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.