular, in consider- 
ation of the tibia, the South End Mound I 
sample has a higher prevalence than do both 
the Georgia prehistoric foragers (9.5%), the 
Georgia prehistoric farmers (19.8%), and 
mission-era populations from Santa Catalina 
de Guale on St. Catherines Island (15.4%) 
(data from Larsen et al., 2002). The preva- 
lence value for South End Mound I is less 
than the value for the Santa Catalina popu- 
lation of Guale from Amelia Island, Florida 
(59.3%), but it is approaching that value. 

In summary, periosteal reactions are high- 
ly prevalent in the South End Mound I skel- 
etal series, a finding that is consistent with 
the population having lived in a relatively 
sedentary village community with poor san- 
itation and an environment conducive to the 
maintenance and spread of infectious dis- 
ease. Some of the infections were probably 
due to local circumstances (e.g., infected 
wounds). However, the evidence of systemic 
infection is strong, which indicates the like- 
lihood that treponematosis was present dur- 
ing the late prehistoric occupation of St. 
Catherines Island. 


CRIBRA ORBITALIA AND POROTIC 
HYPEROSTOSIS 


Only two individuals display evidence of 
cribra orbitalia or porotic hyperostosis. These 
included cribra orbitalia for an adult female 
(individual 16) and porotic hyperostosis for 
an adult male (individual 28). The lesions 
were well healed and likely reflect an episode 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 49 


Dental Caries 


South End Mound | 


Florida Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Georgia Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Groups 


2002 
25 
20 
xo} 
2 
® 
= 
= KS) 
= 
o 
o 
-e 
r) 
e 10 
o 
2 
o 
o 
5 
0 
Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers 
Fig. 17. 


Dental caries comparison of frequencies from Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers, Georgia 


coastal prehistoric farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal 
mission farmers. The frequency is elevated for South End Mound I in comparison with these other 
groups (comparative data from Larsen et al., 1991; Larsen et al., 2002). 


of anemia much earlier in their lifetimes, 
probably the juvenile years, since cribra or- 
bitalia and porotic hyperostosis reflect pri- 
marily childhood episodes of disease (Stuart- 
Macadam, 1992). Unfortunately, the frequen- 
cy in the South End Mound I series is not 
possible to determine because only these and 
a few other individuals had cranial remains 
that were preserved well enough to be able 
to identify the pathology. My sense of the 
collection is that the frequency is low, a find- 
ing that has been reported for the Georgia 
coastal prehistoric populations (see Larsen 
and Sering, 2000). 

Cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis 
are complex and caused by various condi- 
tions (see Larsen, 1997). Most bioarchaeol- 
ogists have argued that the lesions are asso- 
ciated with iron-deficiency anemia. If a per- 
son experiences this type of anemia, the body 
attempts to increase the production of red 
blood cells. The area of the skeleton produc- 


ing red blood cells—especially the diploe of 
the skull—expands and does so at the ex- 
pense of the adjacent compact bone. As a 
result, areas of porosity develop. Iron defi- 
ciency can be caused by dietary shortfalls in 
iron. Maize has a chemical substance, phy- 
tate, which binds with iron, thus reducing 
bioavailability of this essential element. 
Thus, this late prehistoric population would 
likely display the osteological indications of 
iron-deficiency anemia, owing to the impor- 
tance of maize in the diet (see above). How- 
ever, clinical evidences indicates that simul- 
taneous consumption of maize and seafood 
increases the iron status by as much as 300% 
(Layrisse et al., 1968). Isotopic evidence in- 
dicates a slight reduction in marine food con- 
sumption, but certainly marine foods are a 
major part of diet in this setting and else- 
where during the late prehistoric period on 
the Georgia coast (Larsen and Sering, 2000; 
Larsen et al., 2002). Thus, the suggested low 


St. Catherines Island Guale: Prehistoric and Historic 


Site 


Cunningham Mound C 
Cunningham Mound D 
Cunningham Mound E 
McLeod Mound 

South New Ground Mound 
Seaside Mound I 

Seaside Mound II 

Johns Mound 


TABLE 19 


Dental Caries and Periosteal Reactions 


Period 


Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
Refuge-Deptford 
St. Catherines 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY 


NO. 84 


Marys Mound St. Catherines 
South End Mound II St. Catherines 
South End Mound I Irene 

Santa Catalina (SCI) Mission 
Santa Catalina (Amelia) Mission 


Periosteal 
Dental caries reactions 
N? Job NC %s 
28 | — — 
56 0.0 os — 
5 0.0 -- — 
133 2.3 5 0.0 
4 0.0 — “= 
128 0.8 | 0.0 
32 9.6 1 0.0 
465 La 40 25 
68 0.0 oo _ 
154 0.7 12 0.0 
204 9.8 22 40.9 
3274 8.0 26 15.4 
1548 19.6 96 59.3 


4 Total number of teeth examined (left and night, deciduous and permanent incisors, canines, premolars, 


molars). 
> Percent affected by dental caries. 


© Total number of tibiae examined (left and right, juvenile and adult). 


d Percent affected by periosteal reactions. 


frequency of cribra orbitalia and porotic hy- 
perostosis is consistent with what has been 
found elsewhere in this region, both on St. 
Catherines Island and elsewhere in the pre- 
historic period. In the contact period (post— 
A.D. 1150), the picture changes dramatically 
with a major increase in pathology, which is 
probably related to deteriorating living con- 
ditions, population crowding, decreased con- 
sumption of marine foods, and parasitism 
caused by drinking contaminated water (e.g., 
from European-style wells; see Sering and 
Larsen, 2000). 


DENTAL CARIES 


Dental caries is also well represented in 
the South End Mound I skeletal series. Of 
the nearly 200 available teeth in or near full 
eruption in the series, 9.8% are carious (20 
of 204: tables 14—18). Seven of 17 individ- 
uals (41.2%) with at least one tooth present 
for observation have a carious tooth. No 
small carious lesions were identified in the 
sample; all lesions were either large (large pit 
extending into the pulp chamber) or had de- 


stroyed the tooth crown. For this series, car- 
ies affects mostly the teeth with complex oc- 
clusal surfaces where cariogenic bacteria 
thrive (e.g., molars). However, caries has a 
significant presence in other teeth. None of 
the deciduous teeth had caries, and none of 
the individual juveniles with permanent teeth 
had caries. This characteristic reveals the 
age-specific nature of the disease; namely, 
the older a person, the greater the exposure 
to risks that cause the disease (Larsen, 1997). 

The 10% caries frequency value is well 
above the frequency reported for prehistoric 
Georgia coastal foragers (1.2%) and is statis- 
tically indistinguishable from Georgia coast- 
al farmers (9.6%) (chi-square, p = 0.05; Lar- 
sen et al., 1991, 2002; fig. 17). In a large 
overview of archaeological dental series 
from eastern North America, we reported 
that prehistoric foragers generally have caries 
frequencies of less than 7% and prehistoric 
farmers have frequencies greater than 7% 
(Larsen et al., 1991). Thus, the frequency for 
South End Mound | is well within the value 
range for agriculturalists. In the following 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 51 


St. Catherines Island and Descendant Guale: Prehistoric and Historic Dental Caries and Tibial 
Periosteai Reactions 


no} 
o 
- 
® 
£ 
< 
~~ 
= 
o 
oO 
hee 
o 
oO. 


St. Catherines Island South End Mound | 


Prehistoric Foragers 


St. Catherines Mission Ameila Island Mission Farmers 


Farmers 


Groups 


Wi Dental Caries EiPeriosteal Reactions 


Fig. 18. 


Bar graph showing dental caries and tibial periosteal reaction frequencies from prehistoric 


and historic St. Catherines Island and descendant (Amelia Island) Guale. 


mission period, the frequency declined some- 
what for Santa Catalina de Guale on St. 
Catherines Island (8.0%), but increased dra- 
matically in the late mission era Guale who 
lived at Santa Catalina on Amelia Island 
(19.6%). Thus, like the findings for periosteal 
reactions, the caries values for the South End 
Mound I series are approximately interme- 
diate between the prehistoric foragers and the 
mission-era farmers in the region. 

Given the strong signature of maize in the 
diets of this series, the relatively high fre- 
quency of dental caries in the South End 
Mound I series is not surprising. In particu- 
lar, maize is a carbohydrate with a significant 
amount of sugar. A large body of evidence 
indicates that sugar is highly cariogenic. The 
normal flora that inhabit the human mouth 
(e.g., Streptococcus mutans) metabolize the 
sugar, producing lactic acid. The acid erodes 
the enamel and underlying hard tissue of the 
tooth, producing cavitation. 


COMMUNITY HEALTH IN TRANSITION: 
PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC GUALE FROM 
ST. CATHERINES ISLAND 


The South End Mound I series displays 
relatively high prevalence of dental caries 
and periosteal reactions, reflecting consump- 
tion of maize agriculture and elevation of in- 
fectious disease, respectively. This pattern is 
consistent with other populations that have 
an agricultural dietary focus (see Larsen, 
1995; and above). In addition to the other 
temporal comparisons involving the Georgia 
Bight in general, it is useful to look at how 
dental caries and periosteal reactions for the 
South End Mound I series compare with oth- 
er Guale populations from St. Catherines Is- 
land in order to more precisely assess tem- 
poral trends in community health for this is- 
land. Comparisons of dental caries and peri- 
osteal reactions for specific series from St. 
Catherines Island and the descendant historic 


52 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 20 
Tooth Size (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Females 


Tooth Dimension 12 18 
Mandible, left 
I] breadth — — 
12 breadth — — 
e length — — 
= breadth — 7.4 
P3 length —- 73 
es breadth oo 7.8 
P4 length — 7.1 
P4 breadth - 8.3 
M1 length — 11.4 
M1 breadth 10.2 
M2 length — 12.0 
M2 breadth _— 10.2 
M3 length oa = 
M3 breadth — — 
Mandible, right 
I] breadth — = 
I2 breadth — — 
C length — — 
€ breadth os V5 
P3 length — 7.4 
P3 breadth — 8.8 
P4 length — 7.6 
P4 breadth 8.0 8.9 
Ml length — — 
M1 breadth — — 
M2 length 11.1 — 
M2 breadth 9.6 -— 
M3 length — 1 
M3 breadth —- 10.1 


Guale from Amelia Island reveal a marked 
change in health in the late prehistoric Irene 
period population represented by the South 
End Mound I series (table 19, fig. 18). 

The comparison samples include seven 
Refuge-Deptford period sites dating between 
about 500 B.c. and A.D. 600 (Cunningham 
Mounds C, D, E, McLeod Mound, South 
New Ground Mound, Seaside Mounds I and 
Il: Thomas and Larsen, 1979), three St. Cath- 
erines period sites dating between about A.D. 
L000 and 1200 (Johns Mound, Marys 
Mound, South End Mound II; Larsen and 
Thomas, 1982, 1986), Santa Catalina de Gu- 
ale from St. Catherines Island (Larsen, 
1990), and Santa Catalina from Amelia Is- 
land (Larsen, in prep.). The Refuge-Deptford 
and St. Catherines period samples represent 


Individual 


19 24 = 27/28A Mean SD 
ae 6.7 ae 6.7 a 
=e _ 7.6 7.6 = 
ae 75 8.2 hy, 0.43 
- _ a. 7.5 me 
ies 8.8 was 8.3 0.70 
_ = 75 73 0.28 
me 8.3 9.1 8.6 0.46 
a = 11.6 11.5 0.14 
_ Be 11.5 10.9 0.91 
= = 127 12.4 0.50 
Sz _ 11.5 10.9 0.92 
= _ 11.5 11.5 = 
= 2 10.2 10.2 = 
— <3 = 7s = 
a 7.6 = 7.5 0.14 
=e 8.6 _ 8.7 0.14 
Ze: = a 7.6 = 
= 8.6 a5 8.5 0.46 
Se = _ 11.1 = 
= = = 9.6 _ 

11.3 zt = 11.3 0.00 

10.1 = ss 10.1 0.00 


prehistoric foragers, and the two Santa Cat- 
alina populations represent agriculturalists 
with some foraging. 

The prehistoric foragers from St. Catheri- 
nes Island display very low levels of dental 
caries and periosteal reactions. The Refuge— 
Deptford and St. Catherines period series 
have only 2.3% and 1.3% dental caries (1.8% 
combined periods), respectively, and 0% and 
1.9% periosteal reactions (1.6% combined 
periods), respectively, contrasting sharply 
with the 9.8% (dental caries) and 40.9% 
(periosteal reactions) for the South End 
Mound I series. In the later Santa Catalina 
series from St. Catherines Island, there is a 
slight reduction in dental caries (to 8.0%) 
and a marked reduction in periosteal reac- 
tions (to 15.4%). However, the values are 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


N 
eS) 


TABLE 20 
(Continued) 


Tooth Dimension 12 18 
Maxilla, left 
Il breadth a — 
[2 breadth -—— — 
6 length a — 
Gs breadth — — 
P3 length a oa 
P3 breadth — — 
P4 length — “= 
P4 breadth — — 
M1 length — —- 
M1 breadth _ — 
M2 length i — 
M2 breadth — — 
M3 length — — 
M3 breadth — — 
Maxilla, right 
Il breadth — 70 
[2 breadth — — 
C length — — 
Cc breadth — — 
P3 length —- — 
P3 breadth — — 
P4 length a — 
P4 breadth — — 
Ml length — 10.6 
Mi breadth HS ip ee 
M2 length — 10.8 
M2 breadth — ig 
M3 length — — 
M3 breadth a — 


still quite elevated in comparison with the 
foragers (and see above). The descendants of 
the St. Catherines Guale who fled to Amelia 
Island in the late seventeenth century display 
very high levels of dental caries (19.6%) and 
periosteal reactions (59.3%). 

With the availability of these new data 
from the South End Mound I series, we can 
now look at key aspects of community health 
that was not possible without this represen- 
tation of the Irene period on St. Catherines 
Island. With this new material, a comparative 
basis for examining biocultural change in re- 
sponse to two key developments—the adop- 
tion of agriculture and the establishment of 
a Spanish mission—is provided. Overall, 
these findings fit expectations based on study 
of other Irene period samples from the Geor- 


Individual 
19 24 27/28A Mean SD 
— i a4 — g — 
— 6.7 — 6.7 — 
— 8.5 — 8.5 — 
7.6 7.4 — aS 0.14 
10.1 9.8 — 10.0 0.21 
— 10.2 — 10.2 — 
| Tes: — — iI — 
— 1 = Jat 0.07 
— 79 — 79 — 
— 8.5 — 8.5 — 
— 8.1 — 8.1 — 
— 8.3 —~ 8.3 — 
— 10.6 — 10.6 — 
— — — 10.6 — 
— — aa 1S — 
— — — 10.8 — 


gia Bight (e.g., Irene Mound site). What is 
especially important, however, is the insight 
into health changes in a small group from a 
single island. The St. Catherines Island tem- 
poral trends provide a microcosm of larger 
developments in the Georgia Bight and the 
Eastern Woodlands of North America. 

Importantly, the increase in infection re- 
flects increased sedentism and concentration 
of population on St. Catherines, well preced- 
ing the arrival of Europeans and subsequent 
concentration of population. Moreover, the 
increase in infection likely reflects the pres- 
ence of a specific disease, such as trepone- 
matosis, that produces abundant skeletal le- 
sions in its victims. 

The skeletal pattern of infection also 
changed in the Irene period on St. Catherines 


54. ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 21 
Permanent Tooth Size (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Males 


Tooth Dimension 5 14 
Mandible, left 
Ii breadth —- — 
[2 breadth 6.5 — 
& length — — 
é breadth — a 
P3 length 8.2 ae 
P3 breadth ‘bee — 
P4 length f ie mo 
P4 breadth 8.5 — 
M1 length Its _— 
M1 breadth 10.9 — 
M2 length It — 
M2 breadth 10.6 — 
M3 length 11.8 _ 
M3 breadth 10.6 — 
Mandible, night 
I] breadth 5:7 — 
I2 breadth 6.7 — 
cC length — - 
Cc breadth — — 
P3 length ao _- 
P3 breadth — — 
P4 length ao — 
P4 breadth —- — 
M1 length — — 
M1 breadth — — 
M2 length 24 11.6 
M2 breadth 10.4 10.8 
M3 length 10.7 — 
M3 breadth 10.0 — 


Island. In particular, there are clear instances 
of infections that look treponemal in origin. 
The South End Mound I infections are sys- 
temic and involve much of the bone (espe- 
cially the tibia). This pattern is consistent 
with endemic (nonvenereal) treponematosis, 
which appears to be absent from the prehis- 
toric record prior to the Savannah and Irene 
periods (and see Powell, 1990). Thus, infec- 
tion increased in the late prehistoric period, 
a trend that continues in general in the de- 
scendant populations. Finally, it is only in 
later prehistory that we see the first appear- 
ance of treponematosis. 
DENTAL AND SKELETAL SIZE AND 
MORPHOLOGY 


Despite the very fragmentary nature of the 
human remains from South End Mound I, a 


Individual 
15 27/28B Mean SD 
— — 6.5 -— 
13 — 7.8 0.63 
8.3 — 7.8 0.78 
ped ms 7.6 0.50 
8.4 —- 8.5 0.07 
a oa 11.9 — 
— — 10.9 — 
a — 1h.2 — 
— _ 10.6 —_ 
10.1 —_ 11.0 1.20 
10.8 — 10.7 0.14 
— oe a0 — 
— — 6.7 — 
TA — 7.0 — 
Le — EZ — 
8.3 — 8.3 — 
he — G2 — 
8.4 — 8.4 — 
oo | 1 | — 
“= 11.4 11.4 — 
— til 11.6 0.05 
— Is 10.9 0.56 
oa —— b0:7 — 
—_ 10.9 10.5 0.64 


large number of dental and postcranial mea- 
surements were taken. Crania were too frag- 
mentary to make meaningful observations. 


DENTAL 


Individual and summary measurements for 
permanent teeth are presented in tables 20 
(adult females), 21 (adult males), and 22 (ju- 
veniles and unsexed adults), and for decidu- 
ous teeth in table 23. Consistent with every 
study of human populations, males have 
larger teeth than do females (Kieser, 1990). 
Owing to the relatively small sample size of 
sexed adults (five females, four males) and 
to the presence of mostly incomplete denti- 
tions, the sex differences in the South End 
Mound I series are not as straightforward as 
are those with larger populations. Overall, 


2002 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 55 


TABLE 21 
(Continued) 


Individual 
Tooth Dimension 5 14 15 27/28B Mean SD 
Maxilla, left 
Il breadth a 7.3 — — a — 
[2 breadth 7a — “= — | — 
& length 8.2 _ 8.4 — 8.3 0.14 
c breadth 9.0 — A a 8.4 0.91 
P3 length 7.9 8.0 T2 — (pe 0.44 
Ps breadth 9.9 9.8 9.6 — 9.8 0.15 
P4 length 7.0 — os — 7.0 _ 
p4 breadth 9.6 — — a 9.6 — 
Ml length 10.3 — — — 10.3 a 
Ml breadth 11.9 — — _- 11.9 — 
M2 length — — Lis — 11.5 — 
M2 breadth — ae ease | —~ | PAE | — 
M3 length 9.4 aa 10.1 9.8 0.50 
M3 breadth 11.3 — 10.8 — 1 0.35 
Maxilla, right 

Il breadth 73 -- — _ a3 — 
(ee breadth 74 — — — 7.4 == 
C length 8.7 a 8.7 a 8.7 0.00 
Cc breadth 9.2 — 7.8 — 8.5 0.99 
P3 length 8.3 —_ 7.0 — ae 0.92 
P3 breadth 10.0 —- 9.9 — 10.0 0.07 
P4 length 72 — — — fee — 
P4 breadth 9.8 — a _~ 9.8 — 
M1 length 10.7 ae — -~ 10:7 — 
Ml breadth 11.4 a — aa 11.4 — 
M2 length 9.6 a — -- 9.6 _ 
M2 breadth 12.0 — — —_ 12.0 —_ 
M3 length 10.2 os —~ —- 10.2 -— 
M3 breadth 1.7 _: oo — it. 7 — 


however, the teeth are similar in size as pre- 
sented in study of other Georgia coastal pre- 
historic populations (see comparative data in 
Larsen, 1982). 


SKELETAL 


Postcranial individual and summary statis- 
tics are presented in tables 1 (juvenile long 
bone lengths), 24 (adult females), and 25 
(adult males). Some of the adult lower limb 
bones (femur and tibia) were complete 
enough for estimation of stature (table 26), 
femur midshaft index, and total subperiosteal 
area (table 27). 

The sample size for adult females and 
males is small. Nevertheless, calculation of 
summary statistics provides a means of com- 


parison with the large sample of prehistoric 
and historic-era Guale from the Georgia 
Bight (Larsen, 1982; Larsen et al., 2002). Fe- 
mur midshaft dimensions for adult males and 
females from South End Mound [| are gen- 
erally similar to the prehistoric and historic- 
era populations from the Georgia Bight (fig. 
19). However, male and female stature com- 
parisons reveal that adults from South End 
Mound I are below the mean heights calcu- 
lated for prehistoric foragers, prehistoric 
farmers, and the earlier and later Guale mis- 
sion populations from St. Catherines Island 
and Amelia Island (fig. 20). The difference 
between the South End Mound I sample and 
other remains studied from the region may 
very well reflect small size of the former. 


56 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 22 
Permanent Tooth Size (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics, Total Sample 
The individuals are juveniles and unsexed adults. Summary statistics (mean, SD) refer to permanent 
teeth of juveniles and both the sexed and unsexed adults. 


Tooth Dimension 16/17A 16/17B 13 20 
Mandible, left 
Il breadth 5.8 _ — — 
I2 breadth 6.0 — — — 
Cc length 7.0 — —- = 
Cc breadth 7.0 — — — 
P3 length 8.2 _ —- -- 
P3 breadth 8.7 — — — 
P4 length 8.3 a — — 
P4 breadth 8.8 _- — — 
M1 length 12.3 — 113 — 
Ml breadth 11.0 — 10.5 — 
M2 length 11.9 — a — 
M2 breadth 10.8 oo — — 
M3 length a= a a — 
M3 breadth _ — — — 
Mandible, right 
I] breadth Se — — — 
[2 breadth 5.9 — — —- 
eS length — — _ -— 
| & breadth — oo — — 
P3 length a — — _ 
P3 breadth a — os — 
P4 length a= -- — _ 
P4 breadth — as _ ao 
Ml length — — — 11.4 
M1 breadth _ a — 10.5 
M2 length — = —- i 
M2 breadth a — — — 
M3 length a — = — 
M3 a a — — 


Individual 
25 25 26 UA UA Mean SD 
— — — — — 5.8 — 
— — — 5.6 a 6.2 0.50 
— — — — = 13 0.42 
— — — — ae 7 0.50 
— — — -- — 7.8 0.47 
— — — — — 8.2 0.67 
— — — — — 7.6 0.50 
— — — — — 8.7 0.32 
— 11.8 — hiss — i 0.34 
— it | — — — 10.9 0.46 
— — — 12.1 11.8 12.0 0.49 
— — — Lit 10.6 10.8 0.45 
— — — — _ 11.1 0.91 
— — — — —- 10.5 0.31 
— — — a a a7 0.00 
_ — — 6.2 —— 6.3 0.40 
-- -- — vi — v1 — 
_ — — 7.7 == 7.4 0.36 
_ --- — 8.0 — 7.6 0.34 
— a — 8.5 — 8.6 0.21 
— — — om = 7.4 0.28 
— — — — oe 8.5 0.38 
a hi — a — 12 0.15 
— rk2 — — — 11.0 0.47 
— _ — —— — iy ee) 0.48 
as — — -— = 10.6 0.79 
—- — —- os --- Litt 0.35 
> oo = — — 10.3 0.42 


breadth 


However, a diet dominated by maize agri- 
culture, which is certainly implicated by the 
carbon isotope ratios and levels of dental car- 
ies, could contribute to poor nutrition and 
poorer growth in this setting. Maize is lack- 
ing in several essential amino acids that are 
required for normal growth and development 
(see discussion in Larsen, 1997), and these 
dietary deficits inferred from the present in- 
vestigation may have contributed to poor 
growth in this setting. However, the small 
sample size of sexed adults from South End 
Mound I[ prevents us from going beyond 
speculation. 

Another important approach for looking at 
bone morphology and assessing size and ac- 


tivity is to compare the femur midshaft index 
with other archaeological series from the re- 
gion. This index is calculated as a ratio of 
mediolateral midshaft diameter to anteropos- 
terior diameter. Because vigorous activity in- 
volving the lower limb, such as running for 
long distances, increases anterior-posterior 
bending stresses in the femur (see Carter, 
1978; Lanyon et al., 1975; Larsen, 1997), the 
anterior-posterior dimension relative to the 
medial-lateral dimension should provide an 
indication of activity and lifestyle. That is, a 
femur midshaft that is long in the anterior- 
posterior axis relative to the medial-lateral 
axis is associated with a relatively high degree 
of activity. As a result, the midshaft region of 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 57 
TABLE 22 
(Continued) 
Individual 

Tooth Dimension 16/17A 16/17B_ 13 20 23 25 26 UA UA Mean SD 

Maxilla, left 
I] breadth 6.9 —- — — — ES — — — %2 0.25 
I2 breadth 6.9 oo — — -— 6.8 — — — 6.9 0.17 
Cc length 8.3 _— — — — 8.7 _ _ — 8.4 0.22 
c breadth 8.3 = — = —- 8.3 — — — 8.4 0.47 
P3 length 7.6 — — — — — _ — — ie; 0.36 
P3 breadth 97 — —_ — —_ — -—— — — 9.8 0.13 
P4 length — — —— = === = — — — 73 0.31 
p4 breadth — — — — — — — — 98 0.25 
M1! length 11.3 — 10.4 10.2 — 10.0 12.5 = — 10.7 0.90 
MI breadth 17 — 10.7 10.9 — 12.4 == — 11.6 0.66 
M2 length -- r22 — i = 10.0 — — 112 Bi? 
M2 breadth — 10.8 — — — a | — — — 11.9 0.97 
M3 length —_— — — — — — — — os 9.8 0.50 
M3 breadth — — — — — = _- _ — 11.1 0.35 

Maxilla, right 
Il breadth 7.0 “= + oo oe -- — — — 7.1 0.14 
12 breadth 8.2 — — — — 7.4 — — a 87 0.40 
c length — — — —_ — — — — — 8.6 0.12 
C breadth oa — — —_ —_ —_ _- =. — 8.4 0.74 
P3 length — 7.1 — — — _. 8.0 oe — 7.7 0.64 
P3 breadth — 9.0 — - — _ 10.2 — — 99 0.59 
P4 length 8.4 7.8 = oom — ad — — 7.8 0.49 
P4 breadth 9.6 9.9 oa -- a — 10.5 — 10.0 0.39 
Ml length 10.8 — — — — me 10.7 — 11.0 0.72 
M1 breadth 11.7 — — — — — 25 2 — 11.8 0.43 
M2 length — a — a ae — 9.9 — — 10.1 0.62 
M2 breadth — — — — — — 11.9 — — 11.9 0.15 
M3 length 98 M2 — — —- os _ — 10.7 10.5 0.61 
M3 breadth 10.7 10.5 ~= a _ -- —_ — 11.7 11.2 0.64 


Key: UA, unassociated tooth. 


the femur of someone who is engaged in high 
levels of activity in walking and running will 
involve greater bone mass in the anterior-pos- 
terior dimension in order to resist the kinds of 
mechanical loading that will affect this region 
of the bone. When viewed in cross-section, 
the femur midshaft of this type of individual 
will have an elongated appearance in the an- 
terior-posterior dimension. On the other hand, 
the femur midshaft for someone who is rela- 
tively inactive or sedentary will be more cir- 
cular in cross-section. 

The shape of the femur midshaft is influ- 
enced during the years of growth and devel- 
Opment in a number of ways. In recent years, 
biomechanical analysis has involved cross- 
sectional geometric analysis, which analyzes 


the “‘strength”” of the bone cross-section in 
its ability to resist mechanical loading (Ruff, 
2000). This approach is a highly effective 
way of looking at bone strength and inferring 
level and type of activity based on the study 
of archaeological skeletal remains. For the 
Georgia Bight and La Florida, Ruff and co- 
workers have completed extensive studies in- 
volving biomechanical analyses of long 
bones (Ruff et al., 1984: Larsen and Ruff. 
1994: Ruff and Larsen, 2001). However, this 
kind of analysis requires intact or nearly in- 
tact femora, which are lacking in the South 
End Mound I skeletal series. 

The traditional approach to looking at 
femoral midshaft shape does not require the 
availability of intact femora. The technique 


58 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Deciduous Tooth Size (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics 


TABLE 23 


Individual 
Tooth Dimension 7 8 13 20 23 26 UA Mean SD 
Mandible, left 
dil breadth 43 ce ® | — _- = == — of | 0.85 
dI2 breadth = i — — a — — = = 
dC length — — — -~ —- — — — oo 
dC breadth a — — — —- — — a —= 
dM1 length 8.5 a — 8.0 8.6 8.6 — 8.4 0.29 
dM1 breadth 6.9 — — 7.0 6.9 6.9 —- 6.9 0.05 
dM2 length -- a — 10.2 11.1 — 11.6 11.0 0.71 
dM2 breadth — --- — 8.7 9.1 — 9.3 9.0 0.31 
Mandible, right 
dll breadth —- — — — — = = a = 
dI2 breadth _- — 35 — a ate 3.5 —_ 
dC length — - — _ 7.0 — — 7.0 — 
dC breadth — ae — — 5.0 os a 5.0 — 
dM1 length _- —- — 6.7 9.6 — 7.9 8.1 1.46 
dM1 breadth = — — 7.6 7.6 — 7.9 TH 0.17 
dM2 length — = — 10.0 11.0 — — 10.5 0.71 
dM2 breadth —- _ 8.8 9.1 — — 9.0 0.21 
Maxilla, left 
dil breadth 0 — a 44 — 49 —~ 48 0.32 
dI2 breadth -- a a a a 47 — 4.7 — 
dC length a — oe 6.9 1S — — i 0.28 
dC breadth a _ — 3 6.1 — — 5.8 0.42 
dM1 length — 6.8 — 6.8 72 Ta 7.6 i fe 0.43 
dM1 breadth — 7.9 — 8.9 9.8 9.0 9.1 8.9 0.68 
dM2 length 10.4 a 8.6 8.8 — 9.9 98 9.5 0.77 
dM2 breadth 9.9 — 9.5 9.8 — 10.1 142 10.1 0.65 
Maxilla, right 
dil breadth 5.3 -- — —-- — — - 5.3 — 
dI2 breadth — — — — — — — oo — 
dc length os — 6.9 6.9 6.9 — — 6.9 0.00 
dC breadth a = 5.9 Re a OF | — — 5.7 0.20 
dM1 length — = — 6.9 13 75 — 12 0.31 
dM1 breadth —- os — 8.7 9.9 8.8 = 9.1 0.67 
dM2 length — a — 8.9 10.7 10.0 — 9.9 0.91 
dM2 breadth — oa — 98 11.0 10.3 —- 10.4 0.60 


Key: UA, unassociated tooth. 


is not as conclusive as cross-sectional geo- 
metric analysis. However, it provides impor- 
tant inferential information about bone shape 
and behavior. In this regard, the calculation 
of the femur midshaft index ({|femur midshaft 
medial-lateral * 100]|/femur anterior-poste- 


rior) provides an important indication of 


bone shape. Basically, an index closer to 100 
indicates a cross-section that is rounder than 
an index further from 100. The femur mid- 
shaft was complete enough for measurement 


for four adult males and five adult females 
providing mean index values of 87.1 and 
95.9, respectively (left femur; table 27). The 
difference between adult males and females 
is consistent with what has been observed in 
other populations around the world, whereby 
males have flatter femoral midshafts in the 
medial-lateral direction than do females. This 
pattern suggests that males are generally 
more physically active (more mobile) than 
females. 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 59 
TABLE 24 
Postcranial Measurements (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Females 
Individual 
Measurement 12 16 18 19 27 Mean SD 

Femur, left 

Head diameter — 39.2 — — 39.4 39.3 0.14 

Maximum length — 417 — 431 400 416 15.52 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 251 26.5 -- 25.8 27.0 26.1 0.83 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 25.8 2.5 — 26.2 26.5 25.4 222 

Midshaft, circumference 81 78 73 80 84 80 3.36 

Subtrochanter, anterior-posterior 21:5 22.4 215 22.5 23.6 22.3 0.87 

Subtrochanter, medial-lateral 32°3 31.4 284 34.2 34.9 873 2.46 
Femur, right 

Head diameter = 39.2 a — 40.4 39.8 0.85 

Maximum length —- 414 455 oo 400 423 28.58 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 25.4 27.4 26.0 = 26.0 26.2 0.85 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 24.3 1 | 23.4 — 235 24.2 0.93 

Midshaft, circumference 81 83 78 — 82 81 ZAG 

Subtrochanter, anterior-posterior —_— 23:9 20.5 — 24.6 23.0 a 

Subtrochanter, medial-lateral — 31.0 20-1 — 32.9 30.5 2.63 
Tibia, left 

Maximum length — — — —_ — — — 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior -—— — — 29.3 28.2 28.8 0.77 

Midshaft, medial-lateral — -— 2d 18.4 20.1 2533 

Midshaft, circumference — — — = 74 74 pa 
Tibia, right 

Maximum length — — — — -~ — 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 272 — — —_ 28.2 27.7 0.71 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 19.7 — — — 18.5 19.1 0.85 

Midshaft, circumference 74 o a —_ Be 74 0.70 
Clavicle, left 

Maximum length — — a — — — = 
Clavicle, nght 

Maximum length — a — — — —_ == 
Ulna, left 

Maximum length --- —- — _ 244 244 = 
Ulna, nght 

Maximum length — — — — 244 244 _ 
Radius, left 

Maximum length — — — —— 220 220 — 
Radius, nght 

Maximum length _— — —_ -- “= — — 
Humerus, left 

Maximum length — oe — = 280 280 — 

Midshaft, maximum diameter — 19.6 — — Pt 20.9 1.77 

Midshaft, minimum diameter = 14.9 — — Ne 15.3 0.57 

Midshaft, circumference —_ a -- -— 63 63 oo 

Head diameter — — ao aoe 37.0 37.0 a 

Biepicondylar breadth — a —_ _ = _- — 
Humerus, right 

Maximum length —_— 274 301 — — 288 19.09 

Midshaft, maximum diameter os — 18.9 — 216 20.3 1.9] 

Midshaft, minimum diameter — — 14.2 — 15.5 14.9 0.92 

Midshaft, circumference a = 59 os --- 59 — 


Head diameter 
Biepicondylar breadth 


60 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 25 
Postcranial Measurements (in mm): Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Males 


Individual 
Measurement =) 14 15 17 21 28 Mean SD 

Femur, left 

Head diameter — — 39.3 — — _— 39.3 nual 

Maximum length 495 _ — — — 424 460 50.21 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 36.5 a 25.9 — 337 29.1 31:3 4.72 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 29.4 —_ 26.7 — 26.8 24.8 26.9 1.89 

Midshaft, circumference 102 —_ 83 — 94 87 92 8.35 

Subtrochanter, anterior-posterior — — 23.2 a —- 22.6 22.9 0.42 

Subtrochanter, medial-lateral — —_— 322 —~ — 33.9 33:1 1.20 
Femur, right 

Head diameter 47.0 — — — es = 47.0 ag 

Maximum length 497 — — 455 --- —_ 476 29.70 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 35.0 — PO | a -- — 31.4 5.16 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 28.7 — 24.6 —- a -- 26.7 2.90 

Midshaft, circumference 100 — 88 — — see 94 8.49 

Subtrochanter, anterior-posterior 26.8 — — — == — 26.8 wee 

Subtrochanter, medial-lateral 42.9 7 — a“ — -— 42.9 ks? 
Tibia, left 

Maximum length 429 — —- a — — 429 — 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 34.1 — — — 32.8 — 33:5 0.92 

Midshaft, medial-lateral yd a | — i =a a 20:7 —_ 20.9 0.28 

Midshaft, circumference 93 — a 88 — 91 3.54 
Tibia, right 

Maximum length 429 —_ —_ — = — 429 isd 

Midshaft, anterior-posterior 33.9 — -32.1 — —- — 33.0 bay 

Midshaft, medial-lateral 23.4 = 23-3 — -- a 23.4 0.07 

Midshaft, circumference 93 — 89 — — — 91 2.83 
Clavicle, left 

Maximum length — — — —- — — = — 
Clavicle, right 

Maximum length — — — = — — — 
Ulna, left 

Maximum length — — 250 ae -- — 250 _ 
Ulna, nght 

Maximum length — — 250 -- — — 250 — 
Radius, left 

Maximum length -— — 239 — —- — 239 —— 
Radius, night 

Maximum length — _ — a -- = — — 
Humerus, left 

Maximum length 350 — — — — — 350 — 

Midshaft, maximum diameter 22.9 = —— — _ 21.0 22.0 1.34 

Midshaft, minimum diameter 17.7 a — a — 16.2 17.0 1.06 

Midshaft, circumference 69 = _ —- — 62 66 4.95 

Head diameter 46.6 — — a — _ 46.6 —_ 

Biepicondylar breadth 64.6 — 52.0 — — — 58.3 8.91 
Humerus, right 

Maximum length — 330 295 a -- — 313 24.75 

Midshaft, maximum diameter — 21.8 21.0 -— — oS 21.4 0.57 

Midshaft, minimum diameter —- 16.7 15.2 _- _- -— 16.0 1.06 

Midshaft, circumference _- 63 62 — _ -— 63 0.71 


Head diameter — — — — ons iors = as 
Biepicondylar breadth -- — — —_~ _ _ ~— a 


2002 
TABLE 26 
Adult Stature Estimates (in cm) 
Bone Estimate? 
Males 
5 femur, left 165.0 
femur, right 165.4 
17 femur, right 153.3 
28 femur, left 144.2 
Mean? 157.0 
Range 144.2-165.4 
SD 10.2 
Females 
16 femur, left 142.2 
femur, nght 141.3 
18 femur, right 153.3 
19 femur, left 146.3 
27 femur, left 1372 
Meanb> 144.1 
Range 137.2-153.3 
SD 6.1 


4 Estimates determined from regression formula provided 
by Sciulli et al. (1990) based on maximum lengths of femora: 
stature = 2.92 X (femur length) + 20.42. 

b Means were determined from all available femora for each 
Sex. 


The value for adult males from South End 
Mound I is very similar to the prehistoric 
foragers and farmers from the Georgia Bight 
and somewhat flatter than the mission Guale 
from St. Catherines and Amelia islands (fig. 
21). This pattern is similar to what Ruff and 
co-workers have identified via cross-section- 
al geometric analysis. The femoral midshaft 
index for adult females from South End 
Mound I is somewhat larger than for the pre- 
historic foragers and farmers from the Geor- 
gia Bight as well as for the mission popula- 
tion from St. Catherines Island. The index is 
less than the value for Guale from Amelia 
Island. This suggests that females are per- 
haps less mobile than the prehistoric and ear- 
ly historic Guale, but more mobile than the 
terminal Guale living on Amelia Island in the 
seventeeth century. 

Although the sample size is small from 
South End Mound I, the findings are gener- 
ally similar to what Ruff and co-workers 
have identified for the Georgia Bight region 
based on formal cross-sectional geometric 
analysis. That is, biomechanical analysis us- 
ing cross-sectional geometry has revealed 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 61 


that prehistoric populations are more mobile 
than the mission populations. 

Calculation of cross-sectional geometric 
properties that are used to analyze bone 
strength requires access to and measurement 
of the subperiosteal (outer) and endosteal (in- 
ner) bone surfaces of the femur midshaft. 
This can only be provided either by invasive 
sectioning (with a saw) or by noninvasive 
imagery (e.g., computed axial tomography). 
One property that provides an overall and 
general measurement of bone mass and 
strength is total subperiosteal area, or TA 
(see table 27 for formula for determining 
TA). Bone mass can vary significantly in re- 
lation to overall body size (as determined by 
stature). Therefore, in comparing human 
populations, TA is usually standardized by 
bone length to some power (for the femur, 
TA is standardized in relation to bone 
length*; see Larsen and Ruff, 1994). For the 
South End Mound I adults, it was possible 
to determine TA,,;, for three males and three 
females, yielding mean values of 719.3 and 
719.4, respectively, based on the left femur 
midshaft dimensions. These values from 
South End Mound I are high in comparison 
with previously reported values for earlier, 
contemporary, and later populations from the 
Georgia Bight (Larsen and Ruff, 1994; fig. 
22). However, the high values are driven by 
the small sample size and the presence of a 
large value of TAg;p for one adult male (in- 
dividual 28) and a large TA,;p value for one 
adult female (individual 27; it is possible that 
this individual is a male, not a female). 

In summary, the individuals from South 
End Mound I are roughly comparable in size 
with other Guale, with some suggestion of 
being somewhat shorter in stature. The fem- 
oral midshaft index is suggestive of relative- 
ly lower mobility than for the prehistoric for- 
agers in the region, a finding that is consis- 
tent with our earlier studies of mobility and 
bone structure based on cross-sectional geo- 
metric analysis of long bones. 


CONCLUSIONS 


When C.B. Moore arrived on St. Catheri- 
nes Island in 1896, he envisioned that his 
expedition would undertake the recovery of 
complete ceramic vessels and other items 


62 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


TABLE 


re | 


Adult Femur Midshaft Index and Total Subperiosteal Area 


Femur midshaft index* 


Left femur Right femur 

Males 

5 80.5 82.0 

15 103.1 88.0 

21 79.5 _ 

28 85.2 — 

Mean 87.1 85.47 

Range 80.5—103.1 82.0-88.8 

SD 10.9 48 
Females 

12 102.8 95.7 

16 81.1 86.5 

18 — 90.0 

19 101.6 — 

27 98.2 98.1 

Mean 95.9 92.6 

Range 81.1-102.8 86.5—98.1 

SD 10.1 33 


Total subperiosteal area> 


Left femur Right femur 
694.9 642.6 
743.6 — 
Te3 642.6 

694.9-743.6 — 
34.4 — 
617.1 718.8 
— 507.3 
663.1 — 
878.1 — 
719.4 613.1 
617.1-878.1 507.3-718.8 
139.3 149.6 


4 Midshaft index computed by the formula (Fresia et al., 1990): 
(Tia % 100).= is 


> Total subperiosteal area computed by the formula (Ruff et al., 1993): 


TAsqp = {[(Typ/2)(Ty/2)] + length3} x 108, 


where TAgrp = total subperiosteal diameter, standardized for body size; 


is 


= anteroposterior diameter; 


Ty) = mediolateral diameter. 


from ancient burial mounds that would be of 
interest to the archaeological community. He 
employed rapid and complete destruction of 
archaeological sites in order to achieve this 
goal. Items that were not of interest—animal 
bones, human skeletal remains, broken ves- 
sels—were discarded in his backdirt as soon 
as they received preliminary identification. 
The approach taken by him would horrify the 
present generation of archaeologists and 
bioarchaeologists if it were applied to the ex- 
cavation of archaeological sites today. How- 
ever, this horror derives from the fact that the 
present generation of archaeologists and 
bioarchaeologists has a very different re- 
search agenda than did our forebears a cen- 
tury ago. Furthermore, this different research 
agenda drives the manner in which archae- 
ological sites are excavated. 

[ronically, had Moore excavated the South 
End Mound I following current procedures, 


there would have been no need to reexcavate 
the site. That is, present recovery techniques 
involve the complete documentation of items 
found during careful excavation and recov- 
ery. However, Moore used a technique in- 
volving rapid shovelling of mound fill, com- 
plete disturbance of human remains, and 
tossing these remains into his backdirt. Our 
excavation of the site nearly a century later 
revealed that indeed Moore kept none of the 
human remains from South End Mound I, 
and the way we found their location in the 
early 1990s was close to their original pro- 
veniences. 

Despite the remarkable degree of distur- 
bance and breakage of human remains, the 
field and laboratory research presented here 
was enormously productive in several key ar- 
eas. First, bioarchaeological crews recovered 
a large sample of human remains represent- 
ing 26 individuals, more than half of the 50 


2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 63 

a Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft A-P Diameter 
E 
S 
2 

o 

= 
s 
Q 
oO. 
< @ Male 
= Female 
is 

” 
Z 
= 
g 

° 

= 

o 

LL 

Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound | Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 
Groups 

b Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft M-L Diameter 

E 

—E 

kn 

2 

o 

= 

is 

a 

= 

= 

= 

© 

= | 

g | Female | 
= 

g 

° 

£ 

® 

LL 

Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound | Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 
Groups 
Fig. 19. Bar graph showing femoral midshaft anterior-posterior diameter (top) and femoral midshaft 


medial-lateral diameter (bottom) for Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers, Georgia coastal prehistoric 
farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmers 
(comparative data from Larsen, 1982, unpubl.). 


identify nearly all of the skeletons in relation 
to his individual determinations. 

Second, all ages and both sexes are rep- 
resented in the series. Although the popula- 
tion is not demographically representative of 


skeletons that Moore identified in his exca- 
vations. These individuals are in various 
Stages of completion, ranging from a few 
fragments to nearly complete skeletons. 
Moreover, owing in large part to the detailed 


record kept by Moore and later published by 
him in his 1897. monograph, we were able to 
match his descriptions with our findings and 


any real population, it does provide a mea- 
sure of comparability with other skeletal se- 
ries in a number of areas (e.g., stable isotope 


64 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Adult Height (cm) 


= 
3 
— 
= 
Am 
o 
x= 


Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers 


Groups 


Fig. 20. 


South End Mound | 


‘Male | 
'EiFemale | 


Florida Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Georgia Coastal 
Mission Farmers 


Bar graph showing adult heights (cm) for Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South End 


Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmers (comparative data from 


Larsen et al., 2002). 


analysis, paleopathology, skeletal morpholo- 
gy). 

Third, the stable isotope analysis provid- 
ed evidence that the population ate maize in 
appreciable amounts. This finding runs 
counter to earlier arguments that maize was 
a minor part of diet in Georgia coastal late 
prehistoric populations (see discussion in 
Jones, 1978). Presence of a Sienificant 
amount of mammalian fauna in the fill of 
the mound points to consumption of terres- 
trial food sources. However, the relatively 
high values of carbon isotope ratios indicate 
significant maize consumption, comparable 
to other late prehistoric samples analyzed 
from the Georgia Bight. Maize consumption 
was intermediate between prehistoric for- 
agers and mission-era Indians living in the 
region. 

Fourth, health status was identified in re- 
lation to earlier (foragers), contemporary 
(farmers), and later mission-era (farmers) 
populations living on St. Catherines Island 
in particular and the Georgia Bight in gen- 
eral. That is to say, oral health (dental car- 
ies) 1s worse than for earlier foragers, sim- 
ilar to contemporary prehistoric farmers, 
and better than for at least some of the mis- 
sion-era Guale (Amelia Island). Skeletal 


health (periosteal reactions) is worse than 
for earlier foragers, and for contemporary 
and mission era farmers from St. Catherines 
Island, but is probably somewhat better than 
for late mission farmers from Amelia Island. 
The frequency of tibial infections (40%), 
however, is high (cf. various studies in Co- 
hen and Armelagos, 1984; Steckel and 
Rose, 2002). At least some of the periosteal 
reactions and infection are systemic, and the 
patterns of presentation on the tibia are 
strongly suggestive of endemic treponema- 
tosis (nonvenereal syphilis). These patterns 
first appear in late prehistoric populations 
from the Georgia Bight. The patterns of 
high caries and tibial infection are strikingly 
similar to other late prehistoric skeletal se- 
ries in the American Southeast and Mid- 
west, and they are associated with the adop- 
tion of maize as a significant contributor to 
diet and to population increase and aggre- 
gation. 

Fifth, body size based on stature estimates 
for the South End Mound I population ts per- 
haps somewhat lower than for prehistoric 
and historic populations from the region. The 
bone mass appears comparable (or even 
higher than) to other skeletal series in the 
region. The sample size is small, and stature 


2002 


Femoral Midshaft Index 


Fig. 21. 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 65 


Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft Index 


100 
98 
96 
94 
92 
90 
88 
86 
84 
82 
80 
78 


B@ Male 
Female 


Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal SouthEnd Mound! Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 


Groups 


Bar graph showing femoral midshaft index for Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South 


End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission farmers (comparative data 
from Larsen, 1982, unpubl.). 


and bone mass are not comparable to the etary pattern as contemporary populations 
larger samples presented in earlier studies from the Georgia Bight in particular and the 


(2... Larsen, 1982). American Southeast in general. Because it is 
Finally, this study reveals evidence of a the only appreciable sample of late prehis- 
population showing a similar lifestyle and di- toric (Irene) period skeletal remains from St. 


Fig. 22. 


Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Total Subperiosteal Area (Standardized) 


Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal § South End Mound | Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 


Groups 


Bar graph showing femoral total subperiosteal area (standardized) for Georgia coastal pre- 


historic farmers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission 
farmers (comparative data from Larsen et al., 2002). 


66 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


Catherines Island, it forms a key link be- 
tween our reconstructions of adaptation and 
lifestyle between earlier (prehistoric forag- 
ers) and later (mission Guale) living in the 
region. In particular, the relatively poor 
health of the late prehistoric population may 
have promoted rapid missionization and con- 
trol of native populations here and elsewhere 
in the Georgia Bight. 


NOTES 


1. The Larsen and Thomas (1986) monograph 
was incorrectly printed with the following title: 
The Archaeology of St. Catherines Island: 5. The 
South End Mound Complex. The correct title is: 
The Anthropology of St. Catherines Island: 5. The 
South End Mound Complex. 

2. The values for carbon- and nitrogen-stable 
isotope ratios were calculated using the following 
equations: 


BC/12C é = BC/2C 
§B3C = ( )sample ( pps x 1000%o 


Cres 


ISN/14N d == ISN/14N 
5'5N oo ( ) sample ( Jair x 1000% 


(N/*N Jair 


3. The Georgia coastal prehistoric foragers are 
from the following sites: South New Ground 
Mound, Cunningham Mound C, Cunningham 
Mound D, Cunningham Mound E, McLeod 
Mound, Seaside Mound I, Seaside Mound II, Eve- 
lyn Plantation, Airport site, Depford site, Wal- 
thour site, Cannons Point site, Cedar Grove 
Mound A, Cedar Grove Mound B, Cedar Grove 
Mound C, Sea Island Mound, Johns Mound, Mar- 
ys Mound, Charlie King Mound, South End 
Mound II, Indian King’s Tomb. 

The Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers are 
from the following sites: North End Mound, 
Low Mound at Shell Bluff, Townsend Mound, 
Deptford Mound, Norman Mound, Kent 
Mound, Lewis Creek Mound II, Lewis Creek 
Mound III, Lewis Creek Mound E, Lewis Creek 
various, Red Knoll site, Seven Mile Bend 
Mound, Oatland Mound, Seaside Mound II (one 
burial), Irene Mound, Grove’s Creek site, Ski- 
daway Mitigation 3 site, Little Pine Island site, 
Red Bird Creek Mound, Couper Field site, Tay- 
lor Mound, Indian Field site, Martinez Test B 
site. 

The Georgia coastal early mission farmers are 
from Santa Catalina de Guale (St. Catherines Is- 
land) and the Pine Harbor Mound site. 

The Florida coastal late mission farmers are 
from Santa Catalina de Guale (Amelia Island). 


REFERENCES 


Ambrose, S.H., and L. Norr. 1992. On stable iso- 
topic data and prehistoric subsistence in the 
Soconusco region. Current Anthropology 33: 
401—404. 

Buikstra, J.E., and D.H. Ubelaker (editors). 1994. 
Standards for data collection from human 
Skeletal remains. Arkansas Archaeological 
Survey Research Series, no. 44. 

Bullen, R.P. 1975. A guide to the identification of 
Florida projectile points, revised ed. Gaines- 
ville, Florida: Kendall Books. 

Bushnell, A.T. 1994. Situado and Sabana: Spain’s 
Support system for the presidio and mission 
provinces of Florida. Anthropological Papers 
of the American Museum of Natural History, 
no. 74. 

Caldwell, J., and C. McCann. 1941. Irene Mound 
site, Chatham County, Georgia. Athens: Uni- 
versity of Georgia Press. 

Carter, D. 1978. Anisotropic analysis of strain ro- 
sette information from cortical bone. Journal 
of Biomechanics 11: 199-202. 

Cohen, M.N., and G.J. Armelagos (editors). 1984. 
Paleopathology at the origins of agriculture. 
Orlando: Academic Press. 

DePratter, C.B. 1979. Ceramics. In D.H. Thomas 
and C.S. Larsen, The anthropology of St. 
Catherines Island: 2. The Refuge-Deptford 
mortuary complex: 109-132. Anthropologi- 
cal Papers of the American Museum of Nat- 
ural History, vol. 56. 

Dukes, J.A. 1993. Change in vertebrate use be- 
tween Irene phase and the seventeenth cen- 
tury St. Catherines Island, Georgia. Unpub- 
lished M.A. thesis, University of Georgia, 
Athens. 

Fresia, A.E., C.B.. Ruff, and) C.S. Larsen. 13a 
Temporal decline in bilateral asymmetry of 
the upper limb on the Georgia coast. /n C.S. 
Larsen (editor), The archaeology of Santa 
Catalina de Guale: 2. Biocultural interpreta- 
tions of a population in transition: 121—132. 
Anthropological Papers of the American Mu- 
seum of Natural History, no. 68. 

Hutchinson, D.L., and C.S. Larsen. 2001. Enamel 
hypoplasia and stress in La Florida. /n C.S. 
Larsen (editor), Bioarchaeology of Spanish 
Florida: The impact of colonialism: 181—206. 
Gainesville: University Press of Florida. 

Hutchinson, D.L., C.S. Larsen, L. Norr, and M.J. 
Schoeninger. 2000. Agricultural melodies 
and alternative harmonies in Florida and 
Georgia. /n P.M. Lambert (editor), Life dur- 
ing the age of agriculture: 96-115. Tuscaloo- 
sa: University of Alabama Press. 

Hutchinson, D.L., C.S. Larsen, M.J. Schoeninger, 


2002 


and L. Norr. 1998. Regional variation in the 
pattern of maize adoption and use in Florida 
and Georgia. American Antiquity 63: 397-— 
416. 

Jones, G.D. 1978. The ethnohistory of the Guale 
coast through 1684. Jn D.H. Thomas, G.D. 
Jones, R.S. Durham, and C.S. Larsen, The 
anthropology of St. Catherines Island: 1. 
Natural and cultural history, 178-210. An- 
thropological Papers of the American Mu- 
seum of Natural History, vol. 55, pt. 2. 

Jones, J. 1876. Explorations of the aboriginal re- 
mains of Tennessee. Smithsonian Contribu- 
tions to Knowledge, vol. 259. 

Justice, N.D. 1995. Stone age spear and arrow 
points of the midcontinental and eastern 
United States: a modern survey and refer- 
ence. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 

Kieser, J.A. 1990. Human adult odontometrics: 
the study of variation in adult tooth size. 
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Lanyon, L.E., W. Hampson, J. Goodship, and J. 
Shah. 1975. Bone deformation recorded in- 
vivo from strain gages attached to the human 
tibial shaft. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica 
46: 256-268. 

Larsen, C.S. 1982. The anthropology of St. Cath- 
erines Island: 3. Prehistoric human biological 
adaptation. Anthropological Papers of the 
American Museum of Natural History, vol. 
SW be ° res 

Larsen, C.S. (editor). 1990. The archaeology of 
Mission Santa Catalina de Guale: 2. Biocul- 
tural interpretations of a population in tran- 
sition. Anthropological Papers of the Amer- 
ican Museum of Natural History, no. 68. 

Larsen, C.S. 1995. Biological changes in human 
populations with agriculture. Annual Review 
of Anthropology 24: 185-213. 

Larsen, C.S. 1997. Bioarchaeology: interpreting 
behavior from the human skeleton. Cam- 
bridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Larsen, C.S. (editor). 2001. Bioarchaeology of 
Spanish Florida: the impact of colonialism. 
Gainesville: University Press of Florida. 

Parsen, C:S.; A‘W- ‘Crosby, M.C: Griffin, D.L. 
Hutchinson, C.B. Ruff, K.E Russell, M.J. 
Schoeninger, L.E. Sering, S.W. Simpson, J.L. 
Takacs, and M.F Teaford. 2002. A biohistory 
of health and behavior in the Georgia Bight: 
the agricultural transition and the impact of 
contact. Jn R.H. Steckel and J.C. Rose (edi- 
tors), The backbone of history: health and 
nutrition in the Western Hemisphere: 406— 
439. Cambridge: Cambridge University 
Press. 

Larsen, C.S., D.L. Hutchinson, M.J. Schoeninger, 
and L. Norr. 2001. Food and stable isotopes 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 67 


in La Florida: diet and nutrition before and 
after contact. Jn C.S. Larsen (editor), Bioar- 
chaeology of Spanish Florida: the impact of 
colonialism: 52—81. Gainesville: University 
Press of Florida. 

Larsen, C.S., and C.B. Ruff. 1994. The stresses 
of conquest in Spanish Florida: structural ad- 
aptation and change before and after contact. 
In C.S. Larsen and G.R. Milner (editors), In 
the wake of contact: biological responses to 
conquest: 21—34. New York: Wiley-Liss. 

Larsen, C.S., C.B. Ruff, M.J. Schoeninger, and 
D.L. Hutchinson. 1992a. Population decline 
and extinction in La Florida. Jn J. W. Verano 
and D.H. Ubelaker (editors), Disease and de- 
mography in the Americas: 25—39. Washing- 
ton, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press. 

Larsen, C.S., M.J. Schoeninger, N.J. van der Mer- 
we, K. Moore, and J.A. Lee-Thorp. 1992b. 
Carbon and nitrogen stable isotopic signa- 
tures of human dietary change in the Georgia 
Bight. American Journal of Physical Anthro- 
pology 89: 197-214. 

Larsen, C.S., and L.E. Sering. 2000. Inferring iron 
deficiency anemia from human skeletal re- 
mains: the case of the Georgia Bight. Jn PM. 
Lambert (editor), Bioarchaeological studies 
in life in the age of agriculture: 116-133. 
Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. 

Larsen, C.S., R. Shavit, and M.C. Griffin. 1991. 
Dental caries evidence for dietary change: an 
archaeological context. In M.A. Kelley and 
C.S. Larsen (editors), Advances in dental an- 
thropology: 179-202. New York: Wiley- 
Liss. 

Larsen, C.S., and D.H. Thomas. 1982. The an- 
thropology of St. Catherines Island: 4. The 
St. Catherines period mortuary complex. An- 
thropological Papers of the American Mu- 
seum of Natural History, vol. 57, pt. 4. 

Larsen, C.S., and D.H. Thomas. 1986. The Ar- 
chaeology of St. Catherines Island: 5. The 
South End Mound complex. Anthropological 
Papers of the American Museum of Natural 
History, vol. 63, pt. 1. 

Larson, L.H., Jr. 1998. Introduction. /n L.H. Lar- 
son (editor), The Georgia and South Carolina 
coastal expeditions of Clarence Bloomfield 
Moore: 1—85. Tuscaloosa: University of Al- 
abama Press. 

Layrisse, M., C. Martinez-Torres, and M. Roche. 
1968. Effect of interaction of various foods 
on iron absorption. American Journal of 
Clinical Nutrition 21: 1175-1183. 

Lovejoy, C.O., R.S. Meindl, T.R. Pryzbeck, and 
R. Mensforth. 1985. Chronological meta- 
morphosis of the auricular surface of the il- 
ium: a new method for the determination of 


68 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


adult skeletal age at death. American Journal 
of Physical Anthropology 68: 15-28. 

McNeil, J. 1999. Raw material availability and 
adaptational behavior: an analysis of the San- 
ta Catalina de Guale lithic assemblage. Un- 
published M.A. thesis, Hunter College, City 
University of New York. 

Moore, C.B. 1897. Certain aboriginal mounds of 
the Georgia coast. Journal of the Academy 
of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 11: 4— 
138. 

O’Brien, D.M. 1986. Nonhuman skeletal remains. 
In C.S. Larsen and D.H. Thomas, The ar- 
chaeology of St. Catherines Island: 5. The 
South End Mound complex: 20-21. Anthro- 
pological Papers of the American Museum of 
Natural History, vol. 63, pt. 1. 

Ortner, D.J. 1999. Scurvy: its skeletal manifesta- 
tions and prevalence in North and South 
American skeletal samples. American Jour- 
nal of Physical Anthropology 28(suppl.): 
216. 

Ortner, D.J., and W.G.J. Putschar. 1985. Identifi- 
cation of pathological conditions in human 
skeletal remains. Washington, D.C.: Smith- 
sonian Institution Press. 

Pendleton, L.S.A. 1986a. Lithic artifacts. In C.S. 
Larsen and D.H. Thomas, The archaeology 
of St. Catherines Island: 5. The South End 
Mound complex: 15—20. Anthropological 
Papers of the American Museum of Natural 
History, vol. 63, pt. 1. 

Pendleton, L.S.A. 1986b. Shell beads. Jn C.S. Lar- 
sen and D.H. Thomas, The archaeology of 
St. Catherines Island: 5. The South End 
Mound complex: 20-21. Anthropological 
Papers of the American Museum of Natural 
History, vol. 63, pt. 1. 

Peter, D. 1986. Ceramic artifacts. Jn C.S. Larsen 
and D.H. Thomas, The archaeology of St. 
Catherines Island: 5. The South End Mound 
complex: 14—20. Anthropological Papers of 
the American Museum of Natural History, 
vol. 63, pt. 1. 

Powell, M.L. 1990. On the eve of the Conquest: 
life and death at Irene Mound, Georgia. /n 
C.S. Larsen (editor), The archaeology of 
Mission Santa Catalina de Guale: 2. Biocul- 
tural interpretations of a population in tran- 
sition: 26-35. Anthropological Papers of the 
American Museum of Natural History, no. 
68. 

Reitz, E.J. 1982. Vertebrate fauna from four coast- 
al Mississippian sites. Journal of Ethnobiol- 
ogy 2: 39-61. 

Reitz, E.J. 1988. Evidence for coastal adaptations 
in Georgia and South Carolina. Archaeology 
of Eastern North America 16: 137-158. 


Reitz, E.J. 1993. Evidence for animal use at the 
missions of Spanish Florida. Jn B.G. Mc- 
Ewan (editor), The Spanish missions of La 
Florida: 376-398. Gainesville: University 
Press of Florida. 

Reitz, E.J., and C.M. Scarry. 1985. Reconstruct- 
ing historic subsistence, with an example 
from sixteenth-century Spanish Florida. So- 
ciety for Historical Archaeology Special 
Publication, no. 3. 

Reitz, E.J., and E. Wing. 1999. Zooarchaeology. 
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Ruff, C.B. 1999. Biomechanical analyses of ar- 
chaeological human skeletons. Jn M.A. Katz- 
enberg and S.R. Saunders (editors), Biolog- 
ical anthropology of the human skeleton: 71— 

102. New York: Wiley-Liss. 

Ruff, C.B., and C.S. Larsen. 2001. Reconstructing 
behavior in Spanish Florida. Jn C.S. Larsen 
(editor), Bioarchaeology of Spanish Florida: 
the impact of colonialism: 113—145. Gaines- 
ville: University Press of Florida. 

Ruff, C.B., C.S. Larsen, and W.C. Hayes. 1984. 
Structural changes in the femur with the tran- 
sition to agriculture on the Georgia coast. 
American Journal of Physical Anthropology 
64: 125-136. 

Ruff, C.B., E. Trinkaus, A. Walker, and C.S. Lar- 
sen. 1993. Postcranial robusticity in Homo. 
I: Temporal trends and mechanical intrepre- 
tation. American Journal of Physical Anthro- 
pology 91: 21-53. 

Saunders, R. 2000. Stability and change in Guale 
Indian pottery, A.D. 1300—1702. Tuscaloosa: 
University of Alabama Press. 

Schoeninger, M.J. 1995. Stable isotope studies in 
human evolution. Evolutionary Anthropolo- 
gy 4: 83-98. 

Schoeninger, M.J., N.J. van der Merwe, K. 
Moore, J. Lee-Thorp, and C.S. Larsen. 1990. 
Decrease in diet quality between the prehis- 
toric and contact periods. /n C.S. Larsen (ed- 
itor), The archaeology of Mission Santa Cat- 
alina de Guale: 2. Biocultural interpretations 
of a population in transition: 78—93. Anthro- 
pological Papers of the American Museum of 
Natural History, no. 68. 

Schultz, M. 1993. Initial stages of systematic bone 
disease. Jn G. Grupe and A.N. Garland (ed- 
itors), Histology of ancient human _ bone: 
methods and diagnosis: 185-203. Berlin: 
Springer-Verlag. 

Schultz, M., C.S. Larsen, and K. Kreutz. 2001. 
Disease in Spanish Florida: microscopy of 
porotic hyperostosis and cribra orbitalia. In 
C.S. Larsen (editor), Bioarchaeology of 
Spanish Florida: the impact of colonialism: 


2002 


207-225. Gainesville: University Press of 
Florida. 

Sciulli, PR W., K.M. Schneider, and M.C. Mahaney. 
1990. Stature estimation in prehistoric Native 
Americans of Ohio. American Journal of 
Physical Anthropology 83: 275—280. 

Steckel, R.H., and J.C. Rose (editors). 2002. The 
backbone of history: health and nutrition in 
the Western Hemisphere. Cambridge: Cam- 
bridge University Press. 

Stuart-Macadam, P. 1992. Anemia in past human 
populations. /n P. Stuart-Macadam and S. 
Kent (editors), Diet, demography, and dis- 
ease: changing perspectives on anemia: 151— 
170. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. 

Thomas, D.H. 1987. The archaeology of Mission 
Santa Catalina de Guale: 1. Search and dis- 
covery. Anthropological Papers of the Amer- 
ican Museum of Natural History, vol. 63, pt. 
2. 

Thomas, D.H., G.D. Jones, R.S. Durham, and C.S. 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 69 


Larsen. 1978. The anthropology of St. Cath- 
erines Island: 1. Natural and cultural history. 
Anthropological Papers of the American Mu- 
seum of Natural History, vol. 55, pt. 2. 

Thomas, D.H., and C.S. Larsen. 1979. The An- 
thropology of St. Catherines Island: 2. The 
Refuge-Deptford mortuary complex. Anthro- 
pological Papers of the American Museum of 
Natural History, vol. 56, pt. 1. 

Thomas, D.H., S. South, and C.S. Larsen. 1977. 
Rich man, poor men: observations on three 
antebellum burials from the Georgia coast. 
Anthropological Papers of the American Mu- 
seum of Natural History, vol. 54, pt. 3. 

Ubelaker, D.H. 1989. Human skeletal remains: 
excavation, analysis, interpretation, 2nd ed. 
Washington, D.C.: Taraxacum. 

White, T-.D. 2000. Human osteology, 2nd ed. San 
Diego: Academic Press. 

Worth, J.E. 1995. The struggle for the Georgia 
coast. Anthropological Papers of the Ameri- 
can Museum of Natural History, no. 75. 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


70 


‘yeLINg BOO S1OEds YIM DUO JO YOIeUT ‘UTeyIOUN Jnq ‘ajqeqod ‘[ ] ‘UONBARSXS [861/6L61 WoIy dunys [jem ‘sm ‘uMOUYUN “YUN ‘jId Jsaq ‘q | ‘a]UaIs *s ‘IYysU “y ‘feutxold *xold 


Q8¢-8H Woly 
JUSUWIZeIJ YIM poyoyeu 


el p- 8a Woy 
JUSUISeIy YIM poyoyeul 


1-8 WIM poyoreus 


punow 
JO UONPALSX9 [86] 


wo LT Aq q Apu 
se paljnuopt Ajeursu0 


SJUSUIWUO-) 


JUSWISey 


[easip 

sjUsUIseIy 

SJUSUISEIY 

sJUsUIseIy 

sJUSUIseIy 

JUDWISeIy 

auog JejOoaye 
SJUSUIBeIJ polynueprun 


sJUsUIseIy 


JUSUII[9 JO UOTLIOg 


yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 


[erxe 


Jerxe 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 
yun 

Jerxe 

jerxe 


apls 


apeore 
[equeqd 


xuvyeyd puey pouwwojut 
jedseorjoul 
sasuvyeyd joo} pawiajul 


sasureyd puey pouiajul 


xuvyeyd joo} powiajul 
sniowiny 

sosueyeyd puey 
sosuejeyd puey 
sosuejeyd puey 
xuvyeyd puey xod ys1y 


fe) 


|) 
InuIay 


jeruel9o 
yetuess 

jerues9 

jerueis 

BIQIHIA [POIAIO 
BIQOLIA [ROIAIIO 
R][IXeW JO J]QIpueU 
xuvyeyd puey yeqsip 
auo0g paliueprun 
BIqn 

BIqn 

INUIIJ 

snipel 

winty! 

jeruess 


a}qipueus 


yugW9}q 


I XIQ(NHddV 


pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 


pe 


pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 


Anf 


assy 


‘(9Q6]) SPUIOY,], pue uasse’] “LT ‘oy “J ‘apuaanl ‘anf ‘ayerpousayur ‘pouLoyUl ‘feNplAIpU! ‘AIpUT ‘oJeUTULIOJOPUI “JOPUT ‘UOTEALSXS 1861/66] Wo dunjs [fem Isva ‘sma ‘I[Npe “pe -Aay 


2 Qrbp-84 usados 09-0b 84 ra ¢ 
? 71-84  ueedos 07-0 84 ras ¢ 
? ZI-8q usados 07-0 84 Ze ¢ 
? ZI-8H - ueados 07-0 84 ze ¢ 
P $S-8q ueel0s §=s_ (QO -08 8d ras ¢ 
° &Sp-8d Aol = OOT-08 sd Ze ¢ 
? 69-84 € 08-09 84 ze ¢ 
° (7p-84 ¢ 09-0 84 Ze ¢ 
° OZE-84 | 09-0r 84 ZE ¢ 
? 67-8d dr 001-08 sd ze ¢ 
° elp-8d b 09-0 84 ze ¢ 
? q8€-84 I 09-0 84 Ze ¢ 
P 69-84 qZ = QOI-08 84 ze ¢ 
P Sp-84  uael0s 09-0r 84 ze ¢ 
? p-8q uaed9s 07-0 84 zE ¢ 
° BE8-Bsq - UaadOS S001 84 rag ¢ 
? IL-84 PZ =: ODI-08 84 ras ¢ 
? €L-84 €  OOI-08 gd ras ¢ 
° pe-8q  usalos Or-07 84 TE ¢ 
? S€-8y  used0s Or-0Z gd ze ¢ 
? ZS-8d ueelds = QOI-08 8d ras ¢ 
Jopul 25 a 09-0 69 _ b 
Jepul — a 09-0 69 = P 
yopul = sacs 09-0 69 = 7 
yopul = = 09-0S 69 —_ p 
Jopul sia = 09-0 69 = 7 
Japul = = 09-0 69 — p 
Jopul = — 09-0 69 =a p 
Jopul = = 09-0 69 —_ p 
x9S ‘ou ‘yeD “ou (wd) wug yeung ‘ou 
PIeld [2A] QO00W “AIPU] 


SUIBUDY URUINA y punopY puy YyINos 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY a 


2002 


RI[IXBW UL pappequa 
ajoduioo Ajaaneyal 
ajajduioo Ajaaneyad 


$S-8H Woy 
JUSWISeIy YM poyowew 


C£-8H Wooly 
JUSWISeIy YAM poyoyew 


8-8e Wooly 
JUSWISey YIM poyoyeur 


8Cp-8q Wor} 
WUOWISeIy YM poyoyeu 


s}USWIWOD 


JUIUI3eIy UMOIO 


S]USWIBR 
S]UDUISBLY 
S]USW3eIy 


uorod snonad 


JUSUISPY 
a[Apuoo 


ssao01d ploiseul 


WUoUIdeIy 

juswi3ely sishydeip 
[eisIp 

jusWseLy 


dovjins seynoune 


WUIUIaTo JO UOTLIOg 


pa = ae = a = > Ae = 7 


ee ee | 


‘d 
Shoe 


ePIS 


Areyyixeu 
Je[nqipuew 
Jeynqipuew 
Jeynqipueuw 
Je[nqipueu 
Je[nqipuew 


apeore 
[ejusq 


I] 
eypIxeul 


eypIxew 
td JO td 
Ul 

tw 

Cl 

Cl 
9]qipuew 
a[qipueuw 
a]qipuew 


ajqipueus 


a1qipueu 
onewo3shz 
o1yBUIO BAZ 
BIqn 
WOJIOUNS psy) 
[esoduray 
snyey 

Z [edseorjow 
eindeos 
jeqdis90 
[eidis90 
Je[NoIAeu 
[esoduia} 
Jesoduray 


wnt]! 
smuauiny 
ayeurey 
qu 
Inwiaj 
euyn 
Q]OIARIO 
ayeyides 


ayeurwouUt 


WUOW9|FA 


(panuyjuo)) 
L XIGNHddV 


pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 


pe 


pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 


pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 
pe 


pe 


aay 


FO £0 £050 "504 ONO) 50! £0), SOuSO 


*o 


FO BOSSONSO 50) SO) 550) 0" SO) 0) 50! £0" 50) SO 


SOETORSONSO! SO" 50) £0 FO 


*O 


X9S 


89-84 
89-84 
89-84 
1S-8H 
tI-84H 
eCL-8H 
QSL-8H 
vi-8d4 
9SL-8H 
PIv-8H 
Ob-8H 


ce-8d 


oS-84 
9¢-34 
9-84 
qép-84 
cC-8d 
L-84 
LL-8a 
qes-8d 
UCb- 84 
OS-8d 
OS-8d 
le-8d 
$-84H 
$-84 


9Cp-8H 
ecr-8H 
e8S-8H 
€-84 
€-84 
tb-84 
ch-8d 
6¢-8H 


8-84 


‘ou "yey 


L4 
eC 
BC 
ugaJ0S 
uddI0S 
udaJI9S 
UddIOS 
u9019S 
UddIOS 


v 
y 


ugo19S 


UudVIOS 
ug919S 
usaJOS 

as 
ugoJOSs 
ugaJOs 


(4 
I 


I/HS 
u9010s 


u9o19S 
usoIOS 
ugeJOS 
ugo190S 


as 


vs 
udoJ0s 


ae 


d0l 
uao10s 


u9d9IJOS 


‘ou 
Pret 


001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
09-0P 
07-0 
001-08 
O0OT-08 
07-0 
001-08 
09-0r 
09-0b 


Ov-02 


08-09 
Ov-07 
07-0 
09-0P 
08-09 
07-0 
S-001 
08-09 
09-0r 
001-08 
001-08 
Ov—-07 
07-0 
07-0 


09-0P 
09-0P 
08-09 
0c-0 
07-0 
09-0r 
001-08 
Ov-07 


0¢-0 


(wi9) 
[aA] 


84 


8H 


wu) 


ce 


jeuing 
aWoopW 


orn a) 


nownnnnwmn 


nwyN 


La) 


nouwuunnMnnnnunnuwnnuwnnnnn nN 


ounnunnnnnn 


‘ou 
“ATpU] 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


72 


19-84 YIM payoieul 
PES-8q YM payoeu 
6>-84 YIM payoreul 
87p-84 YIM payoreul 
L7-84 YUM payoreu 


11-8e YM poyoreur 
apis J oy) wo Ajqeqoid 
$- 84 YIM poyoieur 
689-84 

‘OU "}¥9 YIM PILIOJUSAUI 
(EW 1y3u Aseqprxew) 
97-84 YIM poyojyeul 
Bl[Ixew ul pappequia 
eI[Ixeu Ul pappaquia 
P[[IxewW Ul pappsquia 
Pl[xew Ul pappequia 
B[[Ixeul Ul pappaquia 
PI[IXeUW UT pappaquia 
el[ixeul ul pappequia 
B[|Ixeul Ul pappaquia 
RI|IxeW Ul pappoquia 
el[Ixew Ul pappaquia 


s}UIUIWIOD 


_ Y _ aieudes =o pe 
-- 7 ao prozedey) = pe 
-- uy — piozades) = pe 
= yun a qu-pe 
— yun aa quspe 
Sg Ps. qu pe 
oe ye ag qu pe 
Sen i, qu-spe 
owe Ge a quip 
my yun oa qu pe 
JUIWISe yun — qu spe 
WUOWIseIy yun _— qu pe 
s]UIWIsey qT ~— eiqn =o pe 
govjins Jepnonse xo1d yun — eiqn = pe 
— yun — xuvjeyd puey xoid_ ~~ pe 
-- yun _— xuvyeyd puey xoid ~~ pe 
— yun — xueyeyd jooy xoid ~—s pe 
JUSWIBIY yun — xuvjeyd ~—s pe 
— yun — sosurjeyd = pe 
— yun — sosurjeyd = pe 
— yun — ejoued ~=—s pe 
— yun — [ejoued =o pe 
— 9uoU _— jedieorjour = pe 
oe Yo Areyyrxeur ZN Ope 
a UM Aseyyixew IN pe 
aa JT Areyprxew CN pe 
- To Areqiixew TN OPP 
cae JT Areyprxeuwr IN pe 
= JT Areyyixew td pe 
Pa a Aseypixeu td pe 
a To Areyyixew fd pe 
= UM Areyyixew fd pe 
= J Aseypexew Oo pe 
— Y Aseytxeul =). © pe 
= JT Areqyixeur ZI ope 
= M Areyyixeus ZI] ope 
= JT Aseyyixeur I] pe 
JUIUII]9 JO UOTWOY apis apror yuaWa,q aay 
jeluoqg 
(panuljuo,)) 
| XIQGNHddV 


£0) £0: FO" £0: £0 FO SO) SO) *O);FO) O80) 090 Onto “ORTOR ONO On Om Ono 


FORTO 


0/0. £0: 10,50 FO) fO SO) 04"0 


xag 


9$-84 
6°84 
6-84 
L7-84 
6>-84 
eEC-84 
11-84 
19-84 
AZp-84 
8p-8d 
37p-84 
481-84 
€b-8d 
J1p-84 
pS-84 
9¢6-84 
&pp-84 
9€8-84 
3[>-84 
€€-84 
1-84 
07-84 
Lp-8d 
L€-8d 


09-84 
21-84 


®0r-84 
89-84 
89-84 
89°84 
89-84 
89-84 
89-84 
89-84 
89-84 
89-84 
89-84 


UddIOS 
UdVIOS 
UdIIOS 
U9saIOS 
Ud81OS 

I 
ug919S 
udaJOS 


S 
udaios 


O01 

v 
UdaIOS 
I 
u9a19S 
UdaIOS 


v 
UddJ9S 


al 
udeJ9S 


ude19S 
6 


uddJOS 
v 


‘ou WweD 


‘ou 
Piel 


08-09 
07-0 
07-0 
Ob-07 
09-OP 
08-09 
07-0 
08-09 
09-Or 
001-08 
09-Ob 
Or-07 
001-08 
09-0P 
08-09 
08-09 
09-0b 
S—001 
09-0P 
Or—-07 
07-0 
Or-07 
09-OP 
001-08 


08-09 
09-0P 


09-0P 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 


(wud) 
[9Aq77] 


jeung 
WooW 


wounnumnnwnnnwnnnuwnnmnnwnnwnnuwnnnwnnwnnwnnnnnwnnnn ww 


ww 


wuouwuuwnun nnn wn 


arn 2 2) 


‘ou 
“AIPUY 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY q3 


2002 


— — . yun a auog paynuoprun =pe sp 99-84 1 001-08 8 ze ¢ 

= — yun — xuvyeyd pury jeisip = =pe =P 99-84 I 001-08 84 Ze ¢ 

— — yun os plousyds pe pL-84 b 001-08 84 Ze ¢ 

— —— yun = p[esiviejou = pep 77-84 =: Uaau0s Ob-02 84 Ze ¢ 

— — yun = Z [esivyejour pep 77-8 =: usau0s Ob-02 84 ze ¢ 

oe —— on re yndeos pe 9 p7-84 uses0s Ob-02 84 Ze ¢ 

= yore u = onewmoskz pe Ulp-84 bp 09-0r 84 Ze ¢ 

= =o u a onewoshz pe p 61-84 UseJ0s Or-07 84 43 ¢ 

+S sishydeip u =, eqn =pe op Ce-8d 26 = OOT-08 8d Ze ¢ 

— — u = ¢[edmovjour pe Pp €7-8H  UdaI0s Obr-02 84 Ze ¢ 

a jusWIsey u = plousyds pe op 87-8 uaados Or-02 84 Ze is 

— —_ Yu = Z[ediovjour pep Ip-8a ¢ 09-0r gq Ze ¢ 

— = u — wuojiaund puoses «= pe 8L-84 € S-OOI 84 Ze ¢ 

—_ susWsely YU —_ eindeos pe P Op-8H usoJ9OS 09-0r 8H (4a ¢ 

ssoo01d [eruo19e Sepnyoul ——— Pal —— eindeos pe Ae) 97Pp-8H OS 09-O0V 84 (AS is 
— — P| os ploydess pe 9 O€-8H usados Or-02 84 Ze ¢ 

= xoud u sae eujn pep 7-84 dz 07-0 84 Ze ¢ 

= == u = ead =6pe |p olp-8d p 09-0r gd Ze ¢ 

== JUWUISeL u =z jesoduia) = pep ege-8d I 09-0 sq Ze ¢ 

= juoWsey u = jejoued =pe op LI-84 I Or-02 8d Ze ¢ 

L8Ob-8A YM payoyeul = UY Areyyrxew EN pe PP 97-84 UsaI9s Or-07 sd Ze ¢ 
== aa J Je[nqipuew TN pe 97-84 uaalos Obr-02 8d ze ¢ 

= os J Je[nqrpuew IN pe 2 97-84  uaalos Or-02 8d ZE ¢ 

as aS JT Jejngipuew td pe? 97-84 UaaIOS Obr-07 8d Ze s 

= = J Je[nqipuew €d pe? 97-84 uaad0s Or-07 gd ZE ¢ 

ZW 

pur ‘[W ‘pd ‘€d surequoo = a == gqipueuws pep 97-84 uaad9s Or-02 i | Ze ¢ 
= = AY epnqipuew EN pe 2 97-84 uaal0s Obr-02 84 Ze S 

= = Y= epnqipuew TN pe 2 97-84 UaadOs Or-07 84 (43 ¢ 

€W-ZW surequos = u = gjqipueur pep 97-84 UaaJ0s Ob-02 gd Ze ¢ 
= = Y = gywuny pe LS-8H  uaelos 08-09 8d Ze ¢ 

= wun[ngejeoe YIM WINTYOSI u — ayeurmouur =pe = p Ptp-8d rats 09-0r 84 Ze s 

= == P| aca ayeurey = =pe =p Q8S-84 uaedos 08-09 84 Ze ¢ 

a [eqsIp u = Gyedmovjou = pep 9¢L-84 ueeI0S = QO I-08 84 Ze ¢ 

Sy [eisip u oes Zlediovjout pe 21-84 ueeI9S_ ~— QO I-08 | Ze ¢ 

—— —_— yun _ xueyeyd puey xoid pe P 9C/-84 udodJ9OS OOI-O8 84 cL ¢ 

oe = u = wnizedey) =pe =p 21-84 ueet0s = CQO -08 8d Ze ¢ 

== = u = inuiay pep J@p-8d ds 09-0r 84 ze ¢ 

= juswisey u — gpouarjo. pep Ip8d VOI 001-08 8d (43 ¢ 
syUSWIWOD JUBWUZ]9 JO UOTIOg apis oprole WUOWIN|q ay xe ‘ou “}eVD “Ou (UID) yup jeung ‘ou 

jequeq Plat JPA9'] aJ00W “AIPU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


74 


pe-8d YM poyoyeu 
eynqy Ayqeqoid 


ejndeos A[qeqoid 


S}UQUIWUO") 


WUSWIdeIy 

jude. 

S}UDWI3RIy 

UISIBUU [RIGO JYBU JOMO] 
sUsWIdBIy 

juowsely sishydeip 


sjuswaely re[nqeiaoe 
peoy 

[easip 

Quog IeJOOATe 
s]UsWseLy 

susWisely 

yun 

S]UDUIBeIy 

sUsWIseLy 

yusWsely poynuaprun 
susW3e1y poursyeo 
susUI3eLy 

sUsUIdRLy 

susWsey 

s]UusW3eIy 

susWIsey 

syuswidely 

Apoq 

Kpoq 


JUdWI]A JO UOIOd 


jeixe 
[eixe 
[eixe 
[eixe 
[eixe 
[erxe 
[vixe 
jeixe 
eixe 


apis apeoir 
jequaq 


*o 0 *0O £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 £0 0 £0 £0 £0 £0 *O OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF O 


~ 
uv 
Sa) 


Pt-6d 
P?7-6d 
97-60 
tS-8d 
LI-8) 
e81-84 
tt-8d 
4Sv-8d 
Sc-8H 
4S-6d 
epb-8d 
91-80 
t-8d 
Ot-8d 
ce-8d 
81-890 
®9-6d 
ec-6d 
LS-8d 
99-60 
P9-6d 
ecc-8d 
eCc-8d 
eC7-8d 
¢9°84 
¢8-84 
cb-8a4 
9¢-8d 
9€9-8H 
OI-8H 
OS-8H 
4Ib-84 
P8t-84 
SI-84 
6b-8d 
L9-8H 
Pes-84 
OL-84 
cL-8Hh 


‘OU "]B°) 


I 
uda19S 


U9d91OS 
UdaJOS 


t 

(4 

v6 
HOI 
udeJ9s 
t 

dol 

(4 
udaJ9S 
dg 
dg 

v 
UdaJ9S 
3 
ud019S 
uda19s 
udal9s 
udel9s 
udeJ9s 
udeJ9S 
udeJ9s 
uge0s 


S 


d6 
uda19s 


Ud—VIOS 
UudVJOS 


v 


I 
udaJOS 


UdIIOS 


‘ou 


Piet 


Ov-07 
07-0 
07-0 
001-08 
001-08 
Ov-07 
001-08 
001-08 
Ov-07 
Or-07 
001-08 
001-08 
07-0 
001-08 
001-08 
001-08 
Or-07 
Ov-07 
001-08 
Ov-07 
Ov-07 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
S-001 
09-0P 
001-08 
08-09 
07-0 
09-0P 
09-0F 
09-0F 
07-0 
001-08 
001-08 
08-09 
001-08 
001-08 


(wd) 
[9A] 


snipes pe 

snipes pe 

IN pe 

eypixewm = pe 

auog paynuseptun ~— pe 

eujn spe 

ayeurwmouul ~—s pe 

sniouiny = pe 

p [edieorjou ~—s pe 

QJOIAR]D spe 

ayeurmouul ~—s pe 

sniguiny = pe 

Binqy = pe 

Binqy = pe 

Binqy = pe 

Biqn = pe 

yeueis = pe 

yemueis = pe 

jelueio =o pe 

Q[OIARTD ~—s pe 

ID pe 

RI[IXBW JO a]qIpueul = pe 

sjedieovjou ~—s pe 

auog paynuepiun ~— pe 

vIGeuaA = pe 

auog polynuopiun = pe 

auog paynuepiun = pe 

vindeos pe 

yemuvio = pe 

auog paynuepiun = pe 

BIGOHaA =p 

BIGeaA ~~ pe 

RIGOUIA ~—s pe 

BIGOUIA ~—s pe 

BIGQUOA ~—s pe 

BIGOUOA =p 

BIGQHOA =p 

BIQOU9A D19vJ0y) ~=—s pe 

BIGOHIA D190eJ0y] ~—s pe 

WUDUUI| 4 asy 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIQGNHddV 


yeung ‘ou 


YFENIAIANQNAAAIAIAIAA A an 
1m AAA AANA AANA NN * 
mwuununuwnnnunnuwnnwnunnuwnuwnuniovwvwoivovoivwvuoivwuoiwvuvoiwuoiwowmrowuowuowunwunuwunuwunuwuouwunuwo oo Oo oO OO 


aan 
a os 
ww 


WOOW ‘AIpU] 


5 


LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


LARSEN 


2002 


ynpe Ajqeqoid sjusWsey poulsyeo =. yun auo0g paynuepiun = pe japul 17-84 -uaas0s Ob-0Z 84 O€ 6 

ynpe Ajqeqoad sjuawiseay pouropeo = yun - euo0g peynuepiun = =pe jepul 98-84 (4 08-09 i | O€ 6 

ynpe Ajqeqoid s]usWIsely pouroyeo = yun — auo0g peynueprun = =pe =: japul C8-84 usal9s 09-0b rs O€ ‘ 

ynpe Atqeqoid s]UsUIse1j poulsyeo = yun — auog peynuoprun pe jopul p8-8q usados Or-0Z ors O€ 6 

ynpe Ayqeqoid sJUsWISe1y poulsjeo = yun — auog peynuepiun = =pe = jepul 19-8  uea0s 08-09 8d O€ 6 

1npe ATqeqoid s]UsWIse1y poulojeo = yun — auog peynusprun = pe japul I-80 sels 07-0 ie) O€ 6 

ynpe A;qeqoid s]usWIse1y poulsyeo = yun —- auo0g peynuspiun pe japul Z-8q@  uaelos 07-0 gq O¢€ 6 

ynpe A;qeqoid SJUSWISeIy poulsjeo =. yun — auog poynusprun pe jopul I-8q@  Uueeos Ob-0Z gq O¢ 6 

ynpe Atqeqoid SJUsWIZeIy pouloyeo = yun _ auog peynueplun = pe japul I-8V _uaal0s Or-0Z QV O€ 6 
O7-8C YUM poyoweul juswWsey u = jesodwo} anf  jepur Ly-8Q  Usel9s 001-08 8d (47 8 
Lp-8d ym peyoeur uorod snoned y — je1oduia} +=aAnf = japur 07-8q  ueelos 08-09 8d Zp g 
a easip = yun “= muwej Jovign anf  jepur OI-8d  usedos Or—-07 8d (44 8 

— = u rar eujn =Anf — yopur €-80 Uealos 08-09 80 (44 8 

aoe = u oe eqn = anf = yopur GS-80 = Uses 08-09 8) (44 8 

= yoou pure peoy u = inwieay Ant jepur 6-8) Ueel9s 08-09 8) (44 8 

aa [eqstp u = sniper nf  jopur L-89 = UeeJ0s 08-09 8) cy 8 

a = u aa ajoravjo Ant japur 9°89 = UseI9S 08-09 8) (44 8 

— snured BuIpUsose 12] ay — gjqipueur anf jopur p-8D —-uaeOS 08-09 80 ay g 

-— juswisely yershyderp al — sniper anf jopur 8-8D uses 08-09 gD ty g 

= = ql = snowy anf yopur I-80 = Ueed0s 08-09 80 cy 8 

aa = a = inuiay = Anf = jopur OI-8D = UeeI9s 08-09 80 (44 8 

— juowsely = =—-yRIXe — gjqipueur =anf = jopur 6-8q  ueel0s Or-0Z sd I€ ip 

— sUsUIsey yun —- eindeos anf joapur 7-80 ~—s uaal0s 08-09 ie) I€ L 

QSb-8d YM peyojeul as 7T = smouny = pe ) ve-8d d6 00I-08 8d 6t 9 
ad yun erxe ete BIgeHoA = pe $ 91-6 I 09-0b 6d 6¢ 9 

a yun yerxe a BIqoHOA = p® rs) 99-6 = UseI9S Ov-07 6d 6£ 9 

— sjueursey ostur pue sishyderp yun = eqn pe $ 61-8) ¢ 001-08 80 6£ 9 

a sjuousey = yun = endeos pe = 5L-6d I 09-0r =: 6£ 9 

a aa u fe eujn pe 3 L1-8d I 08-09 8d 6t 9 

— JUDUISeY Y — eindeos pe j 26-6 ~=—«Uaa0s 08-09 6d 6£ 9 

= = u Ts eindeos = pe } 97-6 =: U8TOS 07-0 6d 6£ 9 

= = ua = eyed = pe 3} 81-8 = usel9s 08-09 8d 6 9 

$1-80 YA peyojeu = ud = Snisuiny = pe ) 8S-8Q usel0s 001-08 8d 6€ 9 
8S-8C YUM poyoieus juowseyy [erskyderp ua =a Stouiny = pe rs) $I-8) I 001-08 890 6 9 
eas [eastp u a einqy = pe rs) 9S-8 UeetDS = QO 1-08 8d 6£ 9 

— sjuowseyy = yun = qu pe fs) yS-8Q Usel9S = =6©O0I-08 8d 6£ 9 

~— sjuousely yun = que 3} I¢-8d dL = O0I-08 8d 6¢ 9 

= juowsey yun = qu pe 3 8e-8d 46 = 001-08 8d 6£ 9 

— peoy eipes yun —s sniper = pe } 6$-8H Yeats 08-09 84 6t 9 
s}UsWIWIOD jUaWZTa JO UOTWIOg apis apeole JUSUIOTA ay xas ‘ou ‘WeO ‘ou (wd) wuy jeung ‘ou 

jequsq Piel [2A07] e100) “AIpU] 
(panuijuo)) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


76 


‘x — ~ jfeixe = ajqipuew = Anf = japut [8-84 9 S-001 84 81 II 

ae = u — snayjeu = Ant apul 18-84 9 S-OOl 84 81 I 

oa oa u aa snour anf japur 18-84 9 S001 84 81 II 

— snojjed pue jesourenbs y = jesodwuia} «anf = japur 18-84 9 S00! gq gI Il 

= = u = eyixeur = Ant yapur 18-84 9 S-00I 83 81 II 

— = u = siqnd anf japur 18-84 9 S-00I 84 81 a 

— = Yu ate wintyost. =Anf = japul 18-84 9 S—00I 84 81 Il 

= = u = win = Ant japut 18-84 ) S-OOl 84 81 II 

— = u = ejndess anf japur 18-84 ) S001 84 8I II 

= per u = eujn = Ant = japut 18-84 9 S-001 84 81 II 

-_ = u aa super anf  japut 18-84 9 S—-00I 84 8I II 

= a. u oa snowy = =anf —japul 18-84 9 S-001 84 81 II 

— = u car ajoraeyo = anf = Japul 18-84 9 S-00I 84 81 II 

= ia u re einqy anf japur 18-84 9 S—00I 84 81 Il 

= == u =. eiqy = Anf = jopul 18-84 9 S-00I 84 81 Il 

= = u = inuay Ant  yapur [8-84 9 S001 84 81 I 

— — ~=—jeixe —- prousyds anf japul Q€8-84  useas0s S-O01 8g gI II 

= —y u Axe|[rxewu ZWP Ant = jopur 6-84 Uesed9s S-08 84 87 Ol 

— a Yu Are|]txe uu IWP Anf  yapur 6-84 Uesedlos S-08 84 87 Ol 

= =a u Axey[txeu Op Anf japur 6-84 Ueedos S-O8 84 87 Ol 

= ne JT Areyprxew ZWP «Anf  japur 6-84 uaal0s S-08 84 87 Ol 

_ = JT Aveyrxew TWP Ant  jopur 6-84 waad0s S-08 84 87 0) | 

= — TJ Areqrxew zip = Anf = japur 6-84 uealds S-08 8d 87 Ol 

A = | Are|[ixeu Tp Anf  japur 6-84 Ueedos S-O8 84 87 Ol 

ra = UY = Aeypnqipuew TWP Anf  jepur 6-84 = Uaed9S S-08 84 87 Ol 

za = YU = Jeypnqipueus INP Ant  jepur 6-84 Used9s S-08 84 87 Ol 

7 wa JT Jepnqipuew TWP Ant = jepul 6°84 = Ueal9s S-08 84 87 Ol 

ox _ JT Jepnqipuew Hp anf yapur 6-84 =: Weeds S-08 84 87 Ol 

ynpe Ajqeqosd ‘pautoyeo = yun oa snfe} = pes yopul 46-84 (4 09-0F 84 Of 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid uorpod snoned y — jesodwia} = pes »japul e79-84 - uaaIOS 08-09 gq O€ 6 
ynpe A;qeqoid WUsWIseIJ pouTo[eo yun os Tejoued =6pe-= = »japul QZ9-84  -uaal0s 08-09 sq O€ 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid sjusWisely pauloyeo yun — Qu0g payueprun = pe japul 6£-84 z 09-0P 84 O¢ 6 
y[npe Ajqeqoid poynuepriun yun -- jeejo pe jopul eE9-Rq -UaaIDS 08-09 9g O¢ 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid peynuepiun yun ree Jetuvjo = pe jepul P6t-84 t 09-0P 84 O€ 6 
ynpe A;qeqoid sjUsWIse1y paulo[eo yun —_ auo0g paynueptun = =pe japul C-84  uaas0s 09-0P 4 O€ 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid sjuswisely poulsyeo yun — auo0g peynuepiun = pe japul 79-84 uaad0s 08-09 gq O¢ 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid s]usWIsely paulojes yun — auo0g payueprun = pe japul Sp-84 ss uaasos 09-0r ie 3 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid sjuswisely pauroyeo yun — auo0g peyusprun = pe japul I-8q  uaasos 07-0 gd o¢ 6 
ynpe Ajqeqoid s]usW3e1y pouloyeo yun — auog paynuopiun = pe japul 9-g-]  udaI0s 08-09 g4 o£ 6 
SJUSWIWOD JUSWII]9 JO UOTIOg apis oproie JUSUIA|q asy xas ‘ou WD ‘ou (ud) uy jeung ‘ou 

jeiueq platy jaaa] 00; “AIPUT 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


oF | 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


susWsely — [RIXe — [eiuvia = pe ) 77-6H SI 08-09 6H €7 ZI 
Apoq —[eixe = BIQIUVA [PIIAIID =—_ pB fo) 38-6H I 08-09 6H £7 cl 
sUsWseI yun aa auog palynuspiun = =Anf — japul V18-8H 9 S-001 8H 81 II 
sjuswisely yun az squ Ant yopur q18-8H 9 S-001 8H 8I II 
JUSWISey yun yun YOO) snonptloep Ant yopul [8-84 9 S-O0] 8A hal Il 
jusWseay yun yun yoo} snonpioap = Ant = japul 18-84 9 S-001 Qq QI Il 

— yun Jeynqipuvus Op anf jepur 18-8H 9 S-O0I 8H 81 Il 

ae UY Jepnqipuvus Tip Ant = japur 18-8H 9 S-O0I 8H 8 I] 

= J deynqipueu 1p Ant jepur [8°84 9 S-OOl 84 81 I] 

— JT Areyprxeu INP Anf  jopur 18-84 9 S-OO1 8H 81 I 

= ‘I Ase] [Ixe uw [1p = Anf = jopur 18-8o 9 S—O0I 8H 81 Il 

aan Pa | Axe] [IXeUL 1p = Anf = yapur 18-8H 9 S—O0I 8H 81 Il 

— [exe a JWOA Ant  jopul 18-84 9 S-O001 8H 81 Il 

—  [erxe cei prousyds anf jopur 18-8H 9 S-O0I 8H 8I Il 

—  [elxe = jeuoy = Ant = jopur 18-84 9 S-O0T 84 si II 

— —-jerxe — feiaued =Anf  japur [8-84 9 S-OOI 84H 81 Il 

— — jerxe = jeudis90— Ant = yoput 18°84 9 S-OO1 84 8I II 

sjuawseyy payynuepiun — perxe = jetuvso = Ant = japur 18-84 9 S-OOI 84 81 II 
s}USWI3BIY yun — souoqg JOO] Ant Jopul [8-84 9 S-OOT 84 RI Il 
sjusuiseyy yun aa sauog puey Anf japut 18-8H 9 S-OOT 8H 81 Il 
(¢) sashydida = yun a auog paynueprun anf japur 18-84 9 S-OOl 84 81 II 
sjusWIseyy yun — squ anf = joput 18-8H 9 S-001 8H 81 I] 

({) sassaooid/enuas ¢ | yun — avigeyiaA = Anf = japul 18-84 9 s-001 gq gI Il 
=e 1 a onewoshz Ant jopul 18-84 9 S-OO1 84 81 Il 

“rT A = sadejs anf japut 18-8H 9 S-O001 8H 8I I] 

= 1 a snour Anf  jeput 18-84 9 S-00I 8H 8I Il 

snoyjed pue jesowenbs | — jesodwia3 «= Anf = japur 18-84 9 S-001 oie QI Il 
= ‘I = eyixeuwt = anf Japul 18-84 9 S-OOI 8H 81 Il 

me | oa siqnd Ant yaput 18-8H 9 bn 00) 8H 8I Il 

a ‘I — winiyost anf jopul 18-8H 9 S—O0I 8H 81 II 

— a = winyt = =Anf —japut 18-84 9 S-001 8H 81 IT 

oa | am yindeos anf jeput 18-8H 9 S-00I 84 8I I 

=a J = vuyn = Anf = yopur 18-8H 9 S-O0T 8H 81 IT 

a | a snipers anf jopul 18-84 9 S-00I 8H 8I Il 

25 | = smauiny Ant  japur 18-84 9 S—00I 84 81 Il 

5am J a ajorarjo = Anf = joput 18-8H 9 S-O0I 8d 81 I] 

s J Sa eiqy = =Anf = jopur 18-84 9 S-O001 84 81 I] 

as T a Binqy =anf japur 18-84 9 S-O01 8H 81 I] 

= ‘I a Inwey Ant yopur 18-8h 9 S-O0I 8H 81 II 
syUJUIWIOD JUDUIZ[9 JO UOTLIOd apis aproe WuoUWIs|q ay = xas ‘ou ‘WO ‘ou (WI9) wup [eling ‘ou 

[esq Plat [9A0'] O00 “AIPU] 
(panu1juo,) ) 
| XIGNHddV 


EE EE EEE EEE EEE 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


78 


O Arqeqosd ‘Z| Atput 
yum payeroosse A;qeqoid 


SJUSUIWIO-) 


qoWsely 
WUOWISeLy 

ajApuos 
WUSUWISeIY 


sjuswseLy 

UIWIseLy 
SJUIWISeLy 
susWIsely 


JUD] JO UOILOg 


Je[nqipuew 
Axeqyixeu 
AxeyyIxeu 
Aseyixeul 
Arey txeul 
Arey[ixeu 
Axeyyixeul 
Arey|ixeu 
Areqyixeu 
Axeytxeul 
Axeqyixeu 
Arey [Ixvul 

Jejnqipueul 

seynqipueul 

Je[nqipueuw 

Je[nqipuew 

Jeynqipueul 

Je[nqipuew 


opeore 
[eiued 


98¢-6H 
6°6H 
48¢-6H 
vI-6H 
S¢-6H 
71-6H 
91-6H 
61-6H 
P1€-6H 
®1£-6H 
®1¢-6H 
®1¢-6H 
vt-6H 
OI-6H 
LI-6H 
LI-6H 
I1-6H 
€1-6H 
$1-6H 
41-6H 
qI¢-6H 
SC-6H 
97-6H 
eL-6H 
J8-6H 
P8-6H 
Lt-6H 
17-6H 
S-6H 
48-6H 
c-6H 
c-6H 
c-6H 
°8-6H 
®8-6H 
®8¢-6H 


‘ou "WD 


Oo pe fs) 

td pe fs) 

IN pe ) 

Cl) Be fs) 

I] * pe rs) 

8 rs) 

CN Ope ) 

LPF ) 

a ope ) 

TN Ope fs) 

td pe ) 

td pe ) 

eyixem spe zs 

td pe 3} 

CN Ope 3} 

s[qipuvu = pe ) 

IN pe fs) 

cl] pe ) 

(A fs) 

II pe fe) 

o[qipuvu = pe ) 

q[qipuewr— pe ) 

Bq) = pe ) 

tN pe ) 

Inwiay pe & 

xuryeyd pouuojur = pe 5 

sniswny —s pe - 

snisuiny —s pe F 

einqyy = pe 3} 

Binqy = pe 3 

imuiej = pe % 

jeyoued =ope = 

jeudis00—s pe Fa 

jerueso =o pe i. 

}OO1 OU ~—s pe 3 

jerueso ope 3 

jeueso ope s 

WoWs|q ay = xas 

(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


usgaJOS 
udeIOS 


udaIOS 
v7 


UVOIOS 


‘ou 
Piel 


S-08 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
07-0 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
09-OP 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
Ov-07 
08-09 
Ov-07 
Ob-07 
Or-07 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 


(ud) 
[9A] 


IID 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 
6H 


Nitta 


tc a 
£2 of 
£7 Tl 
£7 al 
€7 a 
£7 a 
£7 a 
€7 ra 
€7 a 
£7 a 
£7 a 
€7 (a 
€¢ al 
4 ra 
£7 al 
£7 al 
£7 al 
£7 a| 
x4 Tl 
€t Tl 
€7 (a 
€7 all 
£7 Tl 
x4 cl 
£7 Tl 
tt a | 
£7 Tl 
tz Tl 
€7 ra 
tt ra | 
€@ a 
€T ra| 
t7 a 
€7 al! 
£7 Tl 
t7 Tl 
tT al! 
jeung ‘ou 
woow “AIPU] 


7 


LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


LARSEN: 


2002 


= ae J Jepnqipueuw IA Ant yoput ae L S-09 69 LZ a 

— JUdWIBRy >| — jesoduia, = =Anf  japut P9-6H udal0s Or-0Z 6H LZ el 

— UMOIO JY Jepnqipuew IW Ant japur PI-6H  UeoJ0s 07-0 6H —: oo 

-; sjuowiseyy — [vixe << feioued «anf yopur S-11D Ol S-08 IHD Lzzsz el 

— = u a fesoduiay Ant yopur %6-6D v8 s-09 69 LZ eI 

5% (paidnioun Us Jeynqipueu ZW Ant yopur 46-69 dg S-09 69 LZ tl 

= (paidnsgun YU seynqipuew IN Ant japur 46-69 ag S-09 69 LZ CI 

-- uotuod Jowajsod yysu —sferxe ~ ajqipueur = Ant = jopur 46-69 dg s-09 69D LZ €] 

mas swuoWsesy — [RIXe = feyoued anf japur P6-69 as s-09 69 Ka el 

= qepiseq = [BIxe ot feudiooo = anf joput J6-69 48 S-09 69 LZ el 

= — —-jeixe ag feudiso0 = Ant = yoput 8-69 b s-09 69 LZ €] 

eo ajApuod — |e ixe ng ayqipueus = anf yoput %6-6D O8 s-09 69 fife El 

— SUSWISBIY yun — jerurio anf joput 26-69 ag S—09 6D iG €I 

= sjuawsely yun as aporarya = Ant = Japut 11-69 Ol S-09 69 LZ el 

i as YU JeyNqipueuw zip = Ant = yapur 11-69 Ol S-09 69 LZ tl 

<5 a UY Jeynqipuews qo Ant = yoput I 11-69 Ol S-09 69 Le tl 

= sjuousey = yun an auog paynuepiun Ant — japut UIs. Ol S-09 69 LZ tl 

— juousely jershydeip  ouou -—— Inuiey Ant japur 1'S-69 (6 s-09 69 [ZZ] €] 

tai co" « [BIXU — G. pe fs) 81-6H I 08-09 6H (x4 a 

= juouseyy = yun = pindros pe 3 98-6H I 08-09 6H 14 4 

a UsWseAy yun —_ vyindeos = pe & 21-6H Udelos 07-0 6H €Z ZI 

= = u is onewoshz — pe rs) 07@-6H el 08-09 6H 6 (4 

=e = Pe ai Burn = pe fo) ®¢-6H (4 Or-07 6H £7 Cl 

= = u = BIqny = pe 3b L7-6H 07 08-09 6H EC cl 

pesoduray 1Yy811 ur punoy a u toe snoyjeur = pe fs) 9¢-6H 67 08-09 6H 14 (6 
a os u pom [esoduiay pe 3g 9¢-6H 67 08-09 6H [54 (lt 

ae —- u oar Inuiojy = pe 3 €C-6H 91 08-09 6H t@ 4 

= syuowsey = yun — qu pe 3 21-6H Used0s 07-0 6H 56 (4 

= wuoulseyy = yun —< qu pe 3} '8-6H I 08-09 6H £7 ra 

=a syuouseyy = yun — sniper = p& ) tt-6H 97 08-09 6H t7 Gl 

poytoads jou adAy WuoWsey yun — xueyeyd = pe & 99-6H  uwoal0s Ov-0Z 6H €Z TI 

— WuoUIseIy yun -— jeioued =o pe S ®1-6H  udelos 07-0 6H €Z ZI 

= juowseyy = yun = jejoued =pe S b-6H € Or-07 6H €Z ZI 

paytoads jou Jaquinu Te + oe Jesivjejyour = pe 4 98-6H I 08-09 6H £7 al| 
poltoods jou soquinu yuowselyy = =yun — jedivovjou ~—s pe $ [8-6H I 08-09 6H €Z Zl 

€d Ajqeqoud ‘Z| arput 
(iim payersosse A[qeqosd =e Uys Jeynqipuews td = pe ) = 6 a=08: 5S (4 rs}! 
€d Aiqeqoad ‘Z| arpur 
aim parersosse A[qeqosd pai J Jernqipuew tds ipe fs) ie 401 S-08 IID td ral 
syUWIWIOD WUIWII]9 JO UOTLIOg apis opeore quoWa|q ay xas ‘ou "yeo ‘ou (wo) Wu jeunq ‘ou 
equoq Piel J9A0] a00W “AIpu] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XI(NHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


80 


YEL-O1D WIM poyore 


OS-11D YM poaysrew 
S-O1D YUM payoyeul 
eOC/PZT-O1D YM payoyeuwl 


SJUSUILUO") 


— =| -— snipes 
— " — eyjoyed 
yojou oneIos Jayv013 sapnN[out | — oye uTWOUUT 
winiyl aT — ayeurmoUUl 
— 1 — snzauiny 
-- 1 —_— Q[OIARIO 
wintyos! yun -— oyeurwouUt 
— yun oo xueyeyd pouwojul 
— —-jeixe i proky 
stsAydeip xoid yun — snJouiny 
susWI3eIy yun — xueyeyd puey 
sisXydeip yun -- Inuwiaj 
stsAydeip yun — Inula} 
— yun =~ Inuwiay 
siskydeip yun _ Inwiaj 
jugwsesy a}Apuoo yun — Inuiaj 
sjuowiselyy = -[erxe =: yeruvso 
sjuswsey = yeixe — jerues9 
suswisely =—-[RIxe — yerues9 
suswsely =—-[RTXe — jeruel9o 
sJusUIsely =—-FRIXe — ZO 
- y — snipes 
— y - sniouiny 
sUsWsey yun — qu 
S]USUISeIy yun _ qu 
ae JT Aseqprxeur €d 
= JT Areqyrxeu II 
<3 YU = Jepnqipuew CW 
— a | — ayeun] 
— yun a xuvyjeyd puey pouwajur 
— yun -- xueyeyd joo} xoid 
susWsely = [RIX — jerues9 
sjusuiselyy =—perxe — jerues9 
susWseyy = [exe - jeruelo 
syuowiseyy = -RIxe -- yerueio 
— yun — snipe 
a a Areyyrxews 2) 
a 7 Areypexeu IW 
nae TY  Areyyrexew 7WP 
JUDUII]A JO UOIOg apis aproir WUsWI]7 
jeuaq] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIUNHddV 


P L7-019 eZ S-08 O10 
P Le-O1D nz S08 O1D 
P SE-019 IZ S08 O10 
? pr-O1D IZ S-08 O10 
? 67-019 4 S08 O10 
P €p-O1D bz S-08 OID 
? Ob-019 uz S-08 OID 
? qL-69 € 09-0 69 
? YES-O1D z S08 OID 
? qS1-O19 ql $08 O10 
? PEs-O1D z S-08 O10 
? S-01D Z Or-0tZ O1D 
° 1-019 I 07-0 01D 
P OS-I1D yh s-09 ID 
? €-69 € Ob-0Z 69 
? 411-69 L 09-0r 69 
? €1-60 I 08-09 69 
? 8-60 p 09-0P 69 
P 7-69 Z Or-07 69 
P 1-69 I Or-0Z 69 
? 2¢-6d I Or-07 6d 
? 901-6 = uaes0s S-08 6d 
° 94-60 | 09-0r ~=«-:« 6 
2 201-6 = usados S-08 6d 
° &8-6q = uaados 09-0P 6d 
? 48-6 = uaas9s 09-0r 6d 
? &L-6d I 09-0r 6d 
? 98-6 = uaasos 09-0r =«:« 6 
? qOI-6Q = uaa9s S-08 6d 
2 POI-6d = uaados S-08 6d 
° 201-6 = uaas9s S-08 6d 
? PL-6d I 09-0P 6d 
? J9-6Q = Uaelds Or-07 6d 
? eE-6 I Or-07 6d 
2 1-6d | 07-0 6d 
Jopul €-6D uaaos Or-07 69 
japul — I 09-0P 69 
yopul —_ UgddIOS 09-0r 69 
yopul _ UQBIOS 09-0P 69 
xaos ‘ou le) ‘ou (Wd) wu 


Piel 


JPA2"] 


81 


LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


LARSEN: 


2002 


— susUIseyy [UIE —— PIGQUaA = pep J€1-O1D I 08 OID Sp SI 
—_ juswisey = yun = vujn pe =p AES-O1D Z S-08 O10 Sb SI 
401-69 WIM payoreu ain or wun pep qS-69 I 09-0r 60 Sp SI 
— <>. --yun =< [edreovjour pep PET-O1D | S-08 O10 SP SI 
= — sn = jedreovjour pep PEl-O1D I 8-08 OID SP SI 
— a[spuod = yun a viqy pep 211-60 ip 09-0P 69 Sp SI 
== juowsey yun — sne) pep fES-O1D Z s=08 O10 Sp SI 
I€S-O1D pur 
Qe 1-019 YM poyoreu a u = vujn pep 981-019 a] S-08 O10 Sp | 
98 1-O1D ym poyoreus == u = vujn = pe sp 26-019 (4 S08 OID SP Sl 
= sisXyderp u = viqn =pe op ®I1-60 L 09-0r 60 Sp SI 
— = u = super pe =p O€-01D PZ S-08 OID Sp | 
281-O1D YM payor sisXydeip xosd u = veuyn pep qeI-O10 I S08 0lo SP CI 
— = u ns ead =pe 8 op 6-60 I 09-0b 69 Sp SI 
— wnt]! u =: awurmouur «= pep St-01D Il s-08 OID SP SI 
— — u sc sniouny pe Pp 87-010 qZ 8-08 OID Sp SI 
at [easip u = vujn pe 9 I11-60 L 09-0b 60 Sp | 
— = u = afoIavejo. pep PET-O1D I s=08 O10 Sp CI 
= siskydeip = yun = snipel pe Pp b-60 p Ob-07 69 SP CI 
— juoulseyy = yun = sniper pe 2p 9-69 4 09-0b 60 SY SI 
= =n a= snipes pep re-O1D YZ S-08 O10 Sp SI 
== — yun = xuvjeyd = pep Zp-O1D dz 8-08 O10 SP SI 
= — yun = xuvjeyd = pe Z-01D (6 07-0 01D SP | 
jeo1sojoyred = og = smiauny pe =p 7-019 JZ s-08 OID SP CI 
9€-O1D YM payoreu = YU Areyyrxew €d pe? f€1-O1D I S-08 O10 Sp SI 
9¢-O1D YIM payor == Y= seynqipuews fd pe PP 02-019 3] S-08 O10 SP CI 
9€-O1D YIM payor = JT Je[nqipuew fd pe? 61-019 JI S-08 O10 SP SI 
a —  jeixe ~~ BIQOUOA Jequing pe Pp qZ1-019 (6 08-09 O10 SP Sl 
aoa sjuawiselj au0g Suo] = yun = quog paynueprun =pe =p ATWO rl Or-0%Z =i+iTID SP SI 
4S-69 WIM payoyeus sjuawsesy | = vujn pe =p 401-69 9 09-0r 69 SP SI 
— juouisely 7 —— vujn pep YIZ-119 bl Or-0t =i SP SI 
= = 7 oe vujn pep Le-01D AZ s-08 O10 SP SI 
s = 7 = vujn =pe |p PIT-69 L 09-0b 69 Sb SI 
®71-60 
pure 01-69 YIM payoyeus sjuowsesy pur siskydeip 4 <3 eiqy pe 6°60 S 09-0P 69 SP SI 
6-6 YIM payoyeul ce 7 = viqu =pe Op °71-60 L 09-0P 60 SP SI 
6-60 YIM payoyeut — 7 =~ eiqu = =pe sp 201-60 9 09-0b 60 Sv SI 
=a =X A a jesoduiay pep 1€S-O1D (d S-08 O10 Sv Cl 
LZ-O1D YM payoreu — 7 3 snipes pe =p YE L-O1D I S-08 O10 SP CI 
S]UUIWIOZ) JUDUIZ]9 JO UOTLIOg apis oproie juUsWII|q wy xaS ‘Ou "yeD ‘Ou (WD) wup jeung ‘ou 
jequaq PIA [9A0] d00W “AIpU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


82 


96-01 YIM poyoreul = 7 = srisuny = pe q¢-6d I Or-07 6d oF 91 

€Z-O1D YIM payoieul sisXydeip 7 — imuay pe % ®77Z-019 I] s-08 O19 9b 91 
** sIuaUIsely 4 = ajoraejo pe S J€S-O1D z S08 OID 9b 9] 
— = un = Binqy = =pe S %Z-01D 1] s-08 O10 oF 91 
_— WINLeATe = [RIXe = jeueio pes LI-019 PI S08 OD OP 91 
= suawiseyy = yun = souog suo] pep 11-69 L 09-0 69 Sp SI 
oe sjuauisey = yun Se sauog 8uo] «pep $-69 I 09-Or 69 Sp SI 
= sjuauisely — eIxe — jeuro pep €-O1D uaer0s 07-0 01D Sp SI 
_— s]UsW3ely auoqg 3u0] yun —_— guog pelynuepiun pe ce) colo UddJOS 07-0 O1O cr Sl 
—_ suouisey = yun a3 squ pe 9° €-O1D —uaados 07-0 01D Sp | 
= sjuouisey = yun oo guog paynueprun pe =p €-O1D uaalos 07-0 01D Sp $1 
oy suouisey = yun — quog paynueprun =pe =p L-69 € 09-0r 69 Sp SI 
—_ S]JUSWISPIY yun — ouog pelyyueprun pe P C P-60 usoJOS Ov-07 ye) So Sl 
srr suouisey = yun — inueay pe Pp €9S/ET-O1D € +08 OID [sr] SI 
= oe UY Areyprxews TN pe OP ®ZI-O1D z 08-09 ~=«~OOlD Sp | 
saues Aq pekonsap UMOID 1001 Yo Areyyrxeu IN pe 9: ®Z1-01D Z 08-09 =O SP SI 
a pot ge Us Aveyyrxew 7 pe B ®Z1-01D z 08-09 ~=«<O1D Sp SI 
— = JT Areyprxeur EN pe 871-010 z 08-09 ~=«~OlD SP | 
== = JT Areyyrxeur ZN pe ®Z71-01D Z 08-09 ~=««O1D Sp SI 
= a JT Areypixeu Ed pe PP ®ZI1-O1D Z 08-09 ~=—s«OLlD Sp CI 
= — JT Averyixew > pe 9 ®Z1-O1D z 08-09 ~=O1D Sp | 
= = JT Azeqirxew 7] pe 871-010 4 08-09 ~=«*OlD Sp SI 

EW ‘CW ‘Ed ‘D ‘ZI Yl 
payenome sepn[oul 4 — eyixeu— pep ®Z1-O1D 4 08-09 ~=O1D Sp SI 

ZI ‘1003 pd ‘pd ‘OD 1y38u 
poyepnore sapnyout =o u == Byixeu = pe ®Z1-O1D Z 08-09 ~=«*O1D Sp ¢] 
— = UY = Je[nqrpuew i pe. ® I€1-O1D I S08 O10 Sb SI 
me — JT Je[nqipueuw td pe 9€-019 (7 S08 O10 Sb SI 
= = YU = Jepnqipuew td pe? 9€-019 (7 S08 O10 Sp ¢1 
= a Y  Jenqrpuew oo pe = 9€-01D (7 S08 OID Sp S] 

pd YI 
‘pd ‘D 1Y48U sopnjout —  jerxe = ajqipueu pe 9€-01D (Z S08 OID Sp | 
= xoid | aaa eujn pep V'9S/1'7Z-O19 € S08 O10 Sp cl 
€-60 YIM payoyeu juowseyy yeishydeip = yun a inwaj pe =p BOCRT-O1D VE S08 OID Sp | 
= juswisey = yeIxe — ID pe 9 9€S-01D Z S08 O10 Sp SI 
= suoUIsey = [RIXe — vIgouaA = pe 2€S-O1D z S08 O10 Sp | 
= sjusuIsely = [RIXe ites BIqauaA = pw SP-01D SZ S08 O10 Sp | 
ia suoUIsely = fRIXe Se eigauaA = pe IZ-01D ul S08 O10 Sp S] 
S]UQWIWWOD JUDWID[9 JO UOTLIOg apis oproe Juda] A wy xas ‘ou yey ‘ou (wid) uy) yeung ‘OU 

Jequed Piety [eAa"] Woow ‘AIpU 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


83 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


— sjuauise.y a]Apuoo yun rr Inuiej = pe P q9b-O1D IZ S-08 O10 Lv LI 
= sjuoUIsely — [RIXe a jetuels = pe fe) PSS/PI-O1D t S-08 O10 oP 9I 
ex sjusuiseay yun am euog peynuepiun = pe & 6-01) I 07-O0r = O1O oP 91 
ee sisXydeip yun = Binqyy = pe 3 9S/c-O1D t 5-08 01D oP 91 
= siskydeip u = sniper = pe 3} 9S/7-O1D 9 S-08 OID 4 91 
— = u = QJSTARJD =—s pB & 49°96/9'7-O1D t s-08 , 01D [9p] 91 
ajajduroout [erxe man [eydto00— pe rs) ecc/el-OlO Pl S-O8 O10 oP 91 
= syUsUIsely —-[BIXE om feyoued = pe & QSS/QI-OlD =: Uaed9s s-08 -° OLD oP 91 
uomiod snosjad jered 
— pue ss9o01d projseu aT — jesodwia} ~=—s pe a IS/PI-OID  use19s S08 O1O 9p 91 
or winjngejeoe jered yam a = eyeurmouul = pe ) 7 96/7 7-019 £ S-0O8 OID oP 9T 
ae sjuouidely = fRIxe ris BIGOHOA = pe 8 9@Z-O1D ty S-08 O10 oP 91 
a sJusuIsely = -[RIXe at BIqoHOA = pe fe) 481-010 2] S-08 OID oY 91 
=z — ~~ [erxe a CG) pe rs) 481-01) 2] S-0O8 OID oP 91 
le: = u a euyn = pe 4 ££-O1D 37 S-08 OID oP 91 
6P-O1D YM payoyeul juswsely u ge sniper = pe & IeS-O1O t S-08 O10 oP 91 
TeS-O1D YM peyoyeu [BqStp u saat snipel = pe & 6v-01D MZ S-08 OID ) 91 
— ae u ma snisuiny = pe & ®6-01D I 09-0r = ==OlO 0) 91 
= sjuouisely yun ag euog pelynueprun = pe ro) 91-010 9] S-08 OID ov 91 
a = uv ig Inwoj pe & 91-019 oT S-08 OID oP 91 
a a yun == xuvyeyd puey xoid pe 3} 477-01) ] S-08 OID oP 91 
= = a = oneuoshz pe & %€T-O1D I S-08 O10 or 91 
== me 7T = Buin = pe re) 96-0190 I 09-0b OO 9P 91 
ae i yun beg souog JSUM/puey pe ro) eCl-O1O qI S-08 OID oP 91 
me aa yun a xuvjeyd puey xoid pe 3} e®CI-O1D ql S-08 OID 4 oI 
Sa a yun ing xuejeyd puey xoid pe é BCI-O1D ql S-08 OID 7 ol 
— =. yun a xuvyeyd puey pounajur = pe ) BCI-O1D qI S-08 OID oP 91 
= zea yun ae xuvyeyd puey [eysip = pe } eBCI-O1D qI S-08 OID ov 91 
mes aad yun rane xuvyeyd puvy yeisip = pe } eCl-O1O qI S-08 OID oP ol 
—= seh yun os xuvjeyd puey [eisip = pe re) eCI-O10 qI S-08 OID oP 91 
om = yun a xuvyeyd purvy [eisip = pe & BCI-O1D qI S-08 OID oP 91 
= sisKydeip = yun = jedreovjour pe eC1-010 qI S-08 O10 or 91 
ae a T ra Z [edreovjour = pe & eBCI-O1D qI S-08 OID OV oT 
299p-O1D pue 
®7Z-O1D WM poyoyeu xoid al ra iInuley = pe re) £7010 t S-08 OID oP 91 
er sno[ns sepnouneesd yim a = oyeurmouut = pe & pc-O19 AI S-08 OID OV 91 
4-6 YM payoyeur jwewsey ET on snisuiny = pe & 29-60 = usados Ov-07 6d or 91 
29-60 
pure 4¢-6C YM poyowew — 4 ag Sniouiny = pe fe) 46-0190 I 09-Or = O1O oP 91 
sjUusWIWIOD JUIUIaTe JO UOTOg apis aperore USWA ay xas ‘ou "yeO ‘ou (ud) wuy) yeunq ‘ou 
[eqweq Pet [9A9"] a00/ ‘AIpuy 
(panuyuog) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


84 


— = Se — snoyeur pe PEI-119 b Or-0z ~=sdD 6P 81 
=< sjuswisey auog Buo] = yun = quog paynuepiun = peg 7-119 4 07-0 are) 6P 8 I 
= sjusUIsey af = eujn pes £-11D € 07-0 ate) 6b 81 
_ — 1 = uuojiounds puosas = pe & I€-119 YI 0-0r =ilD 6b gi 
— — 7 — uuojiound puosas = pe %6I-11D ZI Or-0Z ~=—sdD 6b 81 
6b- 11D WIM poyorew == | 7 srisuny = pe Z-1D rl Or-07 ~=O«dOD 6b 81 
O1Z-11D yum payoreu = 71 xs sniguny = peg 6b-119 QL so9 11D 6p 81 
oe =r 7 = wejnotavus—spe O€-11D 3] 0-0r IID 6b 81 
—_ — 1 = UOJIOUND IsIyY pe PLE-11D  ueesos 0-0r =D 6P 81 
PII-O1D yum payoyeu < 1 a inway pe qII-O1D I 08-09 ~=—«OO1D 6P 81 
BLL-O1 yim payorew a Al = muy pe PII-O19 I 08-09 ~=—«OOlD 6b 81 
— wintyost = yun = ayeurmouur = peg r-O19 I Or-0z =O 6P 81 
== goejins seynouine yyw = yun a awurmouur =pe =} PEE-11D I 09-0r ~=sdOD 6P 81 
—  goeyns Jeynoune YM win! = yun a qyeulmouur «pe 4L-019 p Or-0z ~=—séOOD 6b 81 
p [edreoejau A}qeqoid = u aS piedmovjour pe  % PIZ-I1D rl Or-07 ~=sdO 6p 81 
= == a aad eedmovjou pe &% PIZ-I1D tl Or-0z ~=C«dTD 6b 81 
a — sun aa saduvjeyd puey = pe PIZ-I1D rl Or-07 =i 6P 81 
aS : — yun 5 sosurjeyd jooy = pe PLI-1ID II Or-07 ~=—sdOD 6b 81 
= sjuawisey = yun 23 ynqy pe {Z-11D rl Or-0z Ss 6p 8] 
S7-T1D Yum poyoreu juowisey = yun a enqy pe & 67-119 JI 0-0r =i 6p 81 
67-11 WIM poyorew jusuiseyy = yun = engy pe & St-11D qI 0-0r =iIlD 6P 81 
— juousey = yun = einqy = pe 8 MZ-11D - uaados meq {1D 6b 81 
<= juouiseyy = yun = enqy pe 8 p-11D p 07-0 11D 6 81 
=e peoy yun aa mua} pe = 8b-11D RL S09 IID 6b 81 
5 peosy yun am muay pe = 4 ®L-O1D 7 Or-0z =C*OD 6r 81 
juouisely = [RIXe oa jeuro peg P7Z-11D  uaasos Or-0 inte) 6b 81 
jususely = [eIXe = jeuro peg BIZ-11D rl Or-0z =O 6b 81 
= juawiseyy = [eIxe a jetuelo pe = i112 I Or-07 =i 6b 81 
ames jUsWIde Ly jerxe — yetuels pe 6 99-1 lO ugoJOS 07-0 IlO 6? SI 
aa jusWsely = [RIXe a jetueo peg Lei PI 0-0r =C«L 6b 81 
= juswsey = yun = eiqy pe =p P9b-O1D 7 sos OID Lp LI 
= — u = eqn pe =p 8€-019 I s0g O10 Le Ll 
= xoud u ans muy pe 2 Ip-O1D 07 s-08 Old Le Ll 
= == u = eyed =pe =p ®PI-O1D e] S08 OID Lp LI 
29p-O1D YIM poyoreul siskydeip al = imuaj pe =P 29p-019 4 S08 OID Le LI 
21-6 YM payorew [eisIp 7 a inmuiaj pe =P ®9b-01D % S08 OID Lr LI 
B9p-O1D YIM payoyeul siskydeip = yun = inuaj pep 1-60 € 0-0r 3 6 Le LI 
= peoay yun aa inway pep 6£-01D wz Sos O10 Le Ll 
=~ sjusuisey ajApuoo = yun = inwaj pe =p Qrl-O1D eR] S08 O10 Lr Ll 
SJUDUIWIOD) JUDUWIDTO JO UOTIOg apis oproie WUDUII]q easy =xas ‘ou “WkD “ou (ud) uy yeung ‘ou 
fequod Plet4 [aaa] qwoow Atpu] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNAddV 


85 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


— — yun — snfey) peg 89-119 usados 07-0 IO 6b 81 

— —‘ yeixe —_ winioes peg 9-019 € Or-0Z Old 6P 81 

— — u — vuyn: pe 8 RIZ-11D rl Or-0Z _ TID 6P 81 

— sJUgUIdeLy u =— eiqy peg QLI-I19 II Or-0Z =i 6P 81 

— — u — endeos pe & QZZ-11D- uses9s Or-0 are) 6P 81 
8I-1ID 

‘87-11 yum payoreu — u _ snisumny = ped PZZ-I1D. -waados weq 1D 6P 81 
P@Z-119 

‘87-11 YM payoreu — u — sniouny pe 81-110 a OF-02 " IID 6h 81 
PZZ-11D 

‘81-11 yim payoyeur — u = snioumny = pe 87-119 a] 09-0r ~=«iT 6p 81 
I-11D 

‘PE T-11O yum payoyeu — u _— Bnqy = pe JIZ-HD rl Or-07 IID 6P 81 
JIZ-119 

“TI-1TO iim payoyeu — u — Bnqy = =pe f ®EI-11D L Or-0Z ~=i110 6P 81 

— — u _ inuaj pe & ®IT-O1D I 08-09 O10 6P 8] 

sae juousey = yun <a sniper pe % %6 1-119 ZI Or-0Z ~=sid 6h 81 

= juowsey = yun =— sniper pe & Q9-11D —_-waad0s 07-0 Id 6p 81 

= se eit = xuvyeyd jooy xoid = pe S€I-11D yh Ov-0Z TID 6b 81 

= — yun — xuepeyd jooj xold pe qiz-lio rl Or-07 ~=Oi«dT:TOD 6P 81 

an juowsey = yun — jesieyejour pet QIZ-I19 rl Or-0%Z i110 6b 81 

— sjusuisey = yun = jesieyejour pe & 461-119 ZI Or-0Z IID 6P 81 

= juouisey = yun == jesseyejour «pet Qe1-110 /} OF-0Z «119 6b 81 

— = Y Aueyprxew cy? 08 86 G€Z-11D.—- uaes0s Or-0Z IID 6P 81 

— = UY Aseyyrxew IN, “pe % PET-I11D -uaad0s Or-07 =i110 6b 81 

=> — 7 Aveqyixeur 7TN pet 97-119 9] 09-0r IID 6r 81 

= — Yo Areqyrxew Teepe Ss P9-11D.  uaes0s 07-0 Ild 6b 81 

= = 7 Areqyrxeur ll pe Ss P9-11D. —- uees0s 07-0 inte) 6b 81 

SE-11D YIM peyoyeu ra a Jeynqrpuews Cd. “Epes 8s JET-11D.- uaas0s Or-0Z ~=«TD 6b 81 
SE-119 

YIM payoyeur *yj}00) Bad = Y  Jejnqrpuew EN pe 8 ®p7-11D e] 09-0r = =i'ID 6b 81 

= — Y  Jeynqipuews [I ape 2g J9-11D— waados 07-0 14 (@) 6P 81 

SE-11D yum poyoyeu rr Y= Je[nqrpueuw DO, Wee 45 PEZ-11D ~—- waados Or-0Z ~=iI1D 6 81 

= = J Je[nqipuew pe 8 99-11 uaados 07-0 inte) 6P 81 

SE-11D YIM poyoyeur <= J Jejngqipuew Do: (PS ees 9€Z-I1D ~- uaed0s Or-07 ~=Oi«D 6P 81 

= << J Je[ngqrpueuw TN pet S€-119 € 09-0r ~=os«dTD 6b 81 

= = J Je[nqrpuew IN peg SE-11D € 09-0r =i 6h 81 

a = J Jenqipuew td pe & S€-I1D € 09-0r ~=«d 6h 81 

— — 7 Jejnqrpuew Gd spB.- 66 SE-1ID € 09-0r ~=sdTTOD 6P 81 

ssa apis yay Ajqeqoid —yeixe — qiqipuew pe CEI € 09-0r =i 6h 81 

S}USUIWIOD JUSUIZ]9 JO UOTLIOg apls opeoe qUSUIS[ ay xaS “Ou “‘JeD ‘ou (ud) wup jeung ‘ou 

vere! Piety [eAdT] dIOOW “AIPU] 
(panuljuo)) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


86 


Opp- 11D YIM payoreus 
epI-11D Wim payoreus 


IZ-11D 
‘PET-11D Yim poyoreur 


syUsWIWOD 


sjuswmsely =—-[RIxe 
sUsUIsey =—«[RIxe 
suswizely = «jRIxe 
sjususely =e Ixe 
yuowsely =—«-jRIXe 
s]UsWI3eI} yun 
suswsey =x 
— yun 

— yun 


sjuowselyy = yun 
sUsWisey yun 
s]UsW3eIy yun 
s]UsWI3eIy yun 
susWseIy yun 
S]USWI3P.y yun 
sUsWIZey yun 
sjusWisely yun 
S]USUI3e IY yun 
s}UdWIZeIy yun 
sjuowsey = = yun 
susWIsey yun 
sUsWIdeYy yun 
sJUsW3eLy yun 
susWi3ey yun 
jusUIsey yun 
i u 

— yun 

a u 
quowsely = -jeIxe 
wuouIseyy =e Ixe 


(z) suawdey(y 


— yun 
sjUsUIsely yun 

— yun 

— yun 

JUDWI]9 JO UOTUIOg apis 


Je]Nqipueuw 


se] nqipuew 
sJe[nqipuew 


aproie 
[equeqd 


je1ues9 
je1ues9 
jerues9 
jeluels 
jelues9 
sauog 3u0| 
jeruess 
QIAO 
Q[DIARIO 


td 


auog palynuopriun 
Quog pelyiuepiun 
auog paljnuspiun 
auog palymueprun 
auog pelyiuaprun 
auo0g pelyuaprun 
auog palyuaprun 
2uo0g peljnuepriun 
auog paljiuaptun 
auog polynueprun 
Quo0q paljnuaprun 
Quog peluspiun 
auog peynuaprun 
auog peynuaprun 
auog pelynueprun 
auog pelynuaprun 
td 

uwojisid 

tW 

BIGOUOA 

BIQOHOA 


Binqy 

eqn 

auo0g paynueprun 
eqn 

snye} 


USWA] 


(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


O+ O+ OF OF OF OF OF OF OF 


Or 


Ot OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF OF 


O+ OF OF OF OF 


xag 


eoPr-IIO 
&pp-llo 
FIP lO 
Ot-11D 
ve-11O 
OI-1lO 
OI-11D 
epI-1IO 
4am 0) 


éc-1lO 


colt 
IS-IID 
9P- 11D 
LEH 
9€-1ID 
te-IlD 
I@-IID 
61-11 
LI-IlD 
tI-IlD 
9-I1D 
S-I1O 
IT-O1O 
8-010 
L-OlO 
¥C-I1O 
1I9@Z-11D 
PeI-IIO 
97-019) 
qee-1lO 
Nello 


1 bal Fe 
I-ITO 
ITT-O1O 
911-01 
8-110 


‘ou ‘IRD 


a 

Tl 

Il 

L 
uaaJ0s 
S 

I 
uaeJds 
v 

e] 
ugeJos 
L 

wy 

I 

Lal 


‘ou 
Piel 


Ov-07 
s-09 
apyoid 
Sutues]o 
atyoid 
Sutues[o 
s-09 
S-09 
09-0P 
09-0r 
09-0b 
Or-07 
Ov-07 
Or—-07 
OF-07 
07-0 
07-0 
08-09 
OF-07 
OF-07 
09-0F 
Or-07 
OF-07 
S-08 
09-0P 
OF-07 


OF-0T 
07-0 
08-09 
08-09 
Or-07 
(wd) 
[Aa] 


lO 
IID 
Ilo 
[lO 
Ilo 
IO 
af) 
lO 
IO 


lO 


1D 
Ilo 
IlO 
ate) 
1D 
af) 
Ilo 
Ilo 
Ilo 
lO 
Ilo 
IO 
OID 
OID 
OID 
IO 
IID 
1 fe 
OID 
IO 
ate) 


IO 
lO 
10) £2) 
OID 
IO 


uy 


Os 
os 
Os 
Os 
Os 
Os 
os 
OS 
Os 


6P 


60 
69 
6h 
6h 
6h 
6P 
6P 
6P 
69 
6h 
6? 
6P 
6P 
6P 
6h 
6P 
6h 
6h 
6P 
6P 
6P 


6? 
6h 
6h 
6P 
6P 


yeung 
Woow 


61 
61 
61 
6! 
61 
61 
61 
61 
61 


8I 


SI 
81 
8I 
81 
81 
8I 
SI 
8I 
8I 
SI 
8! 
8I 
SI 
81 
SI 
81 
81 
| 
SI 
8! 
81 


SI 
SI 
I 
8I 
81 


‘ou 


AIpu] 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 87 


2002 


— 6-9 [euing queyur YM punoj TY Areqrxews IT Ant yapur 01-69 6 s-09 69 67 0z 
— 6D [eung queyur yum punoy Uo Areypixews IT Ant yepur 01-69 6 09 69 67 0Z 
— 6D [eung jueyur yum punoy To Areqyrxew IW = Anf — jopur 01-69 6 S09 69 67 0Z 
— 6-9 [eung jueyur YIM punoy YU epnqrpuew IN Ant joput 01-69 6 s-09 69 67 0z 
— 6D ung queyur yam punoy a Jepnqrpuew IT Ant  yepur 01-69 6 s-09 69 62 0Z 
= syususesy — [RIXE = jerueso = Ant japul 01-69 6 s-09 69 67 0z 
ae sjuoWIsely = [eIXe — jerueis = Ant — yopur YOI-6D H6 s-09 6D 67 0@ 
= sjuawsely = [eIXe _ jetuvso Ant = yopul 301-69 6 s-09 69 62 02 
<= syusUIseyy — [RIXE — jerueso = Anf = yapul JOI-6D 46 s-09 69 67 0z 
ae syusWIsely — RTXE = jetueso = Ant — yeput 201-69 6 s-09 6D 6Z 0z 
= sJUusUIsely — RIE = jetueso = anf yoput q01-6D d6 s-09 69 6Z 0z 
= sjuouseyy — eIXe es ferueio = Anf = japur 1801-69 V6 S09 69 67 0z 
= sjusUIsely — RIXE aa jerueso = Ant joput 201-69 V6 s-09 69 67 0z 
= sjuowsey = yun acs auog paynueprun = pe Sb-11D p s-09 IID os 61 
= sjuowsey = yun = quog paynueprun = =pe = py 11D € s-09 11D os 61 
= sjuowseyy = yun — auog paynueprun = =pe = Ip-110 q¢ s-09 1D os 61 
= sjuowsey = yun = quog paynuaprun pe = 91-119 Ol Or-02. ia Ws 61 
=e sjuowsey = yun = auog paynueprun =pe S19) 6 Or-0z  =«ID Ws 61 
= sjuewiseyy = yun eas auog paynueprun =pe = yI-11D 8 Or-0Z =—s«T Ws 61 
= syusUIseyy = |RIXE = BIqoWOA = pe ®Lb-11D 9 s-09 IID (Ws 61 
= syusuIsely = |RIXe a eiqeHwaA =pe Qpb- 11D € s-09 IID os 61 
= =3 u Sa jesoduiay pe & &pb- 11D € 8-09 IID Os 61 
=— juouisey u = endeos pe epp-11D € s-09 IID Ws 61 
= — = -jerxe = jeruejo pes Crile 9 Or0e. Ito os 61 
ad a u = jeioued «= pe Aas 9 Or-0Z =i 0s 61 
<= apis su yerxe = qjqipueut pe eer 11D PE s-09 IID os 61 
a sjuowsey = yun a auog paynueprun = pe °ZP- 11D oF s-09 1D os 61 
a opis Ys perxe = ajqipueuzt pe °p- 11D o€ $091 110 os 61 
= sjuowseyy = yun = qu pe = Prb- 11D € s-09 IID os 61 
= = JT Areqyrxeu td pe q€b-119 PE 8-09 IID os 6I 
ae = JT Arepprxew IN pe 68 Ipp-11D € s-09 «TID Ns 61 
= — UY Jejnqipuew eN pe 8 q@p- 119 og s-09 IID os 61 
ou — yun = seuog Suop = pe 6-119 € Or-07 =sdID Ws 61 
6€-11D YM poyoreur = 4 = eiqn =pe | Led 9 s-09 IID os 61 
Lp-11D yum peyorews = Al = eiqn =pe 8 6£-11D (6 s-09 IID os 61 
= ore al = jesoduia} pe Or- 11D ee s-09 IID os 61 
a sjuowseyy = yun re quog paynueplun = pe 8E-119 I s-09" iD os 61 
— = 71 = inuay pe S 8E-119 I s-09 11D os 61 
= — yun = Sgdisso wo pe} ROP- 11D ve s-09 IID os 61 
SJUDUWUOD, JUIWII[9 JO UOTHOg opis opeoie JUSWI9[q ay xg ‘Ou "JeD ‘ou (Wud) wuy jeung ‘ou 
[eiusqd Plel4 [PAI] IOO[W “AIpUy] 
(panuluo,) ) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


88 


11Z-O1d yl payors 
11Z-Old YM payoreus 
11Z-Old Yim payors 
11Z-Old Yt payoreus 
11Z-Old Yim payors 


7-61 YUM poyoyeu 

1-6] WM payseuw 

£-6l 

pue ¢-6f YM payoyew 
€-6f 

pue 9-6] YIM poyoew 

7 P-O1D ‘II-O1D ‘8-019 
‘Y7-O1ID ‘19-019 ‘1°92 
-O1D ‘S-6] YIM poyoyew 
7 P-O1D ‘II-O1D ‘8-019 
PTOID T'9-01D ‘152 
-O1D ‘p-6] YIM poyorew 


s}usWWO> 


PIs 2] 
JUSWISeIJ UMOID 
s]UsWI3eIy 
sUsw3ely 


stsAydeip 


sisXydeip 
juawi3ely sishyderp 


jUsWIse 


WUsUIseIy BUG BuO] 


ouou 

uorod snoned 

rejiseq 

uomod snoned 

6-D [euing Juvsur YIM punoy 
6-D [eng Juvjur YIM punoy 
6-D [eLing Juejur YIM punoy 
6-D [eung juejur YIM punoy 
6-D [eung Juejur YIM puno} 
6-D [eLing juejur YIM punoj 
6-D [eung juezut jo wed 
6-D [eng juesur jo ued 
6-9 [eung juejut jo wed 
6-D [elung juvjur jo wed 


JUSUWIA]A JO UOILIOg 


[erxe 


s 
ss 
cs 


eA Sy fe SS) SS) Sj fen pS) [ev fen 


apis 


Arey]Ixeul 
yejnqipuew 
Jejnqipuew 
Je[nqipueul 
Je[nqipueuw 

Areyyixew 

Axe] [Ixe ul 


Axeqytxeu 
Asey]ixeut 
Axeytxeu 
Arey [xe ul 
Areyyixew 
Axeyyixew 
Jejnqipuew 
Je[nqipueul 
Je[nqipuew 
Jejnqipuew 


aprose 
jejusq 


Il 

tibet] 

bd 

td 

o 

ra | 

a[qipuew 

je1odua} 10 eo 
td 10 td 


Cl 
Inwaj 


Inwia-j 
eqn 


eqn 
snipel 


[ejoued 


[ejoued 
2uo0g palynuaprun 
ernqy 
QIAO 
CWP 
esoduiay 
jewdis90 
jesoduia} 
CWP 
TWP 
LWP 

op 


juaWayq 


pe 


Anf japul 
Ant jopul 


61-Old 

61-014 
I1c-Old 
I1c-O14 
I1@-OlA 
I17-Old 
11c-Old 
A1c-OlA 


b-61 


S-6l 
6-61 
L-6l 
L-6l 
POI-69 
901-69 
'O1-6D 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 
01-69 


‘ou "wD 


(panuyuo,)) 
| XIANHddV 


I 
II 
Il 
Il 
II 
II 
II 


41 
ude19S 


udaJOS 
I 
c 


S 
uaal9s 


ugoIOS 
udeVIOS 


DDDNDNDDNDNDN NW 


‘ou 


Piel 


08-09 
08-09 
3-08 
3-08 
S-08 
5-08 
3-08 
S-08 
S—08 
S08 
Ov-07 
Ov-07 


09-OP 


09-OF 
08-09 


09-0F 


09-0r 
08-09 
09-0F 
09-0F 
S-09 
S-09 
S-09 
s-09 
S-09 
S-09 
S-09 
S-09 
S-09 
s-09 
S-09 
$-09 
S-09 
S-09 


(wd) 
[9A] 


Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Ild 
Id 

6! 

61 


6l 
61 
6] 


61 


91 


9I 
91 
9I 
9I 
67 
67 
67 
67 
67 
67 
67 
67 
6T 
67 
67 
67 
67 
6T 
jeung 
Woow 


07 
Ot 
07 
0t 
0t 
0t 
07 
Ot 
0t 
OT 
Ot 
Ot 
Ot 
‘ou 
‘ATpUY 


89 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


— syuswiseyy = [eIxe = jeturio = Anf = yoput IS-Old  uees9s Or-0% = OO Ip @ 
_ swusWsely = [RIXe = jerueio = Anf — japul S1-Old L 08-09 = Ol Iv SZ 
— sjuouisely = ferxe = ferueso = Ant = jopul €l-Old ¢ 08-09 = OOIld Ip 4 
je1uvso Ajqeqoid sWUoWIsely =—-yeIxe — jeruesJo = =Anf = jopur LZ-Ol4  useJos S-O8 Old Iv CZ 
jedieo Ajqeqoid S]USWISeI] yun — jedieo ~=Anf = jopul 97-OIlq  usel0s S-O8 Old Iv GZ 
= suawiseyy = yun = auog peynusprun = Anf — japut €7-Old € S-08 Old Ip Sz 
— — _jerxe = JBIGIHAIA [BIAJD = Ant Japul PS-Old PZ Or-0Z = OO Ip Sz 
<i — yun ae onvuoshz pe (7-01 fy S-08 OI pe v7 
ssao01d 
plojuopuo sopnyoul —_ jerxe _— BIQQUVA [BOIAIOS pe 6 91Z-Old oT S-OR Old pe v7 
= a u a Iejnoiavuss—spe CS ®17-Old e] S-08 Old pe 7 
— = UY Areyprxeus €d pe & ®61-Old eT 08-09 = OOld pe 7 
— = Yo Areyprxeu Ope ug ®61-O1ld el] 08-09 ~—sOOIH pe pZ 
— oa UY Areyyrxeun a pes ®61-O1d eT] 08-09 ~=s Old pe 7 
_— = UY Areqyrxew [ieee a 61-01 ely 08-09 = Old pe 7 
= = u a eyixeur pes 61-01 aa 08-09 ~—s Old pe 7 
11Z-O1lA WIM payoyeu = Y  Jepnqrpuew td pe & 11Z-Old 1 S-08 Old be pZ 
11Z-Old WM poyoyeu oe a Jeynqipuews fd pe & 117-Old 1 S08 Old pe v7 
11Z-O1d WIM poyoyeu apis ys [exe == ajqipue— pe f 117-014 1 s-08 Old be pZ 
apis ys [exe a3 qiqipueum pe W1Z-O1d wy] s-08 Old pe v7 
= [eystp u = eujn pe 8 d{zZ-Old d] s-08 Old pe 7 
oS a0 ae auog poynuepiun = Anf = & 17-01 I S-08 Old pe pZ 
se same (1 = auog poynuepiun pe & 1Z-Old I S-08 Old pe yZ 
= — ‘4un = souoqjooj pe = 4 17-Old I s-08 Old pe 7 
= =a te i sasuvjeyd puey = pe 1Z-Old I S-08 Old be v7 
ae =) een = soduejeyd jooy = pe 1Z-Old I s-08 Old pe v7 
oe — yun = snouvojeo pe & 1Z-Old I s-08 Old pe pZ 
= — Aun a squ pe 8 1Z-Old I s-08 Old be v7 
= — yun = xuereyd puey xoid pe} 317-Old 3] S-08 Old ve v7 
= = al —— uyixeurs pes YIZ-Old YI S08 Old pe pz 
— _ 7 = onewoshz pe 8 YIZ-Old UI s-08 Old pe pZ 
= = | i jesoduia) pe PI7Z-Old PI S-08 Old pe 2 
re aS 4 _ jeiodwa) pe} q17@-Old ql s-08 Old pe v7 
= xo1d al = euyn pes b7Z-OIH bz S08 Old pe v7 
= a TY  Arerpixew IN pe 8 61-01d II 08-09 ~=—s OI be v7 
= = JT Aveyjixews bd pe 8 61-01 I 08-09 ~=Old pe v7 
snoles 1001 JT  Areqyixew €d pe & 61-0I4 Il 08-09 ~=sOOld pe 7 
= = 7 Axeqpixews oe ee 61-014 II 08-09 ~=sOOTH pe v7 
= = JY  Areqyrxew de 61-Old UI 08-09 OOH pe 7 
SJUSWIWIOD JUSWIZ[9 JO UOTWOd apis oproie qUSWS[q ay xas “OU "WWD ‘Ou (Wd) wu jeung ‘Ou 
jequoq PIP J2Ao'] a100/ “AIPU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


90 


paidnia 
paidnia 
poidnisun 


6-015 YM poyoyeu 
J9-OlA pue 
4¢1-Old YM peyoieul 


QZ1-O1A YM poyoiew 
OT-O1ld YM poyoyeut 


99-O1d Gt poyoieul 
L-O14 WIM poysiew 
saskydida sapnyout 


s]UsUIWOD 


Al 
oa Al 
Fr 7 
a 7 

a 


easip 


susWsey ose] = [RIX 
(Z) saskydido yun 


m3 u 

se u 

ary u 

4 ad 

stsAydeip pure xoid Y 
[eisIp u 

— yun 

— yun 

xold yun 


stsXydeip yun 
sisAydeip yun 
=) Saati 

rad a 

= a 

=% a 
stsXydeip pue xoid a | 
sUsUIsely =—-[RIXe 
rae 
qusUIsey yun 
— yun 
suswisely = yun 
sJUsUIseL yun 
susUIsely yun 
suswisely yun 
sugwmiseyy = yun 
sjuowiseyy = yun 
S}USWISeY yun 
sjuswizey = yun 
siskydeip = yun 
Teasip = yun 
sqususely yun 


JUBWATA JO UOTLOg apis 


aproe 
pequoq 


CcINP 
IW 

td 

aT bat 
Inwigj 


[ejoured 

2uo0g poynueprun 
snauroyeo 

snyei 

erqn 

ejndeos 

Inu2j 

Inuidj 

siqnd 

siqnd 

run 

Q[SIAPIOD 

Q]OIAR]O 

eyrxeul 

eIqn 

snye} 

snouwiny 

InNUIay 

jequo1y 

[eqoy 

xuvyeyd 

xuvyeyd puey powwojur 
squ 

auog paynueprun 
auo0g paynuaprun 
9uo0g poynusprun 
auo0g pelyiuspriun 
9u0q payinuaprun 
qu Isa 

Binqyy 

einqy 

eIqn 

xueyeyd 


Wuawealq 


(panulyuo)) 
| XI(NHddV 


Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
ant 
Ant 


Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
ant 
Ant 
ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
Ant 
ant 
Ant 
Ant 
ant 
anf 
ant 
Ant 
anf 
anf 
Ant 
ant 
Ant 


aay 


yopul 
Jopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yoput 


yopur 
yopul 
yeput 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopur 
yopul 
yopul 
yoput 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yoput 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
Japul 
Jopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopur 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 
yopul 


Xag 


9S1-OIA 
961-014 
9$1-O1ls 
9S1-O14 

L-Olsd 


rl-Old 
07-01 
07-OIA 
07-01 
97I-Old 
(S-O14 
OI-Old 
qZ1-014 
p7-01d 
8¢-O14 
q7Z-OlA 
ys-Old 
JS-OlA 
AS-OlA 
9€7-OlA 
®¢7-0ld 
®C-Ol4 
6-014 
1S-Old 
1'1S-O1ld 
®IT-Old 
®1IT-Old 
ZI-OlA 
Z1-Old 
7-Ols 
St-01d 
b-Old 
¢-Old 
S-Old 
q€7Z-Ols 
®Z71-01d 
%€7-Old 
IS-Ols 


‘ou "RD 


9 
u90J9S 


uga19OS 
uga19OS 


ugoIOS 


NESE SE 


ON = 


qe 
ep 
% 
uaal0s 
‘ou 
Piel 


08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
09-OP 


08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
Or—-07 
08-09 
08-09 
S-08 
Or—-07 
S-08 
Ov—-07 
OF—-07 
Or-07 
S-08 
S-08 
Ov—-07 
08-09 
Or-07 
Or—-07 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
S-08 
S-08 
Or-07 
OF-07 
Or-07 
S-08 
08-09 
S-08 
Or-07 
(wid) 
[eAq7] 


Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Oid 


Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
OIA 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 
Old 


wy 


wouwununnwnnuwnnwnnunnununnynnunnuwnnunwn 4 
ONAN AANA NA AN NN ON 


‘ou 
“ATpU] 


91 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


®1-Old 
qui payoeu ‘paydnioun as J Je[nqipuew D> anf jepur P€Z-Old PE S-08 Old Iv 4 
®1-Old 
iM payoreu! :paidnia — J se[nqrpuew TWP Ant = jepur PEZ-OI Pe S08 Old Iv SZ 
®1-Old 
(IM payorew :paydnia == J se[nqrpuew IWP Ant jeput PEz-O1A PE s-08 Old Ip SZ 
®1-Old 
yim payorew :pardnia "2 JT Je[nqrpueut IW Ant Jepur PEz-Ols Pe $08 = Old Ip Se 
e1-Old 
yim peyoyeus :paidnia == J se[nqipuew IT anf jepur Pez-O1ld PE s-08 Old Ip 4 
PT-Old YIM payor — jerxe = ajqipueu = Anf = japul P€7-OlA PE S-08 Old Ip Sz 
= sjuawsey = =yun = auog paynuepiun = anf  japul q€1-014 qs 08-09 ~—s Old Ip SZ 
39-0ld 
pur p1-O1d yum poyoyeu sjuousey = RIXe = jeoued §=anf = japur q€1-O1d qs 08-09 ~—s Old Ip Sz 
= sjuousey = [RIXe = jesoduia} anf = yopul 39-014 i 09-0r = OO Ip SZ 
q€1-O14 
pue p]-O1d yim poyoyew syuouisely = [RIXe = eyoued =anf = jopur 39-014 JI 09-0r =O Ip SZ 
®E1-Old 
pure 99-014 yum poyoyeul syuoUIsely = [BIXe er jeudis00—Anf = yaput J9-Old iI 09-0r = Old Ip Sz 
pur 29-014 WIM edit sjuouiseyy = [exe a jeudiooo = Anf = japul ®E1-Old eG 08-09 ~=—s Old Iv SZ 
= sjuowsey = yun re auog peynueprun anf  japur 29-014 3] 09-0r = OO Iv 4 
eEl-Old 
pur J9-O14 WM poyoyeu — jerxe a fevidtooo «= anf = yopur 29-014 a] 0-0r Old Ip SZ 
= = Yo Areyyrxews ZN «Anf  jepur == 8 s-08 IID Iv v4 
= — UY Areyyrxews IN Ant jepur aa 8 s-08 IID Ip 4 
ae = YU Areqyrxew pd Ant jepur Se 8 s-08 11D Iv SZ 
— a= UY Areyyrxews €d Ant jyoepur aS 8 s-08 11D Iv CZ 
= — YU Aseyyrxews TWP Anf jepur == 8 s-08 119 Iv SZ 
= a UY Aeyyrxew INP Ant jeput — 8 S-08 IID Ip Sz 
= == Uo Areyyixew Op anf jepur == of 08-09 ~=—sOOl Iv 4 
=< — JT Arerpixew ZN Anf = yopur a vE 08-09 = Old Iv SZ 
se = JY = Azepixew ZZ] «Ant = jepur = PE 08-09 = OA Iv Sz 
— a JT Aveyyixew IT Ant jepur = PE 08-09 = OIA Iv Sz 
= a JT Areyyixew IWp anf jepur = el 08-09 ~—s OI Iv Su 
ad air JT = Areyyixew Op Ant yepur —  usaalos 08-09 = Old Iv 4 
= = JT Aveyprxew D Anf  jopur asad 3] 09-0r = OO Iv 4 
aa sjuswsey auog suo] = yun oe auog peynuepiun = anf japul 7-0ld (é 07-0 Old Iv SZ 
— ar 7 a= wwojiouns piryy anf japul P7I-O14 Pr 08-09 ~=—sOOld Ip Sz 
a = *] = jesoduiay anf = yopul 26-014 ey 4 Or-0t =O Iv SZ 
SJUDUIWIOD, JUSUIZ]9 JO UOTHIOg opis oprole jUOUWIZ|q ay xas ‘ou ‘JeD ‘ou (WId) ywuy jeung ‘ou 
feiuod Piel [SA9'] aIOOW “AIpUy 
(panuluo)) 
I XI(NHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


o2 


Sc AIpul 


yiim parersosse A]qeqo.d sjusuiseyy = yun — auog paynuaprun anf japut VI-ld I 0-0r = =iIIA (19) SZ 
CZ Alpul 
yum payeroosse A}qeqo.d sjuswiseyy = yun mi auog paynuaprun anf japul I-11 I Or-0Z = dA [1p] SZ 
— syuouseyy = RIxe a awiqeuaA Ant japul 81-014 Ol 08-09 ~=sOOIA Ip SZ 
a S]USUISeIy yun a auog paynuspiun = anf japul 8-Ol4  Uuselos 09-0P Old Ip SZ 
= syuowseyy = yun = auog paynuaprun anf japut [1-014 € 08-09 ~=s Ol Ip Sz 
= sjuouiseyy = yun = squ anf = jopur 11-014 € 08-09 ~—s OIA Ip 4 
= sjuowsey = yun = auog paynuaprun anf — yeput 9-01A I 09-0r Ol Ip 4 
a,Apuos 
feiidts90 ue sapniout sjuousey = [BIxe a jeudiooo0 = Anf = yapur 9-014 I 09-0r Ol Ip 4 
= juouse1y — |RIXe ae prousyds anf japul qS1-OIs ql 08-09 ~=s Old Ip SZ 
=< juswsey = yun aaa endess anf japur %7-Old 74 s-0g Old Ip SZ 
= - u a jesoduiay anf = Japut 91-014 8 0s-09~—s Old Ip Sz 
= a u we eyed = anf yapur eZ1-O1s ap 08-09 ~=—s«OOTd Ip SZ 
= ms u = ayeurmouur Ant — japut 1-1 eZ s0g II Ip Sz 
paidnioun aoe a Jenqipuew ZWP «Ant = japur ®1-O14 e] 07-0 Old Ip SZ 
paidnoun = UY se[nqipuew IWP Ant yapur ®I-O1s e] 07-0 Old Ip SZ 
paidnuaun am a Jeinqrpuew Op anf jepur ®I-Ols e] 07-0 Old Ip 4 
paidnioun = a Jenqrpuew ZW Ant = japur P1-O1s e] 07-0 Ols Ip 4 
paidnia = Y  se[nqipuew IN Ant jeput ®I-O1d P| 07-0 OlA Ip ST 
paidnia ar UY Jepnqipuews ZI Ant = yapur e1-Old e] 07-0 Old Ip 4 
PEZ-O1d WIM poyoyew apis ys puixe = ajqipuew = anf = yoput ®1-O1d e] 0z-0 Old Ip 4 
YS-O1d WIM poyoreu = u =a aqjoraryo = Anf = Japul 29-014 | 0-0r =O Ip 4 
= sjuowseyy = yun = qu anf jeput J€7-O1 Je SOs Old Ip Sz 
an suouisey = [BIXe — aeiqoweA anf yapul 1-Old I 07-0 Old Ip Sz 
Se sjuowsey = yun = qu anf japul 1-014 I 0t-0 Old Ip St 
aa sisXydeip = yun — smiper anf  japur qL-014 qz 0-0r =OOllA Ip Sz 
= quowsey = yun = eindess anf japut e9-O14 P| 0-0r = OO Ip 4 
— stsXydeip = yun _ sniper anf japur 9-014 e] 0-0r Old Ip Sz 
= sjuowiseyy = yun = euyn anf japut qI-O1s qI 0t-0 Old Ip SZ 
= sjuswisey = yun = sniper anf yopul qI-Ols ql 0z-0 Old Ip St 
= stshydida xoid = yun = eiqn = Anf = yapur PE7-O1A BE 0g Old Ip 4 
on = “yun = xuevyeyd puey xord = anf = japul 11-014 aE 08-09 ~— sO Ip St 
— stshydeip xoid yun ae einqy =Anf = yapur JZ1-01d Ip 08-09 = Old Ip St 
1-014 
iM payoiew ‘paydnioun = J se[nqipuew ZW Ant = yepur PEZ-OlA PE S08 Old Ip ST 
®T-Old 
(iim payoyew ‘paydnuoun = J se[nqrpuew €d Ant  yepur P€z-OlAd PE S08 Old Ip St 
S}USUIWIOD JUIWII9 JO UOILIOd apis apeoie JUsWII|q ay xas ‘ou “1RD ‘ou (wud) uy yeung ‘OU 
jeiuaq Plat [aaa] 200A “AIPU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


“LYT Aq g Arpur pojyeo A]peursu0 ‘uoNeAvoxe 616] UI (OTD HUN) I] dL Ul punog q 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


= sjuowseyy = yun oe auog paynuaprun = pe p-01D ‘6 07-0 ~3=——OOID v7 L@ 
= juauidseyy — ferxe 3 jerueio pes 132-019 JI Or-0z OID 7 i 
PZ-O1D YUM payoreu 
‘sa[Apuoo [ered sapnjout [eisip al — inuay pe S €-119 € s-08 IID v7 [bya 
ZP-01D ‘IT-O1D ‘8-019 
‘y'Z-01D ‘192-019 
‘S-61 ‘b-61 YIM payoreu sjuauiseyy = RIxe a jerueio pe 19-019 p 09-0r OID v7 LZ 
= sjuauisely = RIE = jeiueia pe I'p-01D Z Or-0Z OID 7 EZ 
= juawisey = feixe 4 jerueso pe €7-01D I 07-0 @O1D 7 LZ 
= ajajduros u = eujn pe S 09-119 Ol s-08 IID v7 LZ 
q = UY Areyyrxews ZWP Ant  jopur a 08-0L OID SZ 9Z 
q a al = jesoduia} anf = yoput oF 08-0L OID SZ 97 
q — —-yerxe = jetuesa = Anf = yopur rox 08-0L OID 4 97 
UOTBABIX9 6/6] Ul 
(O1D Wun) TI] dL Woy umo9 Surdojaasp a Areyyrxews DO Ant yepur = eu 0L-09 =—O1D SZ 9% 
UOT]BAPIX9 6/6] Ul 
(O1D Wun) II] dL woy uMOID BuIdofaAep JT Areyyixeu DO Ant jepur a eu 0L-09 =—OOID SZ 97 
UONPARIXS 6/6] Ul 
(O1D Wun) [I] dL Woy juouselyy = [RIxe Sa jerueso = Ant — yoput = eu 0L-09 =—OID 4 97 
UONVALIXI 6/6] Ul 
(O1D Wun) [I] dL wos juousey = eIxe ma jeruess = Ant — japur ce eu 09-0S OID SZ 9@ 
r = a Areyypixews INP Ant japur = eu 08-09 69 Sz 97 
v = T  Areqyexeu TWP Ant  jepur = eu 08-09 69 SZ 97 
v = JT Areqyrxeu [WP Ant  jopur a eu 08-09 = 6D SZ 97 
r as TY  Areyprxews zip = Ant = Jopur oe eu 08-09 69 SZ 9Z 
e == JT Aseyprxew HIP Ant = yapur — eu 08-09 = 66D Sz 97 
v = J se[nqipuew IAP Ant  jepur = eu 08-09 69 SZ 97 
v = UY Aseyyrxeus ZT «ont = jopur = eu 08-09 69 SZ 97 
e cage JT Axeqyrxeu IW Ant yopur = eu 08-09 69 SZ 97 
v aa JT Areqyrxew I] Ant jopur =< eu 08-09 §=69 St 97 
e yuouIsely =I _ jerue1o =Anf = jopul — eu 08-09 69 CZ 97 
LT Aq ¢ Atpur 
payjeo Ayjeursuo ‘yun jo 
UONBARIXS [RG] Ul punoj uMOJS Suidojaaop YU Arey[ixeu IW Ant yopul es eu OS-OVr 119 CZ 97 
SZ AIpul 
\iIM payeroosse A]qeqoid — -jerxe = ZO «Ant yopur ®81-O14 P01 08-09 sOOlA [1p] SZ 
SZ Alput 
yum pareioosse Ajqeqoid yun = siqnd = anf yoput p-lld € 08-09 sd [1p] SZ 
SJUSWIWOD JUDUIZI9 JO UOILOg apts operore JUDUII|q ay xg ‘OU “WeD ‘Ou (ud) up jeung ‘ou 
jequeq PI [aaay a00W ‘AIpU] 
(panuljuo)) 
| XIGNAddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


94 


L797 uly atpur _ 1 = snipes pe — = re O19 pZ LZ 
Ly] uly atpur — u = sniowny =pe S = ad Ie oo 74 LZ 
L7 uly atpur = 7 or sniauny =pe S rT a4 Ie oD v7 Lz 
L977 uly Atpur = u == eindeos pe = & a = Ie oo 74 LZ 
L977 uly Atpur uInTYost u at ayeurmouur = peg — i re oo 7 LZ 
Ly] uly atpur wuintyost | ose ayeurmouur = peg eee —_ Ie O19 vz LZ 
LY] Ul y Atput winiy! u = ayeurmouur = peg “oe — Ie o19 v7 LZ 
L977 uly aipur winiy! 7 = aeurmouur = pe & = — Ie oo pZ LZ 
LZ Alpul 
YIM payeroosse Ajqeqosd — u = eyawd =pe | s 37-019 3] sm OID (PZ) LZ 
LZ Alpul 
yim payersosse Ajqeqoid aoejins Jejnoune sopnyour yun — ayeulmouul ~=—s pe 4 ZPr-O1D eZ 09-O0r OID [pz] LZ 
LZ Alpul 
Yim payeroosse Ajqeqosd pesy = yun = sriauny = pe P9-11D PII s-08 IID (pz) LZ 
LZ Alpur 
yim payeroosse Ajqeqoid — yun — —_ xuryeyd jooj xoud ys pw ZI-01D S s-09 OID [pZ) LZ 
—  sisKydeip pur stsXydida xord = yun a eiqn pe S p-119 ¢ sos 119 bZ LZ 
Er sishydeip u oo eiqn pe 8 17-019 1 sm OID b7 LZ 
= stsAydeip u = eqn pes 97-019 2] sm OID 7 LZ 
= xoid u ae snipes pe 37-019 3] sm OID 7 LZ 
= ajApuos ys perxe = jeudis90 = pe S 197-019 qI Or-0z =—OOID v7 LZ 
= ssaooid proyseul sapnyout u = jesoduiay pe S ®p-O1D eZ Or-0z ~=C«OID b7 LZ 
snjooaye pue snuwiel 
= [eUOZOY YUM apis Ys ere ae qjqipuew pe qI-119 ql 08-09 ~—s«1ID 7 LZ 
= = u — aun, pe yYO-IID ~—sUII s-0g 11D 7 LZ 
= = u a snour pe = T®p-01D eZ Or-0z OID 97 LZ 
= =: u = piedmovjou pe § 89-119 311 sos 1D b7 LZ 
7; = u = pioydess pe & b9-11D bII s-08 19 74 LZ 
~s ae u = audeo peg b9-119 bIT sos 119 $7 LZ 
Z'P-01D ‘II-O1D 
‘8-O1D ‘P'Z-01D ‘19-019 
‘S-61 ‘p-61 YIM poyoyew juouisey = RIxe = jeyoued = pe 137-019 3] Or-0z—séOID 7 LZ 
€-11D yim poyoyeut xoid 7 sacs ina pe 7-019 B] sm OID v7 LZ 
pe ajApuoo yo, = -erxe = jeudisoo0 «= pe 127-019 a] Or-0z =D 97 Lz 
a sishydeip = yun = sniouny = pe %-01D a] sw OID PZ LZ 
i — yun —— xuzyeyd puey pe P7-01D I Or-0z ~=—~OOID o7 LZ 
ZT P-OID ‘II-O1D ‘8-019 
‘19-019 ‘1'D7-01D 
‘S61 ‘p-6] YIM payoreu syuswiseyy = ere = yeruwso pe y7-01D I Or-0Z OID p7 LZ 
ne suowseyy = yun as quog paynuspiun = pes 7-119 qu os-09 ~=—«LID v7 LZ 
S}USWIWWOD) JUDWI9]9 JO UOILOg apis aprole JUSUI9|q ady = xas ‘ou "RD ‘ou (wid) uy yeung ‘ou 
jeuoqd Pisl4 [aaa] qoow AIpuy 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIGNHddV 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


LT ul y Arpul or u = WWOjsIaUNS pouajul =pe =p = = re ol re 8Z 
L977 ul y Arpur = u ae WOJIaUND [eIpaut = pep = i re ol 7 8Z 
L797 ul y Alpul = yun = snouvgjeo = pep ra — le op 7 8Z 

8Z AIpul 
YIM poyeloosse Ajqeqoid jUsWseIy jerxe —_ jeydi990 pe P 6-019 udo19D$ SMOQ9-Ob OID (2Z] RZ 
— — Y = ¢[edivovjour pe =p dT-11D 9] 08-09 IID 7 87 
= sisdydeip xoid u == vuyn pe =p 8-119  uees9s s-08 IID (a8 8Z 
— — u = proydeos pe Pp eC-119 vO! s-08 IID 7 8Z 
= — yun a xuvjeyd puey xoid = pep e9-119 ell s-08 11D (a6 87 
_ ssooo1d UOTLUOIOR yun —_— eindeos pe P €-O19 qu 07-0 OID HG ye 
= jusuIsely = [RIXe = jejoued «= pep €-01D qu 07-0 83=6: 01D 7 87 
_ sisXydeip a — viqn pe 2p 7 PZ-01D PI 09-0r 01D 7 8Z 
— sisXydeip A a viqy pep 797-019 oT 09-0r OID a 8Z 
— stsXydeip 1 — smauiny = pep 797-019 ql 09-0r 01D a 8Z 
Z2Z-O1D YIM poyoyeut yoou pur pray aT — inuiay =pe = p ZTPZ-O1D e] 09-0r OID 7 8Z 
ZPZ-O1D WIM payor sisXydeip 5 = Inuiay = pep 797-019 a] 09-0b OID 7 82 
= [eisip 1 = snauny pe Pp qZ-01D qI sm OID 7 8Z 
— [eisip 7 mec muaj pe 9 PZ-01D PI sm OID tZ 8Z 
= Al — gjoravjo. pep 29-119 TT s-08 IID (a6 8Z 

(7-019 
‘T-O1D YM payoreul sjuowsey = yun == einqy = =pe =p Z-01D I sm OID 7 8Z 

7-019 
‘T-O1D WM payor =) un = einqy pe Pp [7-019 ty sm OID 7 8Z 
LT uly Arpur — = -jerxe — QVIQOUOA [eIVS = pe = — re om v7 Le 
L797 uly Arput — = -jerxe or avIqaUaA Iequint pe a = i om vZ LZ 
LY] uly Arlpur =< [eixu = BVIGIVOA o1ovoy) «= pet on = 1 orm 74 Mie 
Ly] Ul y Alpul — yun — squ pe 8 er = re orm p@ LZ 
L797 ul y Alpur — yin —  xuvyeyd puvy pouuojur pe = = — re om v7 LZ 
LY] ul y Alput :Z — yun = sadurjeyd puey xoid = pe & = ad Ie om v7 Le 
LY] Ul y AIpUT tp — 7 — sedreovjour pe} si re om 4 LZ 
L797 ul y AIpur *] — u — sjedreovjour «pe & a = 1 om v7 LZ 
LT ul y Atput — u — aeuey pe} os = I om 7 Lz 
L797 uly Alpur ae Y a plozeden = =pe = oo re om pZ LZ 
L797 uly Arpur oa: u — wnizeden = pe} ne = 1 om 7 Lz 
L797 uly Alpul =a mn a uuojisid pe % = are Ie ol v7 LZ 
L797 Ul y Alpur a un = yinqy = =pe 8 a. = re oro 7 re 
L797 uly Alput = u — inwaj pe} a = Ie om vZ ibe 
L797 uly Arpul ne a] — wun pe} = = Ie ol vz LZ 
L797 uly Arpul = u = sniper pe} = > re on v7 LZ 
SJUSUWIWUIOD JUDUIIJO JO UOTLIOd opts opeore qUOWIS[q ey xaos ‘Ou “VO ‘ou (Wd) mug Jeung ‘ou 

[equsq Plot [9Ao'] dOOW ‘AIpU] 
(panuljuo,) ) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


96 


S-O8 
8-08 
S-08 
S-08 
S-08 
S-08 
S-08 
3-08 
S—-08 
S-08 
S—08 
S-08 
S—08 
S-08 
08-09 
08-09 


(utd) 


[2Aq"] 


OID 
OID 
OLD 
10) 8) 
OO 
O1O 
OID 
OID 
OO 
O1O 
OID 
OID 
OID 
Wd 
Id 
Hd 

6f 


6f 
6f 


1d 


Id 


Hd 


Hd 


Wd 


Wd 
OID 
OID 
OID 
10} 59) 
01D 
01D 
01D 
01D 


1wuA 


VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/9I 
VLI/I 

LU/91 

(ezi/(sz] 

[ezl(sz) 

[ezl(sz) 

(1Z7JAzz) 


(1ZJA7Zz 
{1zzz 


= — i Axe | [1x td pe jepul 99S/97-O1D % 

=F = ‘1 Axe ||ixeul Oo pe jepul 296/97-O1D % 

=< = | Areyjixeu cI] = pes epul 99S/9T-O1D % 

= = 7 = Bixeu = pe Jopul 296/97-O1OD of 

snoues a JT Jejnqipuew tN pe yopur = =8°9S/8°T-O1D t 

a = JT Jenqtipuew CN pe oepur 8°9S/8°7-O1D t 

ae = JT Je[nqipuew IN pe ypur = 8°9S/8°7-O1D t 

ar a JT Jernqtpuew td pe pur = =8°9S/8°C-O1D € 

= = JT Jenqipuew oO pe pur = 8°9S/8°T-O1D £ 

— oe JT Jenqipuewi cl] =pe epul §=—- 69S /6'7-O1D t 

Za: = J = Jernqtpueul II pe yepur 696/6'7-O1D 3 

as Josue = fRIxe aie ayqipueur pe = yepul = 9/6 7-O1D 3 

— JUIWIBeIY IE[OIATE yun a]QIpuewl JO eI[Ixeul pe PUI kg'9C/9'7-OID € 

a sJUsUIdeIy yun — auog paynuopiun = aAnf japul l€-l4 Z 

—- s]UsWIde Ly yun = auog paylueprun §=aAnf  japul S-II4 ueasos 

= s]UsWIdeYy yun — auog paynueprun =anf japur ZI-lld I 

a sJUIUI3e yun — auog pelyuspilun = pe jopul Z-6f Uuedl0s 
£-61 

pure 9-6] YM payoyew sjusui3ely pur siskydeip yun — eiqt) pe  japul €-6f Uael0s 

ugeJ9S UI punoj yun -—- xuvyeyd joo} pouaqur = pe s«»19 pul I-6f uaas0s 
6¢ AIpul 

yim payeroosse Ayqeqoid sisAydeip yun _- eujn = pe é Q¢-I14 qz 
62 Atpul 

yim payeroosse A]qeqoid Japsog [e1aIe] Y — pindeoss = pe 3g €-Il4 7 
62 Alpul 

ym payeroosse Ajqeqoid SUSWISeY yun — auog peyuapiun = pe ro €i-llad I 
6¢ Alpul 

yim payeroosse A[qeqoid — yun — syesiejyejoul = pe 5 €I-lld I 
6¢ Alpul 

yam payeroosse Ajqeqoid — yun ae squ pe 3s eT-Wa I 
67 AIpul 

YIM payeroosse Ajqeqoid sisXydeip yun os snipes pe 3 e¢e-T 14 eZ 

L297] Ul y Alpul a yun = prouleses jOOJ = pe ? re a 

L79'T Ul vy Alpul aa a Bore xuvyeyd Jooj [esip = pe ? me a 

LY] Ul Y AIpUl °Z a yun a saduryeyd jooj appar pe 3 S — 

L797 Uy Arpur ‘Z aa 7 —  sasuejeyd jooj ajppiun pe P = = 

LJ ul y Alpul ‘¢ — y -- sosueyeyd jooj xoid ~—s pe fe) _ — 

LY] ul y Alput S¢ — 7 — sosueyeyd joo} xoid ~—s pe ce) —— a 

L797 Ul Y AIPUT Sp =< u — syesivjejoul = pe ? a = 

LT Ul y Alpur -¢ = a a sessejejoul = pe ? 585 = 

SJUSUILUOD JUSUIITA JO UOILIOg apis aproe jUsWIa]q asy = xas ‘ou "yea ‘ou 
jeuaq Piel 
(panuluo,)) 
| XI(NHddV 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 97 


2002 


— wINIYos! puke N[Nqeizoe =. yun — ayeurmouur = =pe =‘ japul [9-119 {T] s-O8” 11D P27 8Z/LZ 
— sjusuidely petues9}sod yun — auog paynuepiun = pe japul — SNOLIBA OID pZ/7Z 8Z/LZ 
= snuies SuIpuaose yo [RIXR — ajqipueul pe japul s9-119 STI S08 IID 2r2 SZ/LZ 
= squguisesj au0g Suc] = yun —s auog paynuepiun = =pe japul &p- 11D eG S08 IID  2/z 8Z/LZ 

[7-019 
‘Z-O1D yum payoreu — yun = Binqy = pes Japul I-O1D — waed9s SM OID ~—sbZ/7Z 8Z/LZ 
— = “| — jenenbiy = pe yapul I-O1D ~—-uaed0s sm OID ~~ vz? 8Z/LZ 
= *s 9 = plozedesy) = pe =: Japul I-O1D ~~ used0s SM OID ~~ Pe? 8Z/LZ 
= -* 7 — ayeun, = pes japul [-O1D ~— uaes0s SM OIDs h@/7Z 8Z/LZ 
= 3 * — ayeyideo = pes japul [-O1D — waes9s sm OID ~~ @/7? 8Z/LZ 
— ajApuod sexe = jeidis00 = pes japul 11-019 qu S09 OID l/r 8Z/LZ 
= — yun — einqy = pe = apul I1-O1D qu 09 O19 Zz 8Z/LZ 
= — son — squ pes japul 1-019 qu 09 O1ID 7 8Z/LZ 

Z'P-01D ‘8-019 

‘pZ-01D ‘19-019 
‘!'D7-01D ‘S-6I ‘b-61 —  jeixe = jejoued =pe = japul I1-O1D qu S09 OID Zr 8Z/LZ 
= sjuswiseyy = yun — auog paynueprun pe japul I'S-11D Ol S08 1D 2/7 SZ/LZ 
= — Poe = BVIQIHIA [BOIAJOD = pes JapuT 49-119 qII s-08 11D v2? 8Z/LZ 
as sjuouiseyy = yun = auog peynuapiun anf jopul €S-01D € S09 OID = Lzzsz €1/9Z 
Ses susuisely = [RIXe =3 JPIQIYOA feoIAJ9D «= Af Japul €S-01D € S09 OID = Lezsz €1/9Z 
== sjuowiseyy = yun =~ squ Ant = yaput €S-019 € S09 O19  LZc7 €1/9Z 
= siskydida [eysip 7 aS mnuay = Ant = japut L-Ild  ueedos S08 Ild  pb/ip €7/ST 
= juswisey = yun — auog paynuaprun = =pe japul p-6f Uuaelos 09-0r 6f =: 9T/EI 17/7 
= sjusuiseyy = yun = auog paynuapun =pe = ZS-11D  ueedos s-09 ID OS/6P 61/81 
= sjusuisely = ferxe <5 jemeio pes ®ZS-11D uaados 09 ID  OS/6r 61/81 
= ee YU = Jepnqipuew eA pe jepul auou € S08 O10 LPb/9Pr ALI/91 
Se = Uo Aveqyexews pd pe jopur auou € 08 O10 Leer ALI/91 
= = Uo Aueypixew €d pe epul auou € S08 O10 8 LPb/9Pr ALI/91 
ai a J Je[nqipuew ZN pe sdaput auou € S08 O10 Lb/9P AL1/91 
== = UY Aveyyixews IN pe epul—_L9S/L'7-01D € S08 O10 Lb/9P VLI/9I 
= = Uo Areqyrxews pd pe wpul L9OS/L'7-01D € S08 O10  Lb/9P VLI/9I 
= oe: u mn eyixeur pe apul = L'OS/L'7-O1D € S-08 O1D  LP/9r VLI/9I 
= os YU = -Je[nqipuew €dioD pe jepul auou € S08 O10  § LYr/9Pr VLI/9I 
= — Y= Jepnqipuew ZT] «= pes yapur guou € S08 O10 } Lb/9P VLI/9I 
er — U = Jepnqipuew II] pe jopur auou € S08 O1ID  Lb/9Pr VLI/9I 
a — J Je[Nqipuew pd pe epul auou € S08 O10 § Lb/9P VLI/9I 
aes = JT Areqyrxeu IN pe Jepul auou € S08 O10  Lb/9r VLI/9I 
= = 7 Areqyexew II pe yepul auou € S08 O10  Lb/9P VLI/9I 
= = UY Areyyixew €W pe depul auou € S08 O10 Lb/9%b VLI/9I 
= = a Areyyixeu I] pe Jepur auou € S-08 O1D  LP/9P VLI/9I 

SJUSWIWWOD JUSUWII]9 JO UOILIOg apis opeoie qUOWII|q ay xas OU "JeD ‘Ou (WId) uy jeung ‘ou 
feed PIP [PAN] dOOW ‘AIPU] 
(panuljuo) ) 
| XIGNHddV 


ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


98 


saues Aq podonsap UMOID 
saues Aq paXoisap uMOJO 


SJUSUILUO-) 


‘QIBYMS]O POLVOJUSAUT PUNO} JOU sem II 
asn¥saq a10Y peOwUsAUT a[qIpUBUE Jo Jey YI ‘ZW ‘LW ‘bd ‘Ed ‘OD “ZI Parejnorse sapnyjour yorym *L7y] Aq y Alp poryes s[qipuew Jo jfey ya] YIM a[qIpueW Jo jfey YU peysIep , 


9 suomod yo] pur ys yeixe ra siqipueu pe Jepul 99-119 oll s-08 IID TU/PT V87/L7Z 
~y aes Uo Areyyrxeur ct] =e sepul aia v s-08 IID TU/PT V87/L7 
= it Yo Areyyirxew II pe sepur 525 wy | s-08 IID TT/PT V87/L7 

— yun Areyyixeu jOO1 jou pe Japul = I s-08 IID TU/PT V87/LT 
— yun Areyprxeur jool yejour = pe Jopul 7 ul] s-08 I19 CC/PT V87/LT 
a FF T  Areyyixew td = pe = jyepul = L s-08 IID CPT V87/L7 
ae rine JT Areyyixew CN «pe sJopul = Sil s-08 IID CUP V87/L7 
= = JT Areqyrxceu cl =e yopul a JU s-08 IID CU/PT V87/LTZ 
= = T  Areyyixews I] pe eput = IT] s-08 IID CC/PT V87/L7 
ai i T  Areyyixew DO pe  yepul = 9 08 IID TT/PT V87Z/L7 
a = aU Je[nqrpuew Cc] =pe = Jepul —  useJ9s s-08 IID TU/PT V87/L7 
si =a JT Jepaqipuew tN pe yepul -< TT s-08 IID CU/PT V87/LTZ 
es pe J = Je[nqrpueul I] pe Jepul —  u90I9s s-08 IID CU/PT V87/L7 
— jApuos pur ssasoid prouosoo ~—yerxe ies e1qipueur = pe Jopul T7-O1D I sm OID TU/bT 87/LTZ 
= ia u ee pioydess = pes yapul T7-O1D I sm = OID CUT 87/LT 
Te ~ u = uinizedey = pe yapul 77-O1D I sm = OID TU/PT 8Z/LT 
a = ~37un aa xueyeyd puey [eisip = pe = jepul T7-O1ID I sm OID TU/PT 87/LT 
ar — yun — _xuvyeyd puey pouojur = pe yepul cCCOID I sm = OID TT/PT 87/LT 
—s — yun — —_xueyeyd puvy peuuojur = pe jepul T7-O1ID I sm = OID TU/PT 87/LTZ 
= sjuowsey = yun =z squU- pe yepul T7-O1D I sm = OID CU/PT 87/LTZ 
TT — yun a jedresvjour = pe Japul 77-01D I sm 6 OID CUFT SULT 
in 5 T ma [ Jedreovjout = pe Japul TT-OID I sm = OID TU/PT 87/LTZ 
sa aa u = [yedreovjour = pe = japul TC7-OID I sm = OID TU/PT 8U/LT 
- = ‘i — ¢ [edreoejour = pe = japur T7-O1D I sm = OID CU/PT 8U/LT 
ra —. u sae Zyedrovjour = pe Jopul 7T7T-OID I sm = OID CUFT 87/LT 
ra sjuowsely — [erxe PEE sBIqsHeA =6pe Jepul TC-OID I sm = OID CUFT SULT 
= qwousey ajApuoo =—-yun 7 BIqu. = pe jopul dg-119 dq] S08 IID vT/CT SULT 
re suousey = yun cag squU pe Jepul i-WO I 08-09 ~=«LID PT/TT 8U/LTZ 
a —  jferxe sas BIQOH9A S19BJOY} = pe epul I-1ID I 08-09 ~=—s«IID PT/CT SULT 
ia — yun =a ouog peynuepun = =pe ypu! iD I 08-09 ~=—s«dIID PT/TT 8T/LT 
a = quo xT ouog peynuspun = pe yepul ELIS qy “0s IID PTT 87/LZ 
oa suousey = yun o eindess = pe japul Sag YC 3. qu S08 IID PT/CT 87/LT 
a sjuowisely = ere = wunioeS = pe jopul 19-119 Be s-08 IID PT/TT 8U/LT 
7 woursey = yun 51 sqU. pe Jepul 9-119 Il s-08 IID PT/TT 8U/LT 
ag — erxe = sBIQoHoA = pe Jopul 9-119 a S08 19 PT/CT 8U/LTZ 
— = «ee — WndseS = pe Jepul 9-119 I] S08 IID bT/CT 8U/LT 
JUDWUITI JO UOILOg apis operoie WUDWII] A asy xas ‘ou WeD ‘ou (wd) uuy yeung ‘ou 
jequeq Plal4 J9Aa"7] qwoow ‘AIpU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XI(NHddV 


99 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


sjUsUIsely yun — auog poyouepiun Ant yopul (Gn 1 @| udaJOS 07-0 gd TV IO TLE R4JO L 
— JT Areqyrxew ZI Ant = yapur El-8D —-aad9s 08-09 8) Tppur{E gloL 

_ TY Aseqyrxew IT Ant  japur €1-8D  uaasos 08-09 8) ~@ppurige  gsoL 

= JT Areyyrxeur TWP Ant joput €1-89 waados 08-09 8) ~Tpuelge  gsoOL 

— TY Aseyyrxeu IWp Anf  jopur €1-BD uaeI0s 08-09 80 @ppurig  gsOL 

_ JT Je[nqipuew Tp Ant yopur €1-8D — uaesos 08-09 8) ~@WPpuUrIE BIOL 

= Uo Areyyixeu Op Ant jeput €1-8D —waad0s 08-09 80 TppurlE gsoL 

— Yo Areqyrxew Tp Ant = japut E1-8D Usados 08-09 8) TpPpurTE BIOL 

= JT Areqyrxeut TWP «Ant = jepur €1-80 —waedos 08-09 8) @PpurlEe  gsozL 

= JT Areqirxew Op anf jepur €1-8D ueeros 08-09 8) ~TppuriE gloL 

a JT Areqprxeur 1p Ant = yopur €1-8D — uaados 08-09 8) ~tpurlEe sol 

= J Je[nqipuew IWp Anf  jepur €1-8D — uaes0s 08-09 8) ~Tppurige BIOL 

— J Jepnqrpuew Op anf jepur €1-8D —-uaads0s 08-09 8) TpPpureIE  gs1OL 

= J Jenqipuew Hp anf yaepur E1-8D avers 08-09 8) ~TrPpurTE gIoL 
sjUsWIsey yun —_— 9a/qipuru Ant yopul €1-SO udaJIOS O8-09 8D (O'4 pure I€ 8 JO L 
sUsWIde Ly yun _ eT Txeul Ant Jopul €I-8O udd1OS O8-09 8D Tp pue [Ee 810 L 
sUsWseLy yun —_ euog polynuoprun pe Jopul O1-6d uso19S S-O8 6d BE JO 6E pl 109 
sJUsWIdeLy yun —_ euog pelynueprun pe yopul 6-6d udo10S O8-09 6d SE 10 6E pl 109 
sjuawseyy = yun = auog paynueprun = =pe —-japur L-6d I 09-0r 64 8£196E F1109 
SUsWIseLy yun —_ euog pelynueprun pe yopul 9-6d uosoJOS Ov-07 6d BE JO 6E pl jog 
suowsey = yun a auog paynuepun = pe japul $-6d € Ob-0Z 6d 8e106E pI 409 
sjuousey = yun i auog peynueprun = pe —-japul b-6d Z Obv-0Z 6d 8Et0G6E pI 109 
sjusuisey = yun == auog payiueplun = pe = japul €-6d I Obr-07 6d 8E406E pI 409 
SJUSWIdey yun —_ ouog poynuoprun pe yopul 7-6d Ud9I9S 07-0 6d BE 10 6E pl 109 
sUsWISey yerxe —_ jetuess pe yopul 47-6d udd1OS 07-0 6d RE IO 6E pl 10 9 
= JT Areqqrxew IN pe jepur ®7-6 = uaat9s 07-0 6G 8£106€ pI 4109 

a Y= Je[nqipuew €W pe jepul = PI 08-09 IID vz A8Z/LZ 

oa Y= Jelnqrpueu TN pes apur as 4 08-09 IID v7 A8Z/LZ 

aos UY  sepnqrpuew IN pe jeput = (6 08-09 IID tv A8Z/LZ 

== J Je[nNqipuew ZN pes Jeput 99-119 ol S08 IID 2/7 V8Z/LZ 

oe J Je[nqipuew IN pes depur 99-119 oll S08 11D 22 V8Z/LZ 

oo JT Jejnqipuew td pe jepur 99-119 ol S-08 IID vz V8Z/LZ 

a J Je[nqipuew €d pe  yepul 99-119 ol S08 IID vz V8Z/LZ 

= J Je[nqipuew D> pe repur 99-119 ol S-08 IID bz V8Z/L7 

= J Je[nqrpuew ZI «pes depur 99-119 ol 08 LID Up V8Z/LZ 

Ha UY = sejnqrpuew ZN «pe sdopur 99-119 ol 08 LID ‘277 V8Z/LZ 

= UY = Je[nqrpuew IN pe yepur 99-119 oll S-08 IID v7 V8Z/LZ 

=: A senqrpuews td pe jepul 99-119 ol S08 HD rz V8Z/LZ 

ae YU  Jepnqipuew D pe rapur 99-119 oll S08 11D cer V82L7 

SJUSUWILWUOD JUSUIZTO JO UOTLIOg apis opeore qUSWI[q ay xaS ‘ou “yWeD ‘Ou (Wd) nud jeung ‘ou 
[eqeq Play [PAN] d100 “AIPUT 
(panuljuo)) 
| XIGNHddV 


100 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


840 L 
ae 
BIOL 
84OL 
84OL 
84IOL 
8407 
840L 
84OZL 
BIOL 
84OL 
8 JO L 
8JOL 
840 / 
84072 
8IOL 
BIOL 
84OZL 
BIOL 
BIOL 
BIOL 
BIOL 
840L 
84OL 
840 7L 
84072 
8402 
BIOL 
84OL 


‘ou 


“AIpU] 


= wuNTYyst yun “= ayeurmouut =—peJepul O0S-O1D XZ S08 O1OD -_ 
-- sJUsW3eAy yun _ aieulmouul = pe s=»apul 3E1-O1D I S08 OID “= 
— sUsWIseLy yun — smiowny pe japul e8r-O1D AZ S08 OID _ 
mai sjuousely yun =< qu pe sJopul qL-6d I 09-0P 6d yg 
a sjuswisely = [RIXe _— jeuvio pe  jepul q9-6H _uaad90s Or-0Z 6H -— 
say — yun a qu anf yapur L-69 € 09 69 = 
= SJUDWISeIy yun == au0g paynueprun §=anf = japul 71-69 pexiw s-09 69 — 
a sjuswsey = yun — auo0g paynuoprun §=anf  japul 6-69 8 s-09 69 _— 
— s]UusWIseLy yun — Inway anf = japur 6-69 rd 09-0P 69 - 
= sishydeip = yun = eiqn = Ant japul Z€-11D a 0-0r =«ID — 
_- euad —s[RIXe — aeiqauaA = Anf  japul IS-8G use9s §=6ol-08 8d =7P4Olg 
— sjuowsey = yun auo0g paynueprun §=anf = japul 91-8q _uaalds 09-0r 8d ~PrsOlg 
= S}UIWISeIy yun —_ qu. anf jopur €-84  udaeal0s Or-0Z 84s TPIOIE 
— sjuowiseyy = yun _ qu anf = jopul I-84  uaelos 07-0 84 TPp4IOIE 
-- quowi3eyy = yun _ qu) anf = japu 8-84 uaelos S-O8 Si TPIOIE 
— WUIWIse yun — qu) anf japur L-84 usados 08-09 84 ~pIOlE 
— saskydidea ajqissod = yun — auo0g paynueprun §=anf  japut Z1-8qQ  usel9s Or-0Z sd i0l 
; _ sjusWIseLy yun — au0g paynueprun §=anf  japul pI-8D uealos 08-09 8) ~WdiOlE 
= — — erxe as prousyds anf  japur q87-8d ae oO0OI-08 8d ZprwOlE 
pas — yun = squ anf = jepur 71-80 =: U9eT9S 08-09 8) cHIOle 
aA =, (Pike eg jendios0 = Anf —japut &87-8d0 de 001-08 8d Tp IOlE 
aa See, lu = jesodwiay  Anf = Japul 97-80 GI OOI-08 8d Z4OlE 
— snoned q Te jesoduiay anf = Japur 97-8 dl 001-08 8d tr IOle 
L-8d YUM poyoyeul ajXpuos —yRixe = jeudis90 anf japur 17-8 usedos 08-09 8d tp sole 
— J1qJO Ya] Jouedns ~—serxe — jewoy anf jopul 8-8q  uedlds Ot-0Z 8d r4ol¢g 
— sJusWsely =—-FRTXe — jerueso «Ant = jopul QS7-8q =: uees0s 08-09 8d «TP 4IOlE 
= suowsey = yun aa auog paynueprun =Anf  japut 8¢-8d det 001-08 8d «=tpIOlE 
17-8 YM poysyeul Jeyiseq = RIXe or feudios0 = Anf = japur L-8Q = used9s OF-07 8d tH IOle 
— sjusuisely =—-peixe — aeiqouaA = Anf jopul 61-80  uaasos 08-09 8d «Zp 4OlE 
— sassaooi1d = yeixe -— aviqoueaA anf japul II-8Q ueeasos Or-0Z sd iol 
— eiqu9d sexe -- aeiqaueA anf japul I1-8qQ users Ot-07 sa i01 
— sjuowiselyy = yun = squ) anf japul 7-8  uaalos 08-09 8d TP 4aOlE 
= syuowiseyy = yun —_ squ anf japur S1-8Q — uaalds 0-0r 868d) TH OTE 
_— sJusuIsely =—-[RIxe — aeiqaueA §=6Anf = japul Z-8D - UaeINS 08-09 8> Wile 
—<— ee u or wintyost Ant — yapul S-8Q usel9s OF-07 80 TPO lt 
— — Y — snoueseo = Anf = yapul R7-8D-—s«UaaUds 08-09 8D ZpIolg 
— snonad aT — jesodwiay =anf = japut 9-gq usados Or-02 Sd tr 4olg 
— snoned Y _- jesodway = Ant = japur 9-8q _-uaalds Ot-07 Sq ss TP Ole 
— SUsUIBeIY ~—-RIXe — yeruvso anf japul €1-8q  usalos Ot-07 Sq ss TP Oleg 
S}USWIWIOD 1UILII]a JO UOTIOg apis aprose yoWI]q ay xas ‘ou "WD ‘ou (uid) Nita) yeung 
equa Pjat4 [PAa"] woo;w 
(panuluo,)) 
| XIQGNHddV 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 101 


2002 


— = | = eindeos = pe = japur 1€-019 az SO" "Old = _ 
— — 7 — ploydeos pe  jopul 9-64 u9aIOS S08 64 -- — 
— = al = snowy = pes Japul S-6a S-08 6 = — 
— sUsUIseLy yun — 9uog palymuaprun pe  jopul L-64 = uses0s OOI-08 64 _ — 
= = al 3 ¢yediovjour pe japul L-6A u92aI9S ~~ QO I-08 64 ae — 
— WUIWIde IY yun —_ qu anf = jopur 1-69 usal90s O7-Ol 69 — — 
a sun = qu Ant japur 9-69 I s09  =69 — — 
aaa sjuowiseyy = yun aa ayeurmiouur = pe Japur O€-6H €7 08-09 6H = _ 
— yo}OU oeIOs J9}e9I3 YUM yun — aye ulWOUUT pe jopur ¢9CS/S7-01D € S—O8 O1O — — 
= winjngejese = yun a ayeurmouur = pe Japul 67-6H (HE 08-09 += 6H = a 
pasnj = s(eixe == QIQOUAA [BOIAIOD = p= JOPUT r1-01D 8 S09 O1D = a 
= sjuowseyy = yun a auog paynuapiun = pe japur 19-119 1{I s-08 11D a = 
— s}UsWISeIy yun —_ ouog paymuspiun pe jopul 7-69 = uaa10S SMO 69 — — 
— sUsUsely yun — uog paynuepiun pe jopur 6£-6H  usel0s 08-09 6H —_— — 
aa sjuowsey = yun ae auog paynueprun = pe Japul Vp € s-og «Id = = 
— sjusWwsey yun — 9uo0g palymuepriun pe  jopur 9-I14  uselos 08-09 HA — — 
— sJUsWIseLy yun — 9uog palyjnuepiun pe  jopul Z-I1lqd - uses9s Ov-07 Ha — — 
= sjuowseyy = yun am auog paynuaprun = pe —yepur I'pz-O1d S08 Old — = 
— sjoWwsey yun — 9uog peynuepiun pe jopul I-64  usel0s 64 — — 
— sUsWseLy yun — ouog polyjnuspiun pe jopur [1-84  ueos0s 07-0 8H — — 
—_ sJUsWIs ey yun — auog palynuspiun pe jopur 09-8q udselos 08-09 8d — — 
— sUsUIseIy yun — ouog paljjuepiun pe  jopul 8S/p-O1D ueel10s S08 O1O — — 
= juowsey = yun a auog peynueprun pe jopul 9-019 p 07-0 ~3=s—«OID = = 
=F quowsey = yun = auog paynuepun pe —japul 79-84 (é 08-09 8a = = 
= sjusuisey aj{puod =. yun — muwej pe wpur p'9OS/P'7-O1D € S-08 OID = — 
= reisiq = yun = euyn = pe apur = Y9S/Z-O1D HE s-08 . (Ole a ee 
= jeisip = yun = snipes pe yepul pg'9¢/9'7-01D € s-08 OID ra = 
— sjuswisely = [eTxe — evIqowiaA = pe-—s*NOPUT €-Old  uselos 07-0 Old _ —_ 
poursoyeo sUsWIseIy yun —_ 9uog peynusprun pe jopul €-OI4  Uusel0s 07-0 Old — _— 
— sUsWIse dy yun — 9u0g polyjuepiun pe jopul 08-84 ¢ S—O0I 84 —_— — 
— sUsWse Ly yun —_— ouog palynuepiun pe japul p-8d udel0s Or-0Z 8d — _ 
=> sjuowsey = yun — auog paynueprun = =pe pul 19°9¢/9'Z-01D € s-08 O10 ss SS 
= sjuewseyy = yun = snipes pe = yapur q8r-010 AZ s-08 O10 a oe 
a juousey = yun = eyjerd =pe = Jopul 6£-8d 96 001-08 8d = — 
ais = UY Areyyrxeu €N pe epur Z7S-019 ZZ s-08 O10 a = 
= aa aU Areypexeus I] pe epur 1S-O19 AZ s-08 O10 = = 
= 7 YU  Jepnqrpuews €d pe epur 9S1-O1D ql S-08 OID = = 
= siskydeip u — sniouny = pes yapul 6S-8G uees9s = QOI-08_~—s8' = a) 
= = al ae sniper pe yepul h-6d Z Or-0t 6d = 5) 
SJUSWIWIOD JUDUIZI9 JO UOTOd apis operoie qUOW9[q ay xaos ‘OU "WROD ‘ou (WI9) wupy jeunqg ‘ou 
Jeiusq Plat [oAgT d1OOW “AIpU] 
(panuljuo)) 
| XIGNHddV 


102 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


a sjuouseyy = yun = squ pe yepul €'P-019 Z 09 OID = — 


_ sjuswide.y yun —_ squ pe yopul PSL-84H usgoJOS OOI|-08 84 _ — 
— sjuowmiseyy = yun = squU pe PUI 99°9S/9'7Z-O1D € SOs Old — — 
— sjuswisey = yun = squ pes jopul PZZ-019 1 S08 O10 —_ _~ 
= sjuouiseyy = yun ee squ pe jopul ®8I-010 aI S08 O10 — — 
— suouseyy = yun = squ pes jopul IEI-O1D I S08 O10 _ _ 
= sjuouiseyy = yun = squ pes jopul ZI-O1D € 08-09 O10 — — 
—- quowsey = yun = qu pes jepur 1'S-O1D € Or-0Z =D — — 
suousey = yun _ un JO snipes pe —japul 4S-0I4 qz Or-0zZ = OOlAd — _ 
_ xoid yun —_— INU} pe yopul OI-8H usaJOS S-OR 84 —_— —_— 
_ S]USWISeIy yun _ auo0g peljQuepiun pe yopul 7-84 usdaJOS 07-0 84 _ —_ 
— ~— - opin aaa vuln JO snipes = pe Japut ZPr-O1D Z 0-0r O19 — —_ 
~— — yun — qu pes japur ZPr-O1D Z 0-0r = O1D _— — 
[1-019 ‘8-019 
‘y'Z-01D ‘19-019 
‘1 8Z-O1D ‘b-6I ‘S-61 — = jerxe ad jeioued = pe sjapul TPr-O1D Z 09-0r OID — — 
= — JT Areqyrxew IWp Anf  jopur —  usalos S08 IID — — 
Z'P-O1D ‘II-O1D 
‘y'7-019 ‘19-019 
‘1'8Z-O1D ‘b-61 ‘S-61 sjuswi3ey = yun — auog paynuepiun = pe Japul 8-019 qu 09-0r 01D — _— 
= sjuousey = yun = auog payuaplun = =pe =: Japul L-01D qu Or-0z ~=OlD — _ 
= — Y= e[nqrpuew ZI «= pes yepur — a] S08 Old — _— 
_— —_ UY Jeynqgipueul IWP Ant yopul —_ usa19OS SM O19 —_ —_ 
_ — Y= e[nqipueuw D> pe. jepur — uy S08 Old — _ 
a os JY Areyrxeu IWP Ant jepur —  ugaalds Or-07 ~—s«OOT — — 
— Ajuo uMOI9 BI Jeynqgipueul (al Ant yopul — ugaIOS 07-0 OIA _ _ 
UMOIS SNOLIPS —_— yun Jeynqipueul Tejoul pe yopul _ usoJOS S-O8 Il4 _ —_ 
— a JT Je[nqipuew ZN Ope_syopul —  uaalos Or-0z ~=—sCOOID _ — 
= — J Je[nqipuew ZN SOpe-~sdopur _ Ol S08 Old — — 
a can J Je[nqipuew I] pe iepur — 4 S08 Old — _— 
= — J Je[nqipuew TWP Ant = yaput — uaalos 09-O0r 6l — — 
= suoWIseyy = RIXxe oe ajqipueul = pes yopul LI-Old 6 08-09 ~—s«éOO — —_ 
aos snuies 3uIpusose yo] = fRIXe — gjqipueu pe apul -99°9C/9'7Z-O1D € S08 O10 _ —_ 
— sususeyy yerxe —_ @PIQIUIA IequIN] pe yopul E€l-O1D ‘ S-09 OID — — 
=~ suowsey = yun —_ auog paynuepiun = pe =: apul qb-01D qz 0-0r O10 _ — 
es suouisey = yun es auog paynueprun pe = apul 7£-6H SZ 08-09 ~=s« 6H — — 
= sjuowisey = yun — auog paynueprun = =pe = apul S1-01D 6 09 O19 — —_ 
see sjuewsey = yun _ auog paynuepiun = pe japul ¢7-01D I 0-0r 01D — — 
i = 1 ee eindeos = pe = japul 8€S-01D Z S08 O10 —_ — 
a sjuowisey = yun _ auog paynuapiun = pe = Japul 1€-019 az 08 oO1o — _ 
SJUDUILUO-) JUsWI9]O jo uolllodg apts opeae WoW] asy xas ‘ou ‘wy ‘Ou (uid) wuyp) yeung ‘ou 
[ejueqd Plet4 J9Aa7] Woow AIpu] 
(panuluo,) ) 
| XIGNHddV 


103 


LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 


2002 


sUsWIseLy yun —_ auog paynuepiun = pe jopul OI-O1DO usados 09-0r O10 -_— _ 
SJUSUIBeIY yun — 9uog polynuaprun pe  joeputr pI-6) usel0s 08-09 60 -= — 
suousey = yun a auog paynuepun = pe japul Z1-60 L 09-0r 60 _— — 
sjuowsey = yun ae auog paynuaprun = pe yoput 9r-019 V4 S-08 O10 _ — 
suowsey = yun — auog paynuaprun = pe yaput 1€-6H b7 08-09 6H — —_ 
susWsey yun —_ 9uog polynueprun pe  jopul I-6H  u9019s 07-0 6H —— -- 
SUSWIBeLYy yun — auog paynuepiun pe japul €-64 usel0s 09-0r 64 — —_ 
sjuowisey = yun = auog paynuepiun = pe Japul 61-84 p S001 84 a2 = 
syuauiseyy = yun ae auog paynuaprun = pe japul 9L-84 I s-OOl 84 sos = 
sjuowisey = yun = auog payiuepun = pe Japul L7-8d ade O0l-ae 9 8a a == 
sUsWIs RLY yun — ouog palymuopiun pe jopul PS-OID  usa10s S—-08 O1lO — —_~ 
sjuowisey = yun za auog paynuapun = pe Japul €S-O1D Z S08 Old == = 
sjuouisey = yun = auog paynuepun = pe jepur 7-019 1 S-08 OID = = 
juouisey = yun a auog poynueprun = pe —-japul Sb-8d Ol OOI-08 8a = a 
Ajuo j001 yun yun JOO1 YJOO} pe jopul 7-64 «= UN0.19S 09-Or 64 — — 
siskydeip = yun ay euyn = pe yapur -Y9°9C/9'7-O1D € S-08 OID == = 
(Z) swouseyy = yun = squ pe jepur P9-6H —uaal0s Op-0Z 6H = = 
ajApuod = yun = eiqn = pe yepul_39°9C/9'Z-O1D € S08 OID = = 
sjusUIseAy = [PTX = avIGAUAA d19vIOY] pk PUI J9°9S/9'7-O1D € S-08 OID 5 =. 
sjuouiseyy = yun = auog paynuaprun = pe yapul 79-019 p s-09 OID = me 
— erxe aes AVIQIWAA D19eJOY] = pw JOPUT 79-019 p s-09 OID = = 
root eet [110 = xuvjeyd pury [eisip pe jepul I'P7-01D PI Or-0z 01D = : 
Poul) aaa xuvyeyd pury eisip pe —japut 1'®Z-01D e] Or-0z 01D = i 
sjuswsey yun —_ ouo0g pelnuspiun pe jopul p-6D = useJ9s 09-0” 69 —_ — 
— —-jerxe ea jesoduia} = pe joput p-6D ueel9s 09-0rp 69 = = 
syuowisely = eTXe oe jesoduia} «= pe Japul 7S-01D € 09-0r OID == a 
snoned = yerxe — je1odwia} += pe = japul ®77-O1 eZ S-08 Old — _ 
jusWIsely yun — epindeos pe jopul 197-019 a) Or-0Z ~=séOOD —_ — 
juowsey = yun = eindeos = pe = yopur S-01D € 07-0 36: OID — = 
stskydeip u a viqn = pes Japul 92-019 p Or-0z =O 7 77 
juowseyy u os eindeos = pe = yopur q8-6H I 08-09 ~=s 6H - — 
wowlsely u se eindvos = pe = yapul q€S-019 c 09 (O10 = =r 
= u ae qu pe jepur YZ-01D UI sm OID = + 
Pe aectul! = saduejeyd = =pe jepul 17-019 I sm OID ae = 
= un = squ pe japur 12-019 I i) £9) SS = 
= eau = auog paynuapun = pe —-Japut LS/E-OID ~— used9s S-08 OID a = 
= un = squ pe japur LS/E-O1D ears S08 OID = a 
u a quisiy = pe yapul PES-O1D Z S08 O10 = — 
ogee MeL IY = squ pe japur eES-O1D Z S08 O10 oS oe 
S]USUIWIOD JUDUII]9 JO UOTIOg apis aprole quoWI]q ay xas ‘ou “yey ‘Ou (WId) up jeung ‘ou 
jequaq PIA [aaa] a00\N “AIPU] 
(panuluo,)) 
| XI(NHddV 


104 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 


D Atpul payyes 

Ajjeursuo pur ‘(65 wun) 
IA dL Ul UONRALSX2 6/61 
UI pUNOJ YOO} ‘WOM AJOA 


eiqn Aqissod 


S]UQWIWOD 


quow3seyy = yun — quo0g payiuepiun = =pe  japul 
jusWseLy yun — qu pe”s»jopul 
— yun ye[nqipuew ZWP Anf = yepur 
sjusuisely =—-eTxe — aeIqoueA = pe_~—s*apul 
sjuowiseyy = [eIxe — aeIqoueA = pe-—s:»jopul 
yuowsey =—-RIXe — QeIQOHeA = pe-~—s«*NOPUI 
sjususely = [RTXe — QVIQdUeA = pe-—s«*NOPUT 
sjuowsey = yun _ guog paynueprun = pe japul 
auoqg suo] = yun — auog palyueptun = pe japul 
suswsely = yun oa eIqd) = pe-—s-»apul 
sjuowsey = yun _ auo0g paynueptun = =pe yapul 
sjuowisey = yun a 9uog paljnuoprun = pe  apul 
sjuowisey = =yun =e auog polyueprun = pe japur 
sjuowisey = yun — Quog paljueprun pe japul 
sjuowiseyy = yun — auog palyueprun = pe japul 
sjuowsey = = yun — auo0g paljuepiun pe jopul 
sjuowsey = yun — auog paljuapiun = =pe = japul 
sjuawsey = yun -— auog palynueprun = pe japul 
sjuowsey yun — auog paljqueprun pe japul 
sjuowisey = yun — auog peynuepiun pe jopul 
sjuowsey yun os auo0g paljueprun pe  japul 
sjuowisey = =yun ouo0g palynueprun = pe  jopul 
sjuswisey = =yun — auog peynuspiun = pe jopul 
sjuowisey = =yun — auo0g paljnueprun = pe japul 
sjuewsey = yun — quog palynueprun pe japul 
sjuowisey = =yun _- auo0g palyynuopiun = pe  japul 
sjuowisey = yun — auo0g paynueprun pe japul 
sjuowisey = = yun ~- auo0g palynuepiun = pe japul 
sjuowsey = yun _ auo0g palyynuepiun = pe japul 
sjuswisey = yun — auog paynuapiun = pe jopul 
sjuowiseyy = =§=yun — ouo0g paynuapiun = =pe--japul 
sjuowisey = yun -- auog palyynuapiun = pe japul 
sjuowisey = =yun — auog paynuepiun = pe japul 
sjuowsey = yun — Quog paljnuepiun = =pe =: japul 
sjuowisey = yun a auog palyjnuepiun = =pe =: japul 
sjuowsey = yun -— Quo0g paynueprun = =pe =: japul 
JUDAS JO UOTLOg apis aproe JUSWII]q aay = xas 
jejuaq 
(panuluo, ) 
| XIQ(NHddV 


9S-OIA 


8C-6H 


®C7-6H 


€c-8d 


OI-O1D 


¥C-6H 
01-6) 
8£-6H 
8-6H 
L-6H 
9-6H 
b-8h 
9-64 
b-64 
1-64 
c8°84 
SL-84 


4¢9-84 


€S-8H 
cS-8a 


&¢S-84 


Iv-84 
8¢-84 
L¢-84 
81-84 
91-84 
9P-8d 
bp-8d 
Or-8d 
pI-8d 


81-010 
$1-OlO 
tl-O1O 


‘ou WD 


eu 
I 
I7 


81 
u9eJ9s 


UgdIOS 


udeJ9s 
ugaJ9S 
udeI9S 
udeJ9S 
udaJ9s 
ugaJ0s 

L 
udeJ9s 
ug9I9S 

I 
ug0J9S 
udaI9S 

v 

I 
udaJ9S 

c 
u90J9S 
udaJ9S 


udel9s 
91 

qI 

I 


‘ou 


Piet 


Ov-07 
OP-07 


O8-0L 
Or-07 
08-09 
08-09 
08-09 
SM209-0b 
08-09 
09-O0F 
08-09 
08-09 
09-0P 
Or-07 
Or—-07 
S—08 
08-09 
07-0 
S—00 
001-08 
08-09 
08-09 


(uid) 
[Pao] 


I 


6H 
6H 


Old 


0 


ID 


uy 


eung ou 
‘AIpU] 


Anthropological papere of the 
American Museum of Natural 
History. 

American Museum of Natural 


St. Catherines Island, Georgia, has been the focus of | 
a century, beginning with excavation of mortuary lox 
Clarence Bloomfield Moore. Moore’s pioneering resea 
prehistoric inhabitants of the region, including what ce, _. .., y 

tal remains. Following up on this work, Larsenandhis 5,4 yed on: @8-09-@2 


I, one of seven burial mounds first described by Moore ee = 
a iia 
004535 _aken by Larsen, 


Bioarchaeology of the Late Prehistoric Guale describ 200 | 
which confirmed Moore’s written comments that very few remains were removed from the site. 
Rather, skeletal remains were left in close proximity to their original location of discovery. 
Documentation of the remains by Larsen and his research team permitted the identification of buri- 
als encountered by Moore. Followup laboratory investigation involved identifying and conjoining 
thousands of skeletal and dental elements, matching many of the skeletons described by Moore. The 
present investigation resulted in the identification of the partial skeletons of 26 of Moore’s 50 burials. 


The South End Mound I skeletal series is the only late prehistoric sample from St. Catherines Island. 
The study of the remains allows key temporal comparisons with earlier populations (Johns Mound 
and various early prehistoric skeletons described previously in the Anthropology of St. Catherines 
[sland series of monographs) and with later populations (Mission Santa Catalina de Guale). Analysis 
of animal remains and stable isotope ratios of carbon and nitrogen revealed that this late prehistoric 
population consumed a variety of terrestrial and marine resources, but with a significant amount 
of maize included in the diet. High frequency of dental caries is consistent with a diet high in plant 
carbohydrates. Presence of a high frequency of skeletal infections in comparison with skeletons 
from earlier sites suggests that the health of late prehistoric populations living on St. Catherines 
Island declined. At least some of the infections documented in the South End Mound I 
skeletons were likely caused by treponemal disease (nonvenereal syphilis). The general pattern of 
health reconstructed from this series is remarkably consistent with other late prehistoric samples 
from the Georgia coast in particular and the American Eastern Woodlands in general. The change in 
health likely reflects the shift from a lifeway based exclusively on hunting, gathering, and fishing to 
a lifeway that included maize. This shift in dietary focus in later prehistory saw a decline in some 
aspects of nutrition and populations became more sedentary, creating conditions that reduced health. 


This study is a continuation of Larsen’s quarter century of bioarchaeological research on native 
populations on the southeastern U.S. Atlantic coast. The analysis underscores the utility of 
reexcavation and reanalysis of sites thought to have been depleted of significant data. Contrary 
to that assumption, a wealth of information from the South End Mound I site reveals key aspects of 
biocultural adaptation in this fascinating region of North America. 


Clark Spencer Larsen is a biological anthropologist with interests in the history of the human 
condition. Most of his research is the study of human remains from archaeological settings through- 
out North America and Europe. He currently codirects the Global History of Health Project, an inter- 
national research program involved in the reconstruction and interpretation of human health based 
on the study of ancient skeletons from around the globe. He is the author or editor of more than 20 
books and monographs, including Bioarchaeology: Interpreting Behavior from the Human Skeleton 
and Skeletons in Our Closet: Revealing Our Past through Bioarchaeology. He is the past president 
of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists and is the present Editor-in-Chief of the 
American Journal of Physical Anthropology. He chairs the Department of Anthropology at Ohio 
State University where he is the Distinguished Professor of Social and Behavioral Sciences. 


Cover: Frontispiece from C.B. Moore’s Certain Aboriginal Mounds of the Georgia Coast showing 
an urn burial from South End Mound I.
Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Bioarchaeology of the late prehistoric Guale : South End Mound I, St. Catherines Island, Georgia"

See other formats
