(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

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

Bioarchaeology of the Late Prehistoric Guale 
if**" 1 SOUTH END MOUN D I, 



. A27 
v. 84 
2002 



ST. CATHERINES ISLAND, 
GEORGIA 




Clark Spencer Larsen 

American Museum of Natural History, Anthropological Papers, Number 84 



BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 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 5 

Introduction 5 

Acknowledgments 6 

The Setting 7 

Previous Work at South End Mound I 8 

Later Excavations and Bioarchaeological Study 9 

Methods of Analysis 12 

Individual Identification 12 

Age Estimation and Sex Determination 13 

Pathology Identification and Health 14 

Skeletal and Dental Measurement 14 

Dietary Reconstruction and Nutritional Inference: Food Remains and Stable Iso- 
topes 15 

The South End Mound I Individuals 16 

Artifacts. David Hurst Thomas And Jessica McNeil 38 

Ceramic Artifacts 38 

Shell Artifacts: Whelk Beads 38 

Shell Artifacts: Modified Whelks 40 

Lithic Artifacts 40 

Miscellaneous Artifacts 41 

Resource Utilization and Dietary Reconstruction. Elizabeth J. Reitz. Clark Spen- 
cer Larsen, and Margaret J. Schoeninger 41 

Zooarchaeology 41 

Stable Isotopes 44 

Patterns of Community Health: Pathology 46 

Periosteal Reactions 46 

Cribra Orbitalia and Porotic Hyperostosis 48 

Dental Caries 50 

Community Health in Transition: Prehistoric and Historic Guale from St. Cath- 
erines Island 51 

Dental and Skeletal Size and Morphology 54 

Dental 54 

Skeletal 55 

Conclusions 61 

Notes 66 

References 66 

Appendix I. South End Mound I Human Remains 70 

TABLES 

1. Long Bone Maximum Lengths. Juveniles 13 

2. South End Mound I Individual Summary 17 

3. Juvenile Dental Preservation IS 

4. Adult Dental Preservation 20 

5. Juvenile Skeletal Element Preservation 22 

6. Adult Skeletal Element Preservation 24 

7. Ceramics 39 

8. Whelk Beads 40 

9. Modified Whelk Artifacts 40 

10. Lithic Artifacts 41 

1 1. Species List of Fauna 42 



2 



2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 3 

12. Stable Isotope Ratios by Individual 42 

13. Skeletal Elements with Periosteal Reactions 44 

14. Dental Caries: Individual Adult Females 46 

15. Dental Caries: Individual Adult Males 46 

16. Dental Caries: Individual Juveniles and Unsexed Adults 47 

17. Dental Caries: Summary Frequency by Tooth Type 47 

18. Periosteal Reactions and Dental Caries: Individual Summary 48 

19. St. Catherines Island Guale: Prehistoric and Historic Dental Caries and Peri- 

osteal Reactions 50 

20. Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics. Adult Females 52 

21. Permanent Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics. Adult Males 54 

22. Permanent Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics, Total Sample 56 

23. Deciduous Tooth Size: Individual and Summary Statistics 58 

24. Postcranial Measurements: Individual and Summary Statistics. Adult Females 

59 

25. Postcranial Measurements: Individual and Summary Statistics, Adult Males 60 

26. Adult Stature Estimates 61 

27. Adult Femur Midshaft Index and Total Subperiosteal Area 62 

FIGURES 

L. Location of South End Mound I (9Li3) on St. Catherines Island 8 

2. C.B. Moore's excavations of South End Mound I 10 

3. 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) 
excavation 11 

4. Excavation unit B8 showing extent of Moore's excavation 12 

5. Map showing locations of bones and teeth recovered in the 1991-1993 exca- 

vation of South End Mound I 13 

6. Percent of juveniles represented by tooth types 19 

7. Percent of adults represented by tooth types 21 

8. Percent of juveniles represented by midline axial skeletal elements, upper body 

elements, and lower body elements 26 

9. Percent of adults represented by midline axial skeletal elements, upper body 

elements, and lower body elements 29 

10. Anterior and posterior views of proliferative periosteal reaction on proximal 

humerus diaphysis of individual 15 compared with nonpathological anatom- 
ical specimen 32 

11. Concentration of disturbed skeletal remains in excavation unit C10 33 

12. Overall and closeup of proliferative periosteal reaction on distal right ulna 

diaphysis from individual 16 compared with nonpathological anatomical 
specimen 34 

13a. Lateral view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of 
left tibia of individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical speci- 
men 36 

13b. Medial view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of 
left tibia of individual 28 compared with nonpathological anatomical speci- 
men 37 

14. Chipped stone artifacts from South End Mound I 42 

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 43 



4 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 

16. 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 
farmers 45 

17. 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 49 

18. Bar graph showing dental caries and tibial periosteal reaction frequencies from 

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

Guale 51 

19. 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 63 

20. Bar graph showing adult heights for Georgia coastal prehistoric farmers, South 

End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal mission 

farmers 64 

2 1 . Bar graph showing femoral midshaft index for Georgia coastal prehistoric farm- 

ers, South End Mound I, Georgia coastal mission farmers, and Florida coastal 

mission farmers 65 

22. 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 farmers 65 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 



5 



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 original 
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). 1 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., 
1977). 

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 NO. 84 



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 9Li3, 
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 
( 1 986) 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- 
der 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 Iai 

Florida Bioarchaeology Project and the .S7. 

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. Prank Y. Larkin 



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 
the Blizzard 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 Lai sen, Scott Legge, 
Elizabeth Moore. Anaslasia 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 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 



7 



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. 

THE 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 



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 et 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 w ith 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 is 
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 



Fig. I. Location of South End Mound I (9Li3) 
on St. Catherines Island. 9Li273 is South End 
Mound II. a St. Catherines Period mound (from 
Larsen and Thomas. P)Nd: liu. I ). 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



9 



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 



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 field work 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 II, 
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 



\ 

\ 

\ 

11 \ 



Extent of excavation 



35, 



30 1 §,21 



26 



ft 



28< 



AT 



20 



39* $38 632 « Q 
42 J 33 ' 29 23 Fa., b. 

f 27 



X^Mound outline 
\ 

\ 

\ 

i >i 8 



40 

34 *r25 
^ r»44 24 ^22 



V 3 




19^ $ ' 

fe 13 ^ ' 1o e ^ 

* / V6 

It '"' * 12 r ° D 

15* / o 
/4B <0 

/ 9 £ E 



5 Ca., b. 
4 1 



^-a37 




magnetic north 



5 ft. 15 



Fig. 2. C.B. Moore's excavations of South End Mound [; numbers indicate burials and letters in- 
dicate ceramic vessels (adapted from Moore, l 897; fig. 49; from Larsen and Thomas, 1 986: fig. 2). 



porated into this larger excavation, especially 
a short north-south trench located to the cast 
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 F10). In total, and including 
the aforementioned north south test trench, 
19 units and a single 1 01 X 2 m unit were 
excavated. Although the depth of the dis- 



turbed mound fill varied, the average depth 
of most units was about I 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 B<s 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 dig. 4). Sim- 
ilarly, the pit associated with Moore's exca- 
vation in the far southeastern corner of the 
site was clearl) displayed in the profile of 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



1 I 




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 






I • 




/'. ? 




' ; 

/; ; 


Undisturbed 




Mound Fill 


/.• * '• .• 








/' 




/; '. '. - 








✓ r v r v <r . '.- 


/ 




/ 


Moore's 


/. - r ■ 


• Excavation Pit • 


S ' \> ' \ > 





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 appeals 
rough, it is accurate. 

The mound fill was hand-troweled in ar- 
bitrary 20-cm levels and subsequently passed 
through '/n-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 f /r 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 I ). Bones and teeth were matched ac- 
cording to excavation unit, color, texture, and 
other physical characteristics. Given the large 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



13 




6 76 



6 5 5 5 J - 



15 » 




C.B. Moore's 
Burial 22 



10 



magnetic north 








2 


m. 


6 



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



Fig. 5. 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 1 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 




47.2 




Clavicle, right 




46.9 


103.0 


Ulna, left 




63.9 




Ulna, right 


100.2 


64.0 




Radius, left 




55.7 




Radius, right 


79.4 


55.9 




Humerus, left 


107.0 


66.8 




Humerus, right 




67.7 




Ilium, left 








Ilium, right 




37.3 





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). T his 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 identity 
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 lour modem 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; Schultz et al., 
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 is highly prevalent in pop- 
ulations who ate maize. Maize is a carbo- 
hydrate that is especially cariogenic (Larsen 
et al., 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 I 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, 
l wx2 >. From maximum lengths of adult fern- 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



15 



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 



isotopes of carbon ( 13 C and 12 C) and nitrogen 
( ,5 N and l4 N) 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 %c) as lower case Greek delta 
(8) 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). 

12 C/ 13 C ratios (5 13 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 

i or 

C 4 . The pathway is determined based on how 
efficiently carbon is extracted from atmo- 
spheric carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) and utilized by 
the plant during photosynthesis. As a rule, C 4 
plants discriminate less against the isotopical- 
ly heavier 13 C from the atmosphere. Thus. C 4 
plants, and the people consuming these plants, 
have higher (less negative) isotope ratios than 
do C 3 plants. For St. Catherines Island, the 
only major economically significant C 4 plant 
eaten by native populations was maize. 

Nitrogen isotopic variation, measured as 
ratios of 15 N/ I4 N (8 15 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 8 15 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, 2 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 
scries 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. lig. 6). In adults, the 
teeth die evenlj distributed across the differ- 
ent tooth types (table 4. lii:. 7). The skeleton 



2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 17 



TABLE 2 

South End Mound I Individual Summary 



Individual 


1V1UUIC 5» 








no. a 


hi i n 1 1 no 
UUIltu 11U- 


T Jnit nn 

\J 111 l 1 IU . 




Sex 


1 


22 


G10-G11 


adult 


2 


2 


? 


G9 


2 


indet 


3 


? 


G9 


8 


indet 


4 


? 


G9 


birth 


indet 


5 


32 


E8 


25 


6 


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 7 


indet 


10 


28 


F8 


6-9 mo 


indet 


11 


18 


E8 


birth— 3 mo 


indet 


12 


23 


H9 


40 + 


2 


13 


27 


G9-G11, H9 


1-3 


indet 


14 


38 


D9 


17-25 


6 


15 


45 


C10 


30+ 


6 


16 


46 


C10 


17-23 


2 


17 


47 


C10 


17-23 


6 


18 


49 


Cll 


40 + 


2 


19 


50 


Cll 


35-45 


2 


20 


29 


G9-G10 


1-3 


indet 


Z 1 


1 o 


TQ-TQ 
iy — j y 


adult 





22 


13 


J9 


adult 


2 


23 


44 


Fll 


5 


indet 


24 


34 


F10 


35 + 


2 


25 


41 


F10, G10-G11 


7-8 


indet 


26 


25 


G10 


1-3 


indet 


27 


24 


G10-G11 


38 + 


2 


28 


22 


G10-G11 


adult 


6 


29 


43 


Fll 


adult 


2 



Key: indet, sex indeterminate; mo, months. 

a Individuals 1^1 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 1 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 1 



Left Right Unsided Total b 



Tooth 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


Maxilla 


















dll 


5 


50 


2 


20 


— 


— 


5 


50 


dI2 


2 


20 


— 


— 


— 


— 


2 


20 


dC 


3 


30 


5 


50 






5 


50 


Ulvl 1 


c 

o 


ou 


4 


40 








fin 


U1V1Z, 


J 




4 








u 


fin 


[J 


4 


40 




10 






4 


40 


I? 


i. 




9 


90 






4 


4.0 


c 


9 




i 


1 






9 


90 




1 
1 


1 


i 
i 


1 






i 
i 


1 
1 w 


PA 






1 


1 
1 w 






i 
i 


1 


Ml 


4 


40 


2 


20 






4 


4.0 


M2 




10 




10 






j 


10 


M3 


















Mandible 


















dll 


4 


40 


1 


10 


— 


— 


3 


30 


dI2 


— 


— 


1 


10 


— 


— 


1 


10 


dC 


1 


10 


1 


10 


1 


10 


3 


30 


dMl 


4 


40 


3 


30 






5 


50 


dM2 


3 


30 


3 


30 






3 


30 


11 


1 


10 


1 


10 






2 


20 


12 






2 


20 






2 


20 


C 


1 


10 










1 


10 


P3 


1 


10 










1 


10 


P4 


















Ml 


2 


20 


3 


30 






3 


30 


M2 


1 


10 


2 


20 






2 


20 


M3 



















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

b 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 
inelude 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-2()s 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. 

[NDrvTDUAi 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 1 8 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 neark so) and 
the maxillary second deciduous molar is in 
its crypt and unerupted. Lengths of long 
bones are consistent with this age estimation 
(table I: 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 19 



Percent of Juveniles Represented by Each Maxillary Tooth Type 
(Estimates Based on the Identification of Ten Juveniles) 
100 | 

90 




di1 di2 dc dm1 dm2 11 12 C P3 P4 M1 M2 M3 



Tooth Type 



■ Right (%) BLeft(%) 



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

100 -i 



■a 90 
| 80 

S 70 




di1 di2 dc dm1 dm2 11 12 C P3 P4 M1 M2 M3 



Tooth Type 

■ Right (%) BLeft (%) SUnsided (%) 



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 1 



Tooth 


Left 


Right 


Unsided 


Total* 


N % 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


Maxilla 
















11 


7 43.8 


6 


37.5 








7 


43.8 


12 


5 31.3 


4 


25.0 


_ 


_ 


6 


37.5 


C 


6 37.5 


4 


25.0 


_ 


_ 


6 


37.5 


P3 


5 31.3 


5 


31.3 


_ 


_ 


7 


43.8 


P4 


5 31.3 


4 


25.0 


_ 


_ 


7 


43.8 


Ml 


6 37.5 


5 


31.3 


_ 


_ 


9 


56.3 


M2 


5 31.3 


4 


25.0 


— 


— 


5 


31.3 


M3 


3 18.8 


2 


12.5 






4 


25.0 


ivlclIlUllMC 
















11 


3 18.8 


5 


31.3 






6 


37.5 


12 


5 31.3 


4 


25.0 






5 


31.3 


C 


5 31.3 


3 


18.8 






6 


37.5 


P3 


6 37.5 


5 


31.3 






7 


43.8 


P4 


5 31.3 


5 


31.3 






7 


43.8 


Ml 


3 18.8 


3 


18.8 






6 


37.5 


M2 


4 25.0 


5 


31.3 






8 


50.0 


M3 


3 18.8 


6 


37.5 






7 


43.8 



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

b 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 lib frag- 
ments assigned to individuals 7 and X 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 1 1 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 1 I was 
interred with small shell beads and was 
found more than 80 cm below the surface. It 
is also possible that individual 1 1 is Moore's 
burial 21. However, Moore reported that the 
base of the pit associated w ith burial 21 e\ 
tended into a layer of oyster shells, which we 
did not observe in our excavation of individ- 
ual I I. 

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 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



21 




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

100 i 




Tooth Type 
■ Right (%) BLeft (%) I 



Fig. 7. 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 Totals 



Element 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


Cranium 














7 


70 


7 


70 
IK) 


Mandible 














6 


60 


6 


60 


Hyoid 






















Vertebrafe^ 






















(unidentifiable) 














3 


30 


3 


JU 


Cervical vertebra(e) 














2 


20 


9 

it 


ZU 


CI 






















C2 














1 


10 


] 


1 n 
1 u 


Thoracic vertebra(e) 






















Lumbar vertebra(e) 






















Sacrum 






















Rib(s) 










4 


40 






4 


4.0 


Sternum 






















Clavicle 


3 


30 


1 


10 


2 


20 






4 


40 


Scapula 


2 


20 


1 


10 


2 


20 






3 


30 


Humerus 




10 


3 


30 










3 


30 


Radius 


2 


20 


3 


30 


2 


20 






5 


50 


Ulna 


2 


20 


1 


10 


1 


10 






3 


30 


Carpal(s) 










l c 


10 








10 


Metacarpals 






















Hand nhalanpei O 






















Proximal hand 






















nhalanpef O 










1 


10 








10 


Intermediate hand 






















phalange(s) 










1 


10 








10 


Terminal hand 






















phalange(s) 






















Ilium 


1 


10 


2 


20 










2 


20 


Ischium 


2 


20 


1 


10 










2 


20 


Pubis 


1 


10 


1 


10 


1 


10 






2 


20 


Femur 


4 


40 


3 


30 










5 


50 


Patella 




10 














1 


10 


Tibia 


4 


40 


3 


30 


j 


10 






4 


40 


Fibula 


1 


10 


1 


10 


2 


20 


— 


— 


2 


20 


Calcaneus 


2 


20 














2 


20 


Cuboid 






















Intermediate 






















cuneiform 






















Lateral cuneiform 






1 


10 












10 


Medial cuneiform 






















Navicular 






















Talus 






1 


10 










1 


10 


Metatarsal(s) 






















Foot phalange(s) 






















a Includes postcranial elements that are part of associated individuals (N = 10 juveniles). 
b Total refers to the number of individuals represented by the element, regardless of side. 



c Unidentifiable carpal. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



23 



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- 



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 
(i.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 NO. 84 



TABLE 6 

Adult Skeletal Element Preservation' 







Left 




Right 


Unsided 




Axial 




Total" 


Element 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


N 


% 


Cranium 
















14 


87.5 


14 


87.5 


Mandible 


— 














8 


50.0 


8 


50.0 


Hyoid 


— 


— 












1 


6.3 


1 


6.3 


Vertebra(e) 






















(unidentifiable) 


— 














7 


43.8 


7 


43.8 


Cervical vertebra(e) 






— 


— 








4 


25.0 


4 


25.0 


CI 
















5 


18.8 


3 


18.8 


C2 


— 














3 


18.8 


3 


18.8 


Thoracic vertebra(e) 




— 






— 


— 


3 


18.8 


3 


18.8 


Lumbar vertebra(e) 
















2 


12.5 


2 


12.5 


Sacrum 
















i 
i 


0.5 


i 
1 


0.5 


Rib/s 


— 


— 


— 


~ 


10 


62.5 


— 




10 


62.5 


Sternum 




— 


— 




— 


— 


— 




~~ 


— 


Clavicle 


3 


18.8 


6 


37.5 


2 


12.5 






7 


43.8 


Scapula 


c 

J 


jI.j 


i 
i 


O.J 


5 


31.3 






o 



CA A 

50.0 


Humerus 


c 

J 


1 1 1 

3 1.5 





j /.j 


5 


31.3 






Q 

y 


DO. 5 


Radius 


4 


1 C A 

25.0 


1 


0.5 


6 


37.5 






9 


56.3 


Ulna 


8 


50.0 


6 


37.5 


2 


12.5 






10 


62.5 


Capitate 


2 


12.5 


1 


12.5 


— 









3 


18.8 


Hamate 


2 


12.5 


1 


6.3 












2 


12.5 


Lunate 


2 


12.5 


2 


12.5 


— 


— 






4 


25.0 


Pisiform 


— 








2 


12.5 






2 


12.5 


Scaphoid 


3 


18.8 






— 


— 






3 


18.8 


T — 1 

Trapezium 


5 


10 
1 0.0 






— 


— 






5 


10 
10. 


Triquetral 






1 


6.3 












1 


6.3 


Metacarpals 


1 


0.5 


i 
i 


O.J 


6 


37.5 






1 


A 1 O 

43.0 


MCI 


1 


6.3 


1 


6.3 


1 


6.3 






1 


6.3 


MC2 


z 


lz.5 


Z 


1Z.5 


— 


— 






1 

5 


1 
1 0.0 


MC3 


2 


12.5 


2 


12.5 












4 


25.0 


MC4 


2 


12.5 


1 


6.3 












5 


18.8 


MC5 


1 


6.3 


~~ 


— 








— 




1 


6.3 


Hand phalange(s) 




— 






5 


31.3 






5 


31.3 


Proximal hand 






















phalange(s) 






— 




4 


25.0 






4 


25.0 


Intermediate hand 






















phalange(s) 










4 


25.0 


_ 


_ 


4 


25.0 


Terminal hand 






















phalange(s) 










3 


18.8 






3 


18.8 


Innominate 


3 


18.8 


5 


31.3 


5 


31.3 






7 


43.8 


Femur 


6 


37.5 


8 


50.0 


6 


37.5 






10 


62.5 


Patella 


4 


25.0 


1 


6.3 


— 


— 






4 


25.0 


Tibia 


7 


43.8 


5 


31.3 


9 


56.3 






1 1 


68.8 


Fibula 


2 


12.5 






7 


43.8 






7 


43.8 


Calcaneus 

Cuboid 

Intermediate 










2 


12.5 






2 


12.5 






















cuneiform 


1 


6.3 














1 


6.3 


Lateral cuneiform 






















Medial cuneiform 


1 


6.3 














1 


6.3 


Navicular 




6.3 


2 


12.5 










3 


18 8 


Talus 






1 


6.3 


3 


18 8 






4 


25.0 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



25 



TABLE 6 
( Continued) 



Left Right Unsided Axial Total b 



Element N % N % N 



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

MT1 __________ 

MT2 — — — — l 6.3 — — 1 6.3 

MT3 — — — — — — — — — 

MT4 — — — — 1 6.3 — — 1 6.3 

MT5 ________ 16.3 

Foot phalange(s) — — — — 2 12.5 — — 2 12.5 

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 — — 3 18.8 
Terminal food 

phalange(s) — — 1 6.3 — — — — 1 6.3 



a 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) 




20 40 60 80 100 

Percent of Individuals Represented 
[■Total % (Axial) I 



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- 
til ion. 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- 
\ i dual w as 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 CIO. 

Individual IS: 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, 
w ith a large amount of dentine exposure and 
severe crow n 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 pies- 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



27 



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



B 
c 
o 

£ 

0) 

ID 

>» 
"O 

o 

CQ 
O 

a 
a 
Z) 



Radius 



Clavicle 



Rib/s 



Ulna 



Humerus 



Scapula 



Middle Hand 
Phalange/s 

Proximal Hand 
Phalange/s 



Carpal/s 



First Rib 




20 40 60 80 

Percent of Individuals Represented 



100 



ITotal%(Any Side) 



Fig. 8. Continued. 



28 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



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



Femur 



Tibia 



Calcaneus 



Fibula 



+■» 
c 

CD 

E 

0) 
LU 

■o 

o 

OQ 
i_ 

a> 

o 



Pubis 



Ischium 



lllium 



Talus 



Lateral 
Cuneiform 



Patella 




20 40 60 80 

Percent of Individuals Represented 
■ Total % (Any Side) 



100 



I 'ig. x. ( lontinued. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



29 



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




20 40 60 80 100 



Percent of Individuals Represented 
[■Total % (Axial) 



Fig. 9. 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 1 8 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 



30 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 



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



c 

<D 

E 

o 

LU 
>* 

■o 

o 

<D 
Q. 




20 40 60 80 100 

Percent of Individuals Represented 

■ Total % (Any Side) 



Fig. ( >. ( !ontinued. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



31 



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 
c 

Q) 

E Metatarsal/s 

0) 

jj 

^ Navicular 



o5 Middle Foot Phalanx 



Foot Phalange/s 
Calcaneus 
Distal Foot Phalanx 
MT2 
MT4 

Medial Cuneiform 
Intermediate Cuneiform 




20 40 60 

Percent Represented 



80 



100 



Total % (Any Side) 



Fig. 9. Continued. 



32 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 




Fig. 10. Anterior (left) and posterior (right) views of proliferative periosteal reaction on proximal 
humerus diaphysis of individual 15 compared with nonpathological anatomical specimen. 



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 is 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: The lew postcranial re- 
mains found representing this person are 
gracile, indicating that the person is probably 
a female. She was probably an adult (full 



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 



33 





Fig. 11. Concentration of disturbed skeletal remains in excavation unit CIO. 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 
(left 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 reaetion 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 I; 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 prev iously 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 arc 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 l ight canines about half formed, roots of 
deciduous maxillary second molars are about 
three-quarters formed. We observed no pa- 
thology. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



35 



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 



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 
Gil, 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 1 indicated that the 
skeletal remains were likely female. Moore 



36 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 






Fig. 13a. Lateral view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of left tibia of 
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 sonic 
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 is the case, then the feet of 
individual I may be from individual 27. or 
Moore's burial 24, an adult female. Alterna- 
tively, the feet may belong to Moore's burial 



22, and the other postcranial remains we 
identified in the excavation lill arc from his 
burial 24. The position of the articulated feet 
in relation to other burials in South hind 
Mound I and the edge of Moore's excavation 
in the south profile of unit B8 argue that the 
feel 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 



Fig. 13b. Medial view of periosteal reaction and proliferative response on diaphysis of left tibia of 
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 



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 ( l c >>86: 
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 
Fl 1, 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 w horls 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 dises. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



39 



TABLE 7 
Ceramics 



Type/series 


N 


Weight (g) 


Type/series 


N 


Weight (g) 


n 1 Ul 1 all la 3C11C3 






Grit tempered {continued) 






Check Stamped 


2 


28.5 


Burnished exterior 


1 


4.3 


Circle in Square 


1 


6.4 


Check stamped 


2 


15.7 


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 


1 


29.2 


Folded incurvate flat rim 


1 


15.9 


Reed punctated, node nm 


1 


16.4 


Reed punctated node rosette rim 


6 


71.6 


Rim 


2 


26.5 


Irene series 






Impressed (?) 


3 


45.6 


Plain 


7 


77.0 


Inri spH 




A 1 


Burnished 


10 


62.1 




i 
i 


i i 


Burnished (?) 


2 


16.9 


Linear stamped 


i 
i 


W.I 


Burnished interior and exterior 


2 


23.6 


Plain 


i 
i 


1 Q 

J . y 


Rim 


2 


102.5 


Shell scraped exterior 




4.4 


Shell scraped interior 


1 


6.2 


Folded nm 


1 


1.4 


Complicated Stamped 
Rim 


151 

2 


1 159.7 
19.9 


Punctated 
Shell scraped interior 


1 
1 


0.2 
10.6 






Reed punctated 


1 


1.4 


St. Catherines series 


3 


25.7 


Stamped 


79 


806.1 


Plain 


Folded punctated rim 


3 


13.4 


Plain ( 9 ) 


1 


11.3 


Folded rim 


7 


17.3 


Stamped (?) 


1 


0.8 


Incised 


2 


28.6 


Rim 


1 


6.7 


Reed rosette, possible Altahama 






Savannah series 






Line Block Stamped 


1 


6.1 


Plain 






Reed punctated 


1 


0.2 


Burnished interior and exterior 


1 


3.7 


Rosette rim 


1 


2.4 


Plain rim 


1 


21.8 


Folded rim 


1 


0.6 


Folded rim 


i 
i 


4. j 


MaHp rim 
INUUC Hill 


i 
i 


1 % Q 

i j.y 


Plain (?) 


2 


14.3 


Rim 


Q 

o 


O /.U 


Misc. 


z 


i . I 


[villi. FldlCU 


1 

1 


j. j 


Wilmington series 






Misc. small sherds 


5 


7.2 








Heavy Cord Marked 




11.7 


Grit and clay tempered 


1 


1.8 


Stamped rim 


1 


2.4 


Decorated, punctated 


1 


3.4 


Wilmington (?), very thick 


1 


172.1 


Shell scraped interior 


1 


3.9 


Misc. 


11 


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 


1 


9.3 


Stamped 


1 


67.2 


Pin 


4 


26.6 








Stamped 


5 
i 


2.2 


Clay and sand tempered 
Rosette decoration 


1 


0.1 


Misc. 


5.6 








Dentin rd (7) 


1 


2.9 


Sand and grit tempered 






Refuge series 
Plain 


8 


51.5 


Plain 

Rim (early) 
Misc. 


1 

1 
1 


4.9 
7.9 
4.9 


Simple Stamped 


1 


4.6 


Refuge (?) 


1 


6.9 


Sand and grog tempered 






Refuge, late(?) 


2 


16.8 


Stamped, with punctated nodes, 






Walthour 


2 


20.1 


folded rim 


1 


6.5 


Grit tempered 






Misc. unidentified small sherds 


425 


634.7 












Burnished interior 


3 


13.3 


Misc. unidentified ceramics 


8 


46.1 


Burnished interior, shell scraped 












exterior 


1 


3.2 









40 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



TABLE 8 
Whelk Beads 



Specimen 


Length 


Width 


Perforation 


Weight 


no. 


(mm) 


(mm) 


diameter (mm) 


(g) 


28.3/2732a 


7.72 


4.07 


2.04 


0.4 


28.3/2732b 


4.32 


2.34 


1.11 


0.1 


28.3/2747 


32.58 


19.11 


5.57 


12.7 


28.3/2769 


32.94 


19.50 


4.71 


12.9 


28.3/2676a 


6.32 


2.35 


1.60 


0.2 


28.3/2676b 


4.58 


3.15 




0.1 


28.3/2676c 


4.62 


1.71 


1.78 




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 arc 
Pinellas projectile points, as defined by Bullen 
( 1975: 8). Pinellas points arc 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) is a small, 
asymmetrical projectile point, the blade mar- 
gins of which arc 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 



TABLE 9 
Modified Whelk Artifacts 



OL/ClTlllCIi 


Height 


Width 


Lip 


W/pi crht 
WClglll 




(mm) 


(mm) 


(mm) 




28.3/2665 


82.88 


99.02 




98.9 


ZO.J/ZD04 




sn fifi 
oU.oo 


i m 


1 OZ. 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 


1.11 


193.5 


28.3/2721 


95.97 


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 Hakes and on one 
piece of shatter. Of the chert Hakes, six ap- 
peal to have been produced from the same 
raw material. Two of these Hakes were found 
in excavation unit (il I. while the other four 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



41 



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 


164 


15.7 


15.7 


3.5 


0.2 


28.3/2776 


Projectile point 


23.7 


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 0-20-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 




Ii<_'. 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, 43.4Vr ) and deer (Odocoileus vir- 
ginianus; 14.66 kg, 47.2%). All other taxa 
contributed 2 ( /r or less to the biomass. 



TABLE 1 1 
Species List of Fauna 



Bone 




Individual 




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 


— 


47.2 




(~*\ jwipIp naht 




46 Q 


1 Uj.U 


Ulna, left 




63.9 




Ulna, right 


100.2 


64.0 




Radius, left 




55.7 




Radius, right 


79.4 


55.9 




Humerus, left 


107.0 


66.8 




Humerus, right 




67.7 




Ilium, left 








Ilium, right 




37.3 





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 



Lab no. 


Indi- 
vidual 


Sex 


Age 


8'3C 

(%c) 


5'5N 

(%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 



13 



12 _ 



5 15 N %o 



11 _ 



10 _ 




-16 



14 



12 



-10 



5 13 C % 



± Georgia Coastal Prehistoric Foragers 

+ Georgia Coastal Prehistoric Farmers 

▼ South End Mound I 

x 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 4 (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 3 

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

Total with 

Indi- Femur Tibia Fibula Humerus Radius Ulna periosteal 

vidual Sex Age* LRLRLRLRLRLR reactions (%) 

4 indet birth — x x x — — — — x — — — 0.0 

5 d 25 xxxx — — x — — — — — 0.0 

6 9 18+ — — — x — — x x — — — — 0.0 

7 indet 6-12 mo — — — — — — — — — — — — — 

8 indet 2-3 pr — — pr — — pr — — x — x 60.0 

9 indet adult? — — — — — — — — — — — — — 

10 indet 6-9 mo — — — — — — — — — — — — — 

1 1 indet 0-3 mo xxxx — — xxxxxx 0.0 

12 9 40+ x x — x — — — — — — — — 0.0 

13 indet 1-3 ____________ _ 

14 6 17-23 — — — — — — — x _____ o.O 

15 S 30+ x x — pr — — — prx — x x 28.6 

16 ? 17-23 x x — pr — pr— x x — — pr 42.9 

17 6 17-23 — x — pr — — — _____ 50.0 

18 9 40+ x pr — pr — — — — x ___ 50.0 

19 9 35-45 x — x — — — — — — — — — 0.0 

20 indet 1-3 ____________ _ 

21 S adult? x — pr — — — — — — — — — 50.0 

22 9 adult ______ — — — — — — _ 

23 indet 5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 

24 9 35+ ___ pr _______ pr 100.0 

25 indet 7-8 xxxx— — — — — — — — 0.0 

26 indet 1-3 ____________ — 

27 9 38+ x x x pr — — x x x — x x 11.1 

28 6 adult pr — pr — pr pr x — pr — — — 88.3 

29 9 adult ____________ _ 

UA indet adult ___ x — — — — — — — — 0.0 

Total periosteal 

reactions (%) 16.7 10.0 25.0 50.0 100.0 100.0 20.0 16.7 0.0 33.3 0.0 33.3 26.0 

Total per element 13.6 40.9 100.0 16.7 11.1 22.2 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. 

a 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. 

h Ages are given in years except as specified. 



the fauna! assemblage at the South End 
Mound [. 

Stabi.i; Inotoi'Ks 

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%< and \ 2.V/<< 
for carbon and nitrogen, respectively. 

In comparison with stable isotope ratios 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



45 



100 



90 



80 



_ 



60 



50 



V 40 



30 



Periosteal Reactions of the Tibia 



Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound I Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers 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 (f-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 4 
(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 


27/2 8 A 


Mandible, left 












11 




X 






X 


12 


X 






X 


X 


C 


X 


X 


— 


X 


X 


P3 


X 


X 





X 


4 


P4 





X 





X 


X 


Ml 





X 








X 


M2 


— 


X 


— 


— 


X 


M3 


— 




— 


— 


X 


Mandible, right 












11 


X 


X 


- 








12 

C 


X 






X 














4 


P3 


X 


X 





X 





P4 


X 


X 





X 


X 


Ml 


X 


— 


— 


— 


X 


M2 


X 


— 


— 


— 


X 


M3 




X 


3 


— 


— 


Maxilla, left 












11 


X 


X 


— 


X 


3 


12 


— 


— 


— 


X 


3 


C 


X 


— 


— 


3 


X 


P3 


— 


— 


— 


3 


_ 


P4 


X 





X 


X 


X 


Ml 








X 


X 


4 


M2 


x 


x 






x 


M3 


X 










Maxilla, right 












11 


X 


X 




X 


3 


12 


X 






3 


3 


C 


X 






X 




P3 


X 






3 




P4 


X 










Ml 


X 


X 








M2 


X 


X 








M3 













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 canes. 



PATTERNS OF COMMUNITY HEALTH: 
PATHOLOGY 

Periosi eal Reaci ions 

Periostea] reactions are not an uncom- 
mon occurrence in the skeletal remains 
iiom South End Mound [. Eighteen of the 

26 individuals represented in the series had 



TABLE 15 

Dental Caries: Individual Adult Males 



Individual 

Tooth 5 14 15 27/28 B 



Mandible, left 

11 — 

12 x — — - 
C — — — - 
P3 x — 3 - 
P4 x — x — 
Ml x — — — 
M2 x — — — 
M3 x — — — 

Mandible, right 

11 x — 4 — 

12 x — — - 
C _ _ x - 
P3 x — x — 
P4 — — x - 
Ml — — — x 
M2 xx — x 
M3 x — — 3 

Maxilla, left 

11 xx — - 

12 x — x - 
C x x 

P3 xxx — 

P4 x — — - 

Ml x — — — 

M2 x — x — 

M3 x — x — 

Maxilla, right 

11 x — — — 

12 x — — — 
C x — x — 
P3 x — x 

P4 x — — — 

Ml x 4 — 

M2 x — x 

M3 x 



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 IS individuals. 50% (n = 9) dis- 
played periosteal reaction on at least one 
long bone. Two-thirds of the affected in- 
dividuals (n ()) had multiple (two or 
more) bones affected by periosteal reac- 
tions. Excluding the fibula, where onl\ 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 



47 



TABLE 16 

Dental Caries: Individual Juveniles and 
Unsexed Adults 







Individual 




Tooth 


16/17A 


16/17B 25 


UA 



Mandible, left 



11 


X 


12 


X 


C 


X 


P3 


X 


P4 


X 


Ml 


X 


M2 


3 


M3 


4 



Mandible, right 
II 
12 
C 
P3 
P4 
Ml 
M2 
M3 

Maxilla, left 
II 
12 
C 
P3 
P4 
Ml 
M2 
M3 

Maxilla, right 
II 
12 
C 
P3 
P4 
Ml 
M2 
M3 



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 a 


% 


Mandible 






11 


1 1 


9.1 


12 


10 


0.0 


C 


11 


18.2 


P3 


14 


14.3 


P4 


11 


0.0 


Ml 


11 


9.1 


M2 


11 


9.1 


M3 


9 


33.3 


dll 


1 


0.0 


dI2 


1 


0.0 


dC 


1 


0.0 


dMl 


6 


0.0 


dM2 


4 


0.0 


Maxilla 






11 


14 


14.3 


12 


11 


27.3 


C 


9 


11.1 


P3 


9 


22.2 


P4 


9 


0.0 


Ml 


12 


16.7 


M2 


9 


0.0 


M3 


7 


0.0 


dll 


2 


0.0 


dI2 


1 


0.0 


dC 


5 


0.0 


dMl 


8 


0.0 


dM2 


7 


0.0 


Permanent teeth 


168 


11.9 


Deciduous teeth 


36 


0.0 


TOTAL 


204 


9.8 



a 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 


6 


25 


none 


0/26 (0.0%) 


6 


9 


18 + 


none 


— 


7 


indet 


6-12 mo 


none 


teeth unerupted 


8 


indet 


2-3 


humerus, L 


0/2 (0.0%) 








femur, L 










tibia, R 




9 


indet 


adult? 


none 


— 


10 


indet 


6-9 mo 


— 


teeth unerupted 


11 


indet 


0-3 mo 


none 


teeth unerupted 


12 


9 


40+ 


none 


0/21 (0.0%) 


13 


indet 


1-3 


none 


0/3 (0.0%) 


14 


6 


17-25 


none 


0/3 (0.0%) 


15 


6 


30+ 


humerus 


3/15 (20.0%) 








tibia, R 




16 a 


9 


17-23 


ulna, R 


3/21 (14.3%) 








fibula 










tibia, R 




17* 


6 


17-23 


tibia, R 


0/4 (0.0%) 


18 


9 


40+ 


femur, R 


0/15 (0.0%) 








tibia, R 




19 


9 


35^5 


none 


1/3 (33.3%) 


20 


indet 


1-3 


none 


0/11 (0.0%) 


21 


6 


adult 


tibia, L 


— 


22 


9 


adult 


none 


— 


23 


indet 


5 


none 


teeth unerupted 


24 


9 


35+ 


ulna, R 


4/16 (25.0%) 








tibia/femur 




25 


indet 


7-8 


none 


0/18 (0 0%) 


26 


indet 


1-3 


none 


on (o.o%) 


27 c 


9 


38 + 


tibia, R 


7/21 (33.3%) 


28d 


6 


adult 


femur, L 


1/3 (33.3%) 








tibia, L 










fibula, L 










fibula, R 










radius, R 




29 


9 


adult 


none 




UA 


indet 


juv, adult 


none 


2/14 (14.3%) 



Key: indet, sex indeterminate, mo, months; juv, juvenile; L, 
left; R, right; UA, unassociated tooth 
a 16/17A dentition (see text) 
b 16/17B dentition (see text). 
c 27/28A dentition (see text). 
d 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 Orbit alia and Porotic 
Hyperostosis 

Only two individuals display evidence of 
cribra orbitalia or porotic hyperostosis. These 
included cribra orbitalia for an adult female 
(individual Id) and porotic hyperostosis for 
an adult male (individual 2N). The lesions 
were well healed and likel) reflect an episode 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



49 



Dental Caries 



25 



20 



15 



10 



Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers 



South End Mound I 



Groups 



Georgia Coastal 
Mission Farmers 



Florida Coastal 
Mission 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 



50 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



TABLE 19 

St. Catherines Island Guale: Prehistoric and Historic 
Dental Caries and Periosteal Reactions 



Periosteal 







Dental caries 


reactions 


Site 


Period 




%b 






f^nnninohnm NAnnnH f 1 

v_ U i 1 1 1 1 1 1 £_ 1 1 cl 1 1 1 i> 1UUI1U V— 


Refuge- Deptford 


Z.O 


7 1 

/ . 1 






Cunningham Mound O 


Refuge- Deptford 


56 


0.0 






Cunningham Mound E 


Refuge-Deptford 


5 


0.0 






McLeod Mound 


Refuge-Deptford 


133 


2.3 


5 


0.0 


South New Ground Mound 


Refuge-Deptford 


4 


0.0 






Seaside Mound I 


Refuge-Deptford 


128 


0.8 


3 


0.0 


Seaside Mound II 


Refuge-Deptford 


52 


9.6 


1 


0.0 


Johns Mound 


St. Catherines 


465 


1.7 


40 


2.5 


Marys Mound 


St. Catherines 


68 


0.0 






South End Mound II 


St. Catherines 


154 


0.7 


12 


0.0 


South End Mound I 


Irene 


204 


9.8 


22 


40.9 


Santa Catalina (SCI) 


Mission 


3274 


8.0 


26 


15.4 


Santa Catalina (Amelia) 


Mission 


1548 


19.6 


96 


59.3 



a Total number of teeth examined (left and right, deciduous and permanent incisors, canines, premolars, 
molars). 

h Percent affected by dental caries. 

c Total number of tibiae examined (left and right, juvenile and adult). 
<J 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). 

Drntal 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. 'j.K'r are carious (20 
of 204; tables 14—18). Seven of 17 individ- 
uals (41.2%) with at least one tooth present 
lor 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 lor 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; lig. 17). In a large 
overview of archaeological dental scries 
from eastern North America, we reported 
that prehistoric foragers generally have caries 
frequencies of less than l°k and prehistoric 
farmers have frequencies greater than 7% 

(Larsen et al., 1991). Thus, the frequenc) for 
South End Mound I is well within the value 
range for agriculturalists, in the following 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



51 



70 



60 



50 



g 40 
< 

§ 30 



20 



10 



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

Periosteal Reactions 






St. Catherines Island 
Prehistoric Foragers 



South End Mound I 



St Catherines Mission 
Farmers 



Ameila Island Mission Farmers 



Groups 



i Dental Caries IS Periosteal 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 


Individual 
19 


24 


27/2 8 A 


Mean 


SD 


Mandible, left 


















11 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 




— 


— 


— 


12 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


6.7 


— 


6.7 


— 


C 


length 


— 


— 


— 


— 


7.6 


7.6 




C 


breadth 


— 


74 


— 


7.5 


8.2 


7.7 


0.43 


P3 


length 


— 


7.5 


— 


— 


— 


7.5 


— 


P3 


breadth 


— 


7.8 


— 


8.8 


— 


8.3 


0.70 


P4 


length 




T 1 

/.I 






7.5 


7.3 


0.28 


P4 


breadth 




O 1 

8.3 




8.3 


9.1 


8.6 


0.46 


Ml 


1 .1, 

length 




11.4 






11.6 


11.5 


0.14 


Ml 


breadth 




1 f\ o 
1U.Z 






1 1 c 

11.5 


10.9 


0.91 


M2 


length 




12.0 






12.7 


12.4 


0.50 


M2 


breadth 




1U.Z 






1 1 c 

1 1.5 


10.9 


0.92 


M3 


length 










1 1.5 


1 1 .5 






breadth 










1 A T 
1U.Z 


10./ 




Mandible, right 


















11 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


— 





— 


— 


12 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


C 


length 


— 


— 


— 


— 





— 


— 


C 


breadth 


— 


7.5 


— 


— 


— 


7.5 


— 


P3 


length 


— 


7.4 


— 


7.6 


— 


7.5 


0.14 


P3 


breadth 




8.8 




8.6 




8.7 


0.14 


P4 


length 




7.6 








7.6 




P4 


breadth 


8.0 


8.9 




8.6 




8.5 


0.46 


Ml 


length 
















Ml 


breadth 
















M2 


length 


11.1 










11.1 




M2 


breadth 


9.6 










9.6 




M3 


length 




11.3 


11.3 






11.3 


0.00 


M3 


breadth 




10.1 


10.1 






10.1 


0.00 



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 
Q; Thomas and Larsen, 1979), three St. Cath- 
erines period sites dating between about a.d. 
1000 and 1200 (Johns Mound. Marys 
Mound. South End Mound U; Lai sen and 
Thomas. 1982, 19X6). 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 



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 r /r 
combined periods), respectively, and ()' < and 
1.9% periosteal reactions (1.6% combined 
periods), respectively, contrasting sharply 
with the 9.895 (dental canes) and 40.995 
(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 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCH AEOLOGY 



53 



TABLE 20 
(Continued) 



Individual 



Tooth 


Dimension 


12 


18 


19 


24 


27/28A 


Mean 


SD 


MiiYilla Ifft 


















11 


breadth 








7.2 




7.2 




1.6 


UlVUUlll 








6.7 




6.7 






length 
















c 


breadth 








8.5 




8.5 




P3 


length 





















P3 


breadth 























P4 


length 





— 


7.6 


7.4 





7.5 


0.14 


P4 


breadth 


— 


— 


10.1 


9.8 


— 


10.0 


0.21 


Ml 


length 





— 


— 


10.2 





10.2 





Ml 


breadth 


— 


— 


11.3 


— 


— 


11.3 





M2 


length 





— 


— 














M2 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 





M3 


length 


— 


— 


— 


— 











M3 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 





X/f^Yillfi rio"ht 
iViclAllla, llglll 


















11 






7.0 




7.1 




7.1 


0.07 


T? 


UlCdUUI 








7.9 




7 9 




c 


length 








8.5 




8.5 




c 


breadth 


— 


— 


— 


8.1 


— 


8.1 





P3 


length 








8.3 




8.3 




P3 


breadth 








10.6 




10.6 




P4 


length 
















P4 


breadth 
















Ml 


length 




10.6 








10.6 




Ml 


breadth 


11.5 


11.5 








11.5 




M2 


length 




10.8 








10.8 




M2 


breadth 




11.7 








11.7 




M3 


length 
















M3 


breadth 

















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- 



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 









Individual 








Tooth 


Dimension 


5 


14 


15 


27/28B 


Mean 


SD 


Mandible, left 
















11 


breadth 


— 






— 


— 


— 


12 


breadth 


6.5 






— 


6.5 


— 


C 


length 


— 






— 


— 


— 


C 


breadth 


— 





_ 


— 


— 


— 


P3 


length 


8.2 


— 


7.3 


— 


7.8 


0.63 


P3 


breadth 


7.2 


— 


8.3 




7.8 


0.78 


P4 




7.9 


— 


7.2 




7 6 


(J.DKJ 


P4 


UICaUlH 


O.J 


— 


8.4 




O.J 


A A7 
U.U / 




length 


1 1 Q 

11.7 


— 


— 




1 1 Q 




Ml 


breadth 


10.9 


— 


— 




10.9 




\A1 
1V1Z 


length 


1 1 ? 

I 1 .z. 


— 


— 




1 1 "> 




M2 


breadth 


10.6 


— 


— 




10.6 




IVIO 


length 


1 1 R 

1 1 . o 


— 


10.1 




1 1 A 


1 OA 


M3 


hrparlth 


10.6 


— 


10.8 




10 7 


A 14 

U. 1 H 


Mandible, right 
















11 


breadth 


5.7 






— 


5.7 





12 


breadth 


6.7 






— 


6.7 





C 


length 


— 






— 


— 





C 


breadth 


— 


— 


7.0 


— 


7.0 





P3 


length 






7.2 




7.2 





: j 


UICaUlH 






8.3 




8 ^ 

O.J 




P4 


length 






7.2 




7.2 




P4 


breadth 






8.4 




8.4 




Ml 


length 








11.1 


11.1 




Ml 


breadth 








11.4 


11.4 




M2 


length 


12.1 


11.6 




11.1 


11.6 


0.05 


M2 


breadth 


10.4 


10.8 




11.5 


10.9 


0.56 


M3 


length 


10.7 








10.7 




M3 


breadth 


10.0 






10.9 


10.5 


0.64 



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 thai we see the first appear- 
ance of treponematosis. 

DENTAL AND SKELETAL SIZE AND 

MORPHOLOGY 
Despite Che very fragmentary nature of the 
human remains from South End Mound [, a 



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, L990). 
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 


iviaxiiia, ieii 
















II 






7.3 






7.3 




TO 


LUCaUlll 


7 1 








7 1 

/ . i 




c 




8.2 




8.4 




8 3 

O.J 


ft 14. 
w. it 


c 


breadth 


9.0 




7.7 




8.4 


0.91 


P3 


length 


7.9 


8.0 


7.2 





7.7 


0.44 


P3 


breadth 


9.9 


9.8 


9.6 





9.8 


0.15 


P4 


length 


7.0 


— 


— 





7.0 





P4 


breadth 


9.6 


— 


— 





9.6 





Ml 


length 


10.3 


— 


— 


— 


10.3 





Ml 


breadth 


11.9 


— 


— 


— 


11.9 


— 


M2 


length 


— 


— 


11.5 


— 


11.5 





M2 


breadth 


— 


— 


12.7 


— 


12.7 


— 


M3 


length 


9.4 


— 


10.1 


— 


9.8 


0.50 


M3 


breadth 


11.3 


— 


10.8 


— 


11.1 


0.35 


\^QYlll'5 rifrnt 
IVldAllla, Ilglll 
















n 


breadth 


7.3 








7.3 




T? 


Ul Cu-ULIl 


7.4 








7.4 




c 


length 


8.7 




8.7 




8.7 


0.00 


c 


breadth 


9.2 


— 


7.8 


— 


8.5 


0.99 


P3 


length 


8.3 




7.0 




7.7 


0.92 


P3 


breadth 


10.0 




9.9 




10.0 


0.07 


P4 


length 


7.2 








7.2 




P4 


breadth 


9.8 








9.8 




Ml 


length 


10.7 








10.7 




Ml 


breadth 


11.4 








11.4 




M2 


length 


9.6 








9.6 




M2 


breadth 


12.0 








12.0 




M3 


length 


10.2 








10.2 




M3 


breadth 


11.7 








11.7 





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 I 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. 



Individual 

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

Mandible, left 



11 


breadth 


5.8 












5.8 


— 


12 


breadth 


6.0 








— 5.6 


— 


6.2 


0.50 


C 


length 


7.0 












7.3 


0.42 


C 


breadth 


7.0 












7.5 


0.50 


P3 


length 


8.2 












7.8 


0.47 


P3 


breadth 


8.7 












8.2 


0.67 


P4 


length 


8.3 












7.6 


0.50 


P4 


breadth 


8.8 












8.7 


0.32 


Ml 


length 


12.3 


— 11.3 


— 


— 11.8 


— 11.5 


— 


11.7 


0.34 


Ml 


breadth 


11.0 


— 10.5 


— 


— 11.1 


— — 


— 


10.9 


0.46 


M2 


length 


11.9 








— 12.1 


11.8 


12.0 


0.49 


M2 


breadth 


10.8 








— 11.1 


10.6 


10.8 


0.45 


M3 


length 














11.1 


0.91 


M3 


breadth 














10.5 


0.31 


/landible. right 




















11 


breadth 


5.7 












5.7 


0.00 


12 


breadth 


5.9 








— 6.2 




6.3 


0.40 


C 


length 










— 7.1 




7.1 




C 


breadth 










— 7.7 




7.4 


0.36 


P3 


length 










— 8.0 




7.6 


0.34 


P3 


breadth 










— 8.5 




8.6 


0.21 


P4 


length 














7.4 


0.28 


P4 


breadth 














8.5 


0.38 


Ml 


length 






11.4 


— 11.2 






11.2 


0.15 


Ml 


breadth 






10.5 


— 11.2 






11.0 


0.47 


M2 


length 














11.5 


0.48 


M2 


breadth 














10.6 


0.79 


M3 


length 














11.1 


0.35 


M3 


breadth 














10.3 


0.42 



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 tor 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 BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 



57 



TABLE 22 
( Continued) 



Individual 



Tooth 


Dimension 


16/17A 


16/17B 


13 


20 


23 


25 


26 


UA 


UA 


Mean 


SD 


\ ^ n v i 11 M loft 

Maxnia. len 


























1 1 


Ul CuU Li 1 


6.9 










7.5 








7.2 


25 




VI CaUl 11 


6 Q 

\j.y 










6.8 








VJ.7 


17 




length 


8.3 










8.7 








8.4 


0.22 


c 


breadth 


8.3 










8.3 








8.4 


0.47 


P3 


length 


7.6 


















7.7 


0.36 


P3 


breadth 


9.7 


















9.8 


0.13 


P4 


length 




















7.3 


0.31 


P4 


breadth 




















9.8 


0.25 


Ml 


length 


11.3 


— 


10.4 


10.2 


— 


10.0 


12.5 








10.7 


0.90 


Ml 


breadth 


11.7 


— 


10.7 


10.9 


— 


12.4 


12.3 


— 


— 


11.6 


0.66 


M2 


length 


— 


12.2 


— 


— 


— 


10.0 


— 


— 





11.2 


1.12 


M2 


breadth 


— 


10.8 


— 


— 


— 


12.1 


— 


— 


— 


11.9 


0.97 


M3 


length 




















9.8 


0.50 


M3 


breadth 




















11.1 


0.35 


iviaxuia. ngm 


























1 1 


breadth 


7.0 


















7.1 


0.14 


P 


LH CuUli 1 


8.2 










7.4 








7 7 


U.H-VJ 


Q 


length 




















8.6 


0.12 


C 


breadth 




















8.4 


0.74 


P3 


length 




7.1 










8.0 






7.7 


0.64 


P3 


breadth 




9.0 










10.2 






9.9 


0.59 


P4 


length 


8.4 


7.8 










7.7 






7.8 


0.49 


P4 


breadth 


9.6 


9.9 










10.5 






10.0 


0.39 


Ml 


length 


10.8 












10.7 


12.3 




11.0 


0.72 


Ml 


breadth 


11.7 












12.5 


12.1 




11.8 


0.43 


M2 


length 














9.9 






10.1 


0.62 


M2 


breadth 














11.9 






11.9 


0.15 


M3 


length 


9.8 


11.2 














10.7 


10.5 


0.61 


M3 


breadth 


10.7 


10.5 














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 



TABLE 23 

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



Individual 

Tooth Dimension 7 8 13 20 25 26 UA Mean SD 



Mandible, left 

dll breadth 4.3 3.1 — 

dI2 breadth — — — 

dC length — — — 

dC breadth — — — 

dMl length 8.5 — — 

dMl breadth 6.9 — — 

dM2 length — — — 

dM2 breadth — 

Mandible, right 

dll breadth — — — 

dI2 breadth — — 3.5 

dC length — — — 

dC breadth — — — 

dMl length — — — 

dMl breadth — — — 

dM2 length — — — 

dM2 breadth — — — 

Maxilla, left 

dll breadth 5.0 — — 

dI2 breadth — — — 

dC length — — — 

dC breadth — — — 

dMl length — 6.8 — 

dMl breadth — 7.9 — 

dM2 length 10.4 — 8.6 

dM2 breadth 9.9 — 9.5 

Maxilla, right 

dll breadth 5.3 — — 

dI2 breadth — — — 

dC length — — 6.9 

dC breadth — — 5.9 

dMl length — — — 

dMl breadth — — — 

dM2 length — — — 

dM2 breadth — 



— 
— 


— 
— 


— 
— 


— 

— 


3.7 
— 


0.85 

— 


— 

8.0 


— 
8.6 


— 
8.6 


— 
— 


— 
8.4 


— 
0.29 


7.0 


6.9 


6.9 


— 


6.9 


0.05 


10.2 


11.1 


— 


11.6 


11.0 


0.71 


8.7 


9.1 


— 


9.3 


9.0 


0.31 


— 
— 


— 
— 


— 
— 


— 
— 


— 
3.5 


— 

— 


— 


7.0 


— 


— 


7.0 


— 




5.0 






5.0 




6.7 


9.6 


— 


7.9 


8.1 


1.46 


7.6 


7.6 




7.9 


7.7 


0.17 


10.0 


11.0 


— 




10.5 


0.71 


8.8 


9.1 






9.0 


0.21 


4.4 


— 


4.9 


— 


4.8 


0.32 


— 


— 


4.7 1 


— 


4.7 


— 


6.9 


7.3 


— 


— 


7.1 


0.28 


5.5 


6.1 


— 


— 


5.8 


0.42 


6.8 


7.2 


7.7 


7.6 


7.2 


0.43 


8.9 


9.8 


9.0 


9.1 


8.9 


0.68 


8.8 




9.9 


9.8 


9.5 


0.77 


9.8 




10.1 


11.2 


10.1 


0.65 


6.9 


6.9 






5.3 
6.9 


0.00 


5.5 


5.7 






5.7 


0.20 


6.9 


7.3 


7.5 




7.2 


0.31 


8.7 


9.9 


8.8 




9.1 


0.67 


8.9 


10.7 


10.0 




9.9 


0.91 


9.8 


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 hone shape 
and behavior. In this regard, the calculation 
of the femur midshaft index ((femur midshaft 
medial-lateral X l()()|/temur 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 S7.I 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 Hatter femoral midshafts in the 
medial-lateral direction than do females. This 
pattern suggests that males are generally 
more physicall\ 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 


25.1 


26.5 




25.8 


27.0 


26.1 


0.83 


Midshaft, medial-lateral 


25.8 


21.5 




26.2 


26.5 


25.4 


2.22 


Midshaft, circumference 


s i 

1 


78 


/ J 




0/1 
84 


oU 


3.36 


oUDirucilalllCl, allici 1UI -jJUJuciiui 


21.5 


22.4 


21.5 


22.5 


23.6 




87 


OuDirOLIlalllCl, IllCUlal-lalClal 


32.3 


31.4 


28.7 


34.2 


34.9 




? 46 


Femur, right 
















Head diameter 




39.2 






40.4 


39.8 


0.85 


Maximum length 




A \ A 


43j 




4UU 


42.3 


TO CO 

AS. 35 


N/IiHchuft nntprinr-nosterior 


25.4 


27.4 


26.0 




26.0 


26.2 


0.85 


IVUUMlall, IllCUlal-lalClal 


24.3 


23.7 


23.4 




25.5 


24.2 


91 


IVllUSIlall, L 11 L u 1 1 11 CI C11L C 


81 


83 


78 




82 


81 

O 1 


i.. 1 t) 


Subtrochanter, antenor-postenor 




T\ 9 


90 5 






Z.J.KJ 


1 Q 
Z. 1 y 


^nhtmrhantpr medial-lateral 




31.0 


27.7 




32.9 


30.5 


2.63 


lioui. leu 
















Maximum length 
















Midshaft, anterior-posterior 






_ 


29.3 


28.2 


28.8 


0.77 


Midshaft, medial -lateral 





— 


— 


21.7 


18.4 


20.1 


2.33 


Midshaft, circumference 


— 


— 


— 


— 


74 


74 


— 


Tibia, right 
















Maximum length 


— 


— 


— 


— 




— 


— 


Midshaft, anterior-posterior 


27.2 


— 


— 


— 


28.2 


27.7 


0.71 


Midshaft, medial-lateral 


19.7 


— 


— 


— 


18.5 


19.1 


0.85 


Midshaft, circumference 


74 


— 


— 


— 


73 


74 


0.70 


Clavicle, left 
















Maximum length 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


Clavicle, right 
















Maximum length 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


Ulna, left 
















Maximum length 


— 


— 


— 


— 


244 


244 


— 


Ulna, right 
















Maximum length 










244 


244 




Radius, left 
















Maximum length 


_ 


_ 


_ 




220 


220 


_ 


Radius, right 
















Maximum length 
















Humerus, left 
















Maximum length 


— 




— 




280 


280 


— 


Midshaft, maximum diameter 




19.6 






22.1 


20.9 


1 .77 


Midshaft, minimum diameter 




14.9 






15.7 


15.3 


0.57 


Midshaft, circumference 










63 


63 




Head diameter 










37.0 


37.0 




Biepicondylar breadth 
















Humerus, right 
















Maximum length 




274 


301 






288 


19.09 


Midshaft, maximum diameter 






18.9 




21.6 


20.3 


1.91 


Midshaft, minimum diameter 






14.2 




15.5 


14.9 


0.92 


Midshaft, circumference 






59 






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 



Measurement 


5 


14 


Individual 
15 17 


21 


28 


Mean 


SD 


Femur, left 


















Head diameter 








39.3 







_ 


39.3 




Maximum length 


495 












424 


460 


50.21 


Midshaft, anterior-posterior 


36.5 





25.9 




33.7 


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, antenor-postenor 


— 


— 


23.2 


— 


— 


22.6 


22.9 


0.42 


Subtrochanter, medial -lateral 


— 


— 


32.2 


— 


— 


33.9 


33.1 


1.20 


Femur, right 


















Head diameter 


47.0 





— 


— 








47.0 


_ 


Maximum length 


497 





— 


455 








476 


29.70 


Midshaft, anterior-posterior 


35.0 


— 


27.7 





— 


— 


31.4 


5.16 


Midshaft, medial-lateral 


28.7 


— 


24.6 





— 


— 


26.7 


2.90 


Midshaft, circumference 


100 


— 


88 


— 


— 


— 


94 


8.49 


Subtrochanter, anterior-posterior 


26.8 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


26.8 


— 


Subtrochanter, medial-lateral 


42.9 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


42.9 


— 


Tibia, left 


















Maximum length 


429 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


429 


— 


Midshaft, anterior-posterior 


34.1 


— 


— 


— 


32.8 


— 


33.5 


0.92 


Midshaft, medial-lateral 


21.1 


— 


— 




20.7 


— 


20.9 


0.28 


Midshaft, circumference 


93 


— 






88 


— 


91 


3.54 


Tibia, right 


















Maximum length 


429 


— 






— 


— 


429 


— 


Midshaft, anterior-posterior 


33.9 




- jZ. 1 








33.0 


1.27 


\;f i H c h o ft m H i Q 1 latAr^l 
.vllUMldl l. 1 1 ICUlal -lalCI al 


93 4 




23.3 








91 A 


u.u / 


IVllUMldl I, L1I LU1111C1C1ILC 


93 




89 








Ql 

y l 


9 81 

Z.O J 


Clavicle, lett 


















. > 1 u.\ 1 II I U 1 1 1 


















Clavicle, right 


















N^t^Yimtim lpncxth 

i» 1 CIA 1 1 1 1 U 1 I 1 Idlglll 


















I linn I.A 

Ulna, lett 


















Maximum length 






250 


— 






9^n 




Ulna, right 


















Maximum length 


— 


— 


250 


— 


— 


— 


250 


— 


Radius, left 


















Maximum length 


— 


— 


239 


— 


— 


— 


239 


— 


Radius, right 


















Maximum length 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


— 


Humerus, left 


















Maximum length 


350 





— 


— 








350 





Midshaft, maximum diameter 


22.9 


— 






— 


21.0 


22.0 


1.34 


Midshaft, minimum diameter 


17.7 


— 






— 


16.2 


17.0 


1.06 


Midshaft, circumference 


69 


— 






— 


62 


66 


4.95 


Head diameter 


46.6 












46.6 




Biepicondylar breadth 


64.6 




520 








58.3 


8.91 


Humerus, right 


















Maximum length 




330 


295 








313 


24.75 


Midshaft, maximum diameter 




218 


21.0 








21.4 


0.57 


Midshaft, minimum diameter 




167 


15.2 








160 


I 06 


Midshaft, circumference 




63 


62 








63 


71 


Head diameter 


















Biepicondylar breadth 



















2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIO ARCHAEOLOGY 



61 



TABLE 26 
Adult Stature Estimates (in cm) 





Bone 


Estimate 3 


Males 






5 


femur, left 


165.0 




femur, right 


165.4 


17 


femur, right 


153.3 


28 


femur, left 


144.2 


Mean'' 




U/.VJ 


Range 




144.2-165.4 


SD 




10.2 


Females 






16 


femur, left 


142.2 




femur, right 


141.3 


18 


femur, right 


153.3 


19 


femur, left 


146.3 


27 


femur, left 


137.2 


Mean b 




144.1 


Range 




137.2-153.3 


SD 




6.1 



a 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. 

h 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 



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 3 : see Larsen and Ruff. 1994). For the 
South End Mound I adults, it was possible 
to determine TA STD 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 TA STD for one adult male (in- 
dividual 28) and a large TA SXD 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 27 

Adult Femur Midshaft Index and Total Subperiosteal Area 





Femur midshaft index 2 


Total subperiosteal area b 


Left femur 


Right femur 


Left femur 


Right femur 


Males 










5 


80.5 


82.0 


694.9 


642.6 


15 


103.1 


88.0 


_ 




21 


79.5 





_ 




28 


85.2 





743.6 




Mean 


87.1 


85.47 


719.3 


642.6 


Range 


80.5-103.1 


82.0-88.8 


694.9-743.6 




or"\ 


10.9 


4.8 


34.4 




rcuiaiCo 










12 


102.8 


95.7 






16 


81.1 


86.5 


617.1 


718.8 


18 




90.0 




507.3 


19 


101.6 




663.1 




27 


98.2 


98.1 


878.1 




Mean 


95.9 


92.6 


719.4 


613.1 


Range 


81.1-102.8 


86.5-98.1 


617.1-878.1 


507.3-718.8 


SD 


10.1 


5.3 


139.3 


149.6 



a Midshaft index computed by the formula (Fresia et al., 1990): 



(T^ X 100) * T ap . 

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

TA STD = {[ir(T, p /2)(T ml /2)] - length3} X 108, 

where TA STD = total subperiosteal diameter, standardized for body size; 
T ap = anteroposterior diameter; 
T m , = 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. 

Ironically, 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 nearl) a century later 
revealed that indeed Moore kepi none of the 
human remains from South End Mound [, 
and the way we found their location in the 
earl) 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 



Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft A-P Diameter 




I Male 
I Female 



Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound I Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 

Groups 



Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft M-L Diameter 




Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound I 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.). 



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 



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 
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) 




Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound I Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 

Groups 



Fig. 20. 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 significant 
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) is 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 arc 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 
lor the South End Mound I population is per 
haps somewhat lower than lor 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 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



65 



100 



Skeletal Size and Robusticity: Femoral Midshaft Index 




Georgia Coastal Georgia Coastal South End Mound I Georgia Coastal Florida Coastal 
Prehistoric Foragers Prehistoric Farmers Mission Farmers Mission Farmers 

Groups 



Fig. 21. 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 
larger samples presented in earlier studies 
(e.g., Larsen, 1982). 

Finally, this study reveals evidence of a 
population showing a similar lifestyle and di- 



etary pattern as contemporary populations 
from the Georgia Bight in particular and the 
American Southeast in general. Because it is 
the only appreciable sample of late prehis- 
toric (Irene) period skeletal remains from St. 




Fig. 22. 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: 

8"C = (13C/ ' 2C)s r! le ..~ ( ' 3C/12C)pDB X 1000% o 



( l3 C/ l2 C) 



PDB 
5M/1- 



6 , 5N = C-W"N) sample - Q*N/"N) AIR 



( 15 N/' 4 N) AIR 



x 1000%, 



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 Q, 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 arc 
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. 1990. 
Temporal decline in bilateral asymmetry of 
the upper limb on the Georgia coast. In 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. /// 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. /// P.M. Lambert (editor). l ife dur- 
ing the age of agriculture: 96 l 15. Tuscaloo- 
sa: University Of Alabama Press. 

Hutchinson, D.l ... C.S. l arsen. M..I. Schoeninger, 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



67 



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. In 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. 
57, pt. 3. 

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. 

Larsen, C.S., A.W. Crosby, M.C. Griffin, D.L. 
Hutchinson, C.B. Ruff, K.F. Russell, M.J. 
Schoeninger, L.E. Sering, S.W. Simpson, J.L. 
Takacs, and M.E Teaford. 2002. A biohistory 
of health and behavior in the Georgia Bight: 
the agricultural transition and the impact of 
contact. In 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 



in La Florida: diet and nutrition before and 
after contact. In 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. In 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. In P.M. 
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. In 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, CO., 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. L. 

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. I. 

Pendleton. L.S.A. 1986b. Shell beads. In 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. In 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. In 
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 Historv. no. 
68. 

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

Reitz, L.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. In B.G. Mc- 
Ewan (editor). The Spanish missions of La 
Florida: 376-398. Gainesville: University 
Press of Florida. 

Reitz. E.J., and CM. 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. In 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. In 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 WC. 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. In 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. /// G. Grupe and A.N. Garland (ed- 
itors). Histology of ancient human bone: 
methods and diagnosis: 1S5-203. Berlin: 
Springer- Verlag. 

Schultz. M., C.S. Larsen. and K. Kreut/. 2001. 
Disease in Spanish Florida: microscopy of 
parotic hyperostosis ami cribra orbitalia. In 

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



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



69 



207-225. Gainesville: University Press of 
Florida. 

Sciulli, P.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. In 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. 1978. The anthropology of St. Cath- 
erines Island: I. 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. 



70 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



T3 

"5 o 



> E 



II 



13 | 

^ b 

S > — c 

■C ^ £ ° 
o .S — E 



I II I I I I I I I I I I I i I I 



a e a e 

rt o « o 
Ei Ei 



I I I I I I I I I 



9) 

E 
& 

* I 



I I I § I 



1/3 vi w </3 



o E E E E £ 

D 5/j 6Jj Ui 5i 5/J 

> I a d a et 

13 I «b <fc «fc * «b 



§ J J OS J § § 



13 13 

'§ '8 



Jk! J*J J*J 



I I I II I I I 



Jtt ^ 



^4 M J* M ^ 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



E = g CO cd 

1 1 1 1 1 



■o E 



u ic 



<A <S) W 
CO <D CJ 
OO DO DO 



•o -o -o 



•O "O 



E b 



"0-0-0 - a*O f O*0*0*tD' t O f TD' i O' t O , TD 



T3T3T3T3T3-O-OT3-0-O 



f O f -0*O f -0*O f O f O*O f '0 ,; 



I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I 



o o o o o o 



s s s s 

o a a o o a a 



I I I I I I I 



<s 
>/-, 




m 


t- 


r~ 


a 

cn 

00 


T T 


ON 


JO 
00 

cn 


as 


Os 


oo 


•42j 




-45a 


>n 
m 


(N 


<N 


rj 


XI 
-f 
■<T 


CO 




00 
LU 


lu 


00 

UJ 


00 
LU 


00 

lu 


00 00 

UJ UJ 


00 
OJ 


00 

uj 


00 

UJ 


00 

Q 


00 
LU 


00 

LU 


00 
UJ 


00 

D 


oc 

Q 


3C 

LU 


LU 


ID 


3C 

LU 



ui w « fl N 



v/~> c~, — ■ (/> 



8 o 


C 


s 


8 


52 


3 


5 


3 


oo rs 




00 


M 


oo oo 


00 


oo 


00 


Q UJ 


UJ 


UJ 


LU 


(N <N 


ri 




rs 

<"«-) 



>/-, in in in in in to in >/~, >/-, 



800088000 
oSSoooooo 

OO Tt vO 00 OO 



OOOOOOOOD05000000000 
QujujujQQujujujuj 



m rn 



loininininininininin 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



71 



■5 v 

r <n 

-o oo 

J UJ 

a s 



Bt oo 
■o oo 



00 

* UJ 

I I I I I I il I I I 



5 en £ 



I I II I I I 



^ E 2 E 
i& ii I I 



I I I I I I 



E 7= 



I I 



I I 8 £ I 



MIS 



60 60 00 



£11 I II g I II 



J"! 



3 !3 



1-s 
2 1 



l I 



I I I I I I I II I I I I I I l l l I l M 



.o .o _g .O .£ 

T3 ^ T3 ^ ^ 

§ ^ s ^ 

E E E E E 



I I 



2 .2 3 3 u 
'S. S c E « I £ 
« — — U rE a 3 



2 -2 

a. i 

E > 



8 8 



8 E 



E E 



I- ■§ -j a a 1 

2 fi ^ N N E 



•o -o -a 



EES 



E E 



-O T3 -O -O T3 

a a « s a 



lililllalilllilili 



*o f -o*o*o*o*o f o t -o 



.2 § 



ov £i cn oo cn 

M f n W in ^ 

oo 90 00 00 00 00 00 

UJ Q UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ 



% 2 



CD 

O UJ UJ 
\0 CI 









O 


C 


2h 


£2 

m 






«n 


in 


m 


in 


in 


<* 


in 


r- 


r-~ 


BO 




X 




00 


3C 


oc 


X 


>: 




w 




D 


Q 




UJ 


U 


UJ 


a 


c 


= 


c 


a 








a 


ee 


ee 


ee 


ee 


ee 


- 






ee 


u 


u 

1^ 


u 

DO 


u 





X 

in 




CM 





<N Tf \0 fi 1^ 



<U <U 1> 1> <U UJ 
1) O D D D 

cow £0 ^ ao w (N (N (N 



> E 



000000808 
— ■ <N — — n vp - — 1 — 1 

oooooiooo 



t oc m 00 



>n m. »n m m >n >n m 



»n >n m m >n m >n >n >n m >n m >n >n 



<n in «n m. «n in m m m m m 



72 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



x x X X X X X X X X '2 

EEEEEEEEEE^-S 

C C B B C C C C C C w c 
T3-OT3T3-OT3T3T3T3-0 

T3-0-OT3T3-0-O-OT3-0 _e — 

EEEEEEEEEEgE 



r- r4 m 



m sO 



J3 j= .e 



=i $ =t £ £ 

"O T3 "O "O "O 



j= jc jc -c sz 



I I E I I I I I I I o. I E I lEEEEEl I I 



1 1 
— « 



I I I I I I I I I I I II 



c3 d ^ (3 d n 



>-> 

& 5a a 



S S S 

E E E 



EEEEEEEE 



3 3 
E E 



I I I I I 



<-> i2 _i — 

p c c c 

b <u d u 

E E E 

£ &o 5b 

| I I g «J ca 03 

I I n. «fc «fc «fc 



I I 



I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I II 



11 



- N N 



u u 



— C4 

2 2 



2 2 2 E 



"S "5 



p p p s -s 



Cl d. o. o. o. =cu O. Q. "J3 *S "c 'C 



c c c c c 



o o a 

N N [1 

U 4) « 

Q. o. a. 

2 2 03 

w w o 



f o*o*o f o f o*o*o*o t o*o*o 



*o f ot) , o f o , o f o f o , o f o , o , o f o f o , o > o f o f o < o'o f o , o'o , o 



00 00 
SO 


oo 
c 


00 

c 


00 
sO 


oo 

SO 


00 

2 


00 00 
so so 


DO 
sO 


% 


■41e 


? 


r> 


r- 


o 

(N 






■41g 


o 

CO 

oo 




OO 00 
UJ UJ 


00 

UJ 


00 

UJ 


oo 

SI 


oo 

2 


OQ 

u 


OO 00 

UJ UJ 


00 
UJ 


oo 
UJ 


00 

UJ 


oo 
UJ 


oo 
Q 


00 

UJ 


oo 
UJ 


00 
UJ 


ob 
UJ 


oo 

E2 


oo 
UJ 


oo 
UJ 



m m. rt 



-^0ON??N-- , ' , ll>l~- sO 



I i 



(N (N M N N (N (M 



8888888888 

ooooooooooooocoooooo 



UJ u 



o o o o o 



O O O O 



O O O O 



o o o o 



sp 00 — sO <N sp oospoOOOsO — Ttsp — spo0(NO0s6T}-rs1(N0O 

6 6 666666 66 6666666666666666 

1- so ootrsi rSTrOTfsOsOTj-oorsiTtoOTj-sO so <N -o 

oooooooooooooooooooo oooo ooocooooooooooooooooooooooocoooooooooooooooooooo 

ujujujujujujujujujuj ujuj QujujujujujujujujujujQujujQujujujujujujujujuj 



m m ID iri v, v, in in vi 



>n in >n m >n m, v> in in m in m in m in m m m m m so m m m 



2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 73 



I I I I I I I I I S I 



I I I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I 



I I I 



_ 3 



E E 

oo oo 



00 — 

I £ I I I 



^4 ^ 



I I I I I I I 



J3 jjj 
3 3 
X) X) 



Mill 



3 3 3 3 ^ 

•5 "3 "3 "3 3 
E E E E E 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I 



n- — - 

m 1 1 i I 

- 3 U 8 « 

11 f Is 1 



ESSE 



S 2 2 



3 o _2 

4) Q. — 

■fi e a 

a S a 



o ^ Ji -a 

x: 3 3 c 

a a a o 

n c« sj o 

o o o u 



E =3 



E E 

o o 
oo oo 



_ -a 



3 t3 3 c -3 CD 

a 2 2 <u ^ T3 

C3 <u u £ s -s 

8 E E S-'-S § 



•OT3T3-O-O-0TD-a-T3T3T3-0-O-OT3-OT3T3-0 



-O T3 -3 T3 



75e 


75e 


75e 


75e 


X 

00 

»n 


■42d 


r- 

«ri 


ts 


cs 


sO 
CS 


o 
cs 


vO 
CS 


o 

cs 


cs 


■C 
CS 


CS 


t- 


CO 
oc 


u 

~T 


CS 


o 

cn 


CJ 
CS 

1* 


O 

-r 


00 

r-p 


<S 


00 
CS 


cn 
cs 


«n 




41h 


l- 
es 


CS 
CS 


cs 
cs 


-T 

r- 


>0 
«o 


c 
c 


cc 
W 


oo 

w 


00 
Pi] 


oc 

po 


00 

u 




oo 
W 


00 

03 


00 


00 

UQ 


ob 
W 


00 

UJ 


oc 

u 


00 

X 


00 


oc 

UU 


ob 

PL] 


ob 


00 

PL] 


OC 

W 


oc 


ob 
W 


00 


oo 
[I] 


00 


oo 


ob 
LU 


ob 
Q 


ob 
LI] 


oc 

u 


oc 
X 


ob 
Pi] 


ob 


ob 
W 


X 

■J- 


oc 


C 


3 

u 


C 

u 


e 

S3 


C 

u 




C 
u 


3 

u 


c 

8 


3 

u 


c 
u 


c 


3 

U 

u 


3 

"J 


3 


3 

s 

CO 










3 




3 

u 






e 
u 


3 

W 

u 




3 

4) 




- 


c 

a> 


c 








u 
5! 




u 








u 

3 


u 
« 


CO 


u 


u 
u 

CO 


CO 


<u 
u 

CO 










W 


u 


u 


u 




m 


u 


U 
0> 




Ti- 


CO 




CU 

9 


-* 







§ 


O 


8 


8 


8 


o 
o 




S 


3 


6 


3 


3 


oc 


t 


oc 


oc 


oc 


00 


oo 


oc 


oc 


oo 


oo 


00 


a 




pc 




PL] 


PC 



00 00 00 00 



i+ i+ i+ 

222 



s s s 
2 2 4 



<± 2 



o o o o o o 

« t ^ " t ^ 

d> d> 2 2 <± 2 ei 

O (N (N OO N TT 



<± 6 6 <J> 6 6 

N N N OO 00 X 



2 x 



CN CN CS CN 
c*"i e**i c**) 



in mm m io vi in vi t, >n >n in 



in m in vi it, viviviviviininviviiovivivi in m m in in in 



74 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I I I I I I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I I I E I I I I II 1 I I | I I I | 



^^EEEEEE 



-i I I I I I =5 I 



I I I 



■= E E E E 

g« M S o& 06 oc 

I « es > cj c3 C3 

I -o ■£ .2 0= <a <b 



c3 C3 C3 c3 cd c3 



^ ^: ^ 



— — — 3 a: j 



I II I I I I I I I I I I I I § I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I 



I I 



X) X> -O 
U V u 

c c c 



X) -O jO 



E 

~ o 

B-i 



2 c 
E E O 



2 2 £ jO jo X 
u o 'S C C IS 



1 jj s- 

8-3! 2 



"O 73 X t_> 

r) O f. r~ 2 30 ~ 

r- r~ v. so^ — <"~. ^ v. — * ^ t » o 



i« « Ol IT, « « l« 



W5 C/i 1/3 CO 



8 8 c 8 8 o 

3 1 2 2 3 2 

ac oo >0 oc oc 



O O 8 Q OOOOO080088808800880880OQ 

OOO^OOvONOvO(Nr<00(N010COOOO XMNNXXNXX <~1 



2 * 



XXXXXxXXXXX*«X»XXX3>a>XJO'XXXXXXO>3eXXxXXy3'? 



r» r) n r< 



r) ri rj 



vr, »/-•. v. vr, vr, vr. vr, vr, vr. vr, vr, vr, vr. vo vO vO -O vO vC O >C vO vO O sO O vO vO vO O •£> vC -© >0 vO 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



75 



! 

I 
I 
II 



It 

II 
1 

II 



"o "S 



I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 



Itttftttftt 



1 

,...! . ,1 .. !! t i IIIllllli 

fiiiii, niJin, iiniriiMiuimmn 

ini««««« 0! «iill J il JJJJ0S0! « 0! „i« a! iiiiiiiii 



1 1 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 



ujliiffifilllflililliJiiillilillllli 

is -a -a -s "s "3 •§ •§ •§ "S •§ "S * "§ * * f. 1. 1. .6. k 4 £ i 4 .6. .1, i. 1. 1, ■§ -a umii 

iillliiiilllllillllii!.! 



00+0+0+00+0+00+000+0+0+00+ 



l.iJMIIL_J_JllimillimmmLI 



ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I 



i 

ii 
! 

I 

i 
5 

II 
I 

II 



I 

iillliiili! 

ftttttiii 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I 



1 I 1 II l ill i i) ii 'i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

ill ititittt 

i i i i i i i i i i i §111111 Jill i i i i i i i i i 

iliii!!!!!iiiiii S ii,iil!iiiiii!iiti!iil 

iiiiiiiiiiiUUU .11.1.1, .11 .5 ass .1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 

llillljmilllllililiillll-llililillilli 

SilsSiiiisieeeiieeeSg 

IIIILLILIIIlilllllll-;^,............ 



ooooooooooo 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



77 



I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I 



| Lj 

I I I I I I i I I I I I l I I I 2 If 1 1 1 1 I I II I I I I I I I S 1 1 1 1 | 



ds 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 m M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ill 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
I i. II I! 

s jiiijiftjiiifjiti Jiliiiiii^i^ J3 Jii 

« ! i 1 1 1 i 1 1 .! .1 .1 i .1 .1 = s i i i .1 = .1 .1 .| .5 i i, S i, i I I I I 1 1 

i iiiiiiiiililliiililiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 

i _ _ _ 

11 llllliililllllllllllllllllllllllll 



78 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | 



8 1 

v> O 



E E £ E 

DO 60 60 60 



I I I I II I I I I I 



I II I J I I I II I I I I II I I || 



3 H 



I I 



3 a 



_^ ^ ^ 



I I I I I I I 



I i 



oi J ai 

c3 ^ ri d 

*3 3 "3 3 

X X X X 

■o "3 -3 K3 



' E 



E E I 



x XI 

E E 



0* UL 






j 


j 


it 


lary 


lary 


lary 


lary 


maxil 
maxil 


maxi) 


maxil 


maxil 


maxil 



a: a o! j j 

^ ja 

<3 c9 c3 ^ _o 



E E 



E E E 



co eg i_ 

e e 5 

rt rt O 

o o E 



g -g 3 3 <U XX 



3 3 

O O O. <X" C C X X 



E E 2 2 2 E22 e£22u:5u: 



2 2 u 



CHCHO+O+CHO+O+O+CHO+CH-O+O+CHO+O+O+CHO+O^ 



^ On s On On ON ON ON On On s On s On s On On ON On O^ s ON ON ON ON ON i 

EXSSXSXXXXSSSXSXXXXSXXSSXSXSXSXIXXaEX I 



> E 



cooooooooooo 



ooooooooooooooooooooooo 



OCMM^'t'tM^MOOMOOiCOOOOOOtSOOMOOOOOOOOMOOWOOOOOOSOOOOOOOOOOOOO </i 



g -5 

2 * 



n fN r-J rj <M rl (N N (N 



<n «n <n <n m «n 



ri rl ri n M r| r| ri M M ri (N ri M ri (N (N M N N (N IN (N N rl N N (N (N n ri (N N (N N N (N 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



79 



1 1 

Q o3 



II 

CL 



> E 

J -3- 



S ^ 



8 1 
« p 



Q. — 

OO OO 

Q. O O 



« > JO X) 

-S E E 

Q..E c c 



I I £ I I I I I £ I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I 



E E E E E E E 

60 W) DO O0 60 00 60 

2 I 2 2 2 2 2 ,2 | 









oo 






(O 

= 


c 

V 




c 
u 


c 

V 


B 
1) 


E 


-C 


g 


g 


= 


M 

id 


5b 


a. 


00 










.2 
-o 


£ 1 


1 £ 





2 £ 



5b 



_z 



3 D2 K K K K K 



s 5 a: a: 



b a: a; a: 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



-2 -£ 

I E E I 



I I I I 



I I E E 



I I I I i 



s I S 1 1 1 £ 5 

E E d. o. o. 2 C C 



8. « 

E "3 



III 



^ -£ 3 3 * -£ 



ESS 



sis 



I I 



"S'^'S'^'^'S'S'S'S'S'S'^'S'S'S'S'S = 3 = 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 

CHCHOtCHCHC>0+CHCrtCH'(>CHO+CHCHCHC>^T3T3T3T3T3^T3^T3T3T3^T3-a-a-OT3 

C C C C C 3 3 B 3 C C C 3 3 3 3 3 3 

u « of.— ajr", a O o •joo' - '. — — — — cj cj <— -o _c _c .c it, ~o cs 
oooo-* — ""O^ oo — n m n n n r) - oo — \n — — — — ON^xcf CN^^^O 1 ^-* 

Ov ^> O** ^ ^ ^ ^ s * O** ^ s s s ^ ^ ^ — ^ ^ r 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxoooooouoouoooooxx I 



— — 00 GO 



ooooooooooooooooo 



OOOUU U. Q ffl DQ 03 < O 
— — — iOOooTj-oooooooooooc — 



<s. oo 00 00^(N^(XOO<NOCOOOOOCt+oOCNOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooow 

QO 00 *0 c^J (nJ v O 'O -sO CS sO *0 *0 O O 'O O oo r^J *o 

— s - On O* 1 O^ O** 0*» s s On On On s On O^ s On On s On s s s s s O^ O^ 

o a xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxooooooooouooaooxxo 

C) <N NNNNNNNNNNNNNN(NNNNN(NNN(SN(NNNNNNN|?; I (N <N 



N (N (N D N N 



80 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



"a 

CM <r> 

6 6 

u u 

■£ ■£ 

"2 "2 



I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I H I I I I I i § I I I I I I I I I I | | 1 



E E 
oo oo 



VD C/) W5 t/3 



E E E E E 
oo oo oo oo oo 



■o -o >c 



II I I 



§ 

i 

oo 

(A 

■ J 

■MS I I 



-£ 



a J B! J J 



______ 



q a 



I 4 & 



ji ^ ^ 



i I i I I I I II I I i i i I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 



I I I I 



-a -o 



2 = 



O "P 

.9 £ 

i i 1 8 § I 



E 

CO X) X) p 
fl. t t £ 



E 3 



2 u 



E E E E E 



o u -2 
.S g. 2 



— r*~, so r- 



TJ O O 



ocr-oooo-r--^-(Noc 

^ s s s ^ C^ 1 0* s 



O fl v. r<"> O m 



<N t}- <N 

6 6 6 6 6 



uuuuouuuuuuuuuuuuu 



it 



o o o o 

2222 



</) </l CO ' 

6 6 6 , 

M » » Tf t Tt Tf 



w V Q OOOCOOO OO w 

»niNPiTfo^(NiO n x x x f x x - 



— ooooo coooooo 
OOOOCQQQQQQQQQQQQQQUOUUUUUUOUUUUUUUUUUO 



f T vn vr, </-, >/-, 



w> u-i v. 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



81 



JS J= 



-O -O T3 



I E E 



E U 



sO v£> vO 
m m m 

6 6 6 
U U U 
■£■£•£ 

T3 T3 T3 



w *s u 
_ _ pr, 

S ? iri 

•O T3 O 
S O — 

3 "2 



I i I I I I 1 I I g. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



6 

-c 

I 

I 

nil 



c c S 

<U <U ° 
MM* 

I I I 



I I I I I £ =3 I 4 I 



D. 



2 o 



E 

I I I 



I I I I I 



-2 -2 
^ '-5 



1 1 i 1 1 1 



1 1 1 1 1 1 1 



1 1 1 1 1 i 



1 1 1 1 1 



ill! 



~a T3 T3 



£ ^ 
o 13 



Du Cu J3 Q. O. C 



.a c 3 c 



u u c c h 
E E 3 3 Si 



■O T3 D 13 13 



> E 



C O T T I 

— — 

U U U U U 



- (S * > IT, 



6 6 5 6 6 

x ac ^ ^ 



o o 

— . — &\ Q\ 

U U U U U 



•Or- — X3 — fNOvOr^lCM 
— cn <N O (N — — '(N — m 



— < cn — m cn tt m 

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 



m m mm 

- - XI IT, - 

<6 <6 ^' d <~> 



u u u 

Ti- 
ro — s/"5 


uuuuuuuuuu 

. — i r-j — I*. - — rj n rj N (M 


UUUUUUUUUUU 

t+ — i 1 — w — — — rirvrvj — 


U U U U U U U 


80-s : 

20-40 

40-60 i 


20-40 

60-80 

80-s 

80-s 

80-s 

80-s : 

0-20 : 

80-s : 
80-s : 

40-60 


20-40 

80-s 

40-60 

80-s 

80-s 

40-60 

80-s 

80-s : 

40-60 

80-s : 

80-s 


80-s : 

40-60 
80-s 
80-s 
40-60 

80-s : 
80-s 


o — 


— oooooooo 


C O O O O CO 


O O O CO 



uuuuuuuuuuuuouuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuu 



2 £ 



vr~, in 



u-, in if; ir, w </-, it-, in »/-, 



82 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



T3 

"5 g 

u. c 



1 1 



s 1 



I I I I 



60 

c 

3 CL 

o 03 



I I I I 



a 5 a <n 
c *s 

= ^ "3 . 
.a ^ .ii m 

fijf §5 

U r ) U . 
3 S 3n 
"u an o tC 



E E E E 
&o &o bo eo 



I I I I I I I 



I I II I 



a: a: j os K 



c3 c3 ct3 

3 3 3 3 
.0.0.0.0 

5 ^ ^ a 

cj r3 o3 cj | 

E E E E I 



- E 



*o *o *o <-o *o *o *o *o*o*o*o*o 



— • T, <~r\ cG . O 

n Tf it, in (S (S 
6066666 



\C 'O * W N 
m — — > 

6 6 6 6 6 



uuuuuuu uuuou 



JC <*> < •— , 

— N n in m « n ts <n <n 



r-i on 

6 6 

u u 

-E ■£ 

I I 

"O 



M I I II § II I I I I I I I I II I I I 



I I I I I 



£EEE£"~;££_ 

6060606060^606000 



E £ 



I 2 2 2 2 



J4 M ^4 ^4 M 



J j aL QZ oz 



IIIIIIH 
EEEEEEEE 



I I I I I I I I 



I I 



CM cn 
£2 2 



£ ^5 jD 

-o -o T3 



T3 T3 T3 



u 2 2 



- 2 
E I 



OOOOOOOOO 



r*"i <"•"> r*l 
6 6 6 6 



I — M fi N 

— <N </"> <N -O 

6 6 6 6 T 



UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUQ 



<NOJ<N<N<N<N(N<N 



00 C*"l CO 0^ CO* £o 



r~ — — <n — ■ 



V) </> (/i 



</) t/i w <s> 



0000000 00000 



00 00 00 00 00 00 00 



00 00 00 NO 



00000000 o 

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 7iTt\p(Nr)(NMvD\£) c/5 10 </) </5 

oooooooooooiooooiooooJ 

nDvOnOnOnOnOnOnOOO 



00000 



tJ- 00 00 00 OO <N 



0000000 00000 
UUUUUUU UUUUU 



222222222 2222 c o o o ^ 

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUQ 



yr, «/-, v, v, it, 



ir, ir, v, «/"■ v~, </-, ir, 



2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 83 



2 "9 2 

s S e 



o 

u 

f 4 

■8 2 
|<-> 

i a "2 



I I II 



I I I 



yr~. -rt 

6 6 

U u 

.e x: 

I I 

1 | 

I I I I I I I EE I I I I I I 



I I I I I 



I I I I I 



I I I I I I 



■3 6 EE 

— 00 60 00 

I =3 £ I I «S «S 



■o .2 

If 

2 3 E 



* E 



Ml 



» i' S 



E E 

60 00 c 

.2 .2 p 



11 



5jj 5 a a: is; 



2 * 



I II III 



I I 



I I I I II I I I I II I I I I I 



I I I I I I I 



a .a 

Z E b 

i § i 

* .9 JJ 





lanx 


lanx 


lanx 


lanx 




pha 


pha 


pha 


pha 


15 


-a -g 




T3 


13 


g" 


G-J 




C 

3 
-c 


C 

C3 


taci 


8 -a 


3 


■a 


3 


me 


E =3 


dis 


dis 


dis 



1 I 



.9 Q. O. j= 3 Q. £ 



•o c .S .5 
■a § -g «g 



E o 



S | £ =§ | 1 



OtOtCHOOtOOOtOtOOtOOOtOOOOOOOOOtOt 



0+0+0+0+0+0+0+*'0 



^ ° ° 

On — ~- 

a u u 



fN 

eacaca o JD _ x> £ u ^ !C 

w it, m omoivovO a o\ r, fi x x (S . o 

222222222222222222229222 
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 



in >n »n >n in m >n 



nO 

x> ca -a 
«n in, ~ m 

>r, it. vo vo m ~ 

:s la *> sq sq ~s £ 
66666666 



uuuuuuuu 



X).0-O.O.OX).OX>.0.0 



— — (N <N CN 



.2 «n 8 



ci c-> c-» 



5 | 



3 3 3 

<N 00 OO 



■y. •s. s. S. S- \r. S. j- y -S. 



C/3 V3 «3 W (/3 



OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTj-OOOOOOOO-rtOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO X X X X 00 00 



<fl</3I/3CAC0NQc/}<0 



^ o o 

ON — — 

P u u 



OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO 

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU uuuuuuuu 



NO NO NO 



NO NO sO NO NO NO nOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnOnO^OsOnOnOsO 



\0 \D *0 NO "-O ^O [ 



84 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



L 

u u u 



? 6 



I I 



s ? s 

"3 "8 "8 

-C -C -C 

u o u 

c3 <3 fa 

E E E 



I I I I I 



I I I 



"S "S 

-C -C 

E E 



•£ -S 

"5 i 



I ! I h I I I i I I I I I I I I I I 



>^ >> 

_ -E ~Z -C 

? ^ a 2 a 



U r T) T3 13 



c c c c c c 



E E E E E E 

00 00 00 00 OX) 00 



c c c c c 



E E E E E 

00 00 00 00 00 



a I c c 



<n -C .C 



IMI I 



.£ J«! 

§ 3 3 J J Bi Cl! 3 



1 1 1 1 



■a -a -a -a -a 



^ ^ ^ 



5 jos 3 



I I I I I I I £ J I 



I I I II I I I II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | | I I 



3 3 

E E 



3 3 3 1) 



E E E 

t) iu .4) 



III 



3 3 3 3 "3 }=; "2 
.O .O .O .O .O g £ 



E E 



E E 

o o 



E is 



E E 



> E 



5 -o -o 

<u e c 
goo 



^)^^^^^^5^^50*(>(>(>tCH<)t(>0*OtCHCHO*CHOtCHC)*C>t(>0«C>O»OtC»0tCH(>C»(>C)»(> 



oo^oooooo — — — — — o — — — — — — — — — — O — OOO — — — — — — — — — 



UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU 



— i/> Tf- r- 



X) <*- rr — 



J! 



K -c -r oo 



oo OO 



opooo o ooooooooqppo 
2 o o ^ 2 2 2 



O O Q O O O 



ooo^ooooooiooooooloioJoooioiooi^ 



c) ci tj- o) \D vC 1- ^ o c-i r-i tj- 



K 1 
J i 



oo oooooo — — — — — o — — — — — — — — — — o — ooo — — — — — — — — — 

CCouuuuuuuuuuuouuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 



r-r-r^r-r-r-r^r-r-cc 



ooooooooooooooooooooacoooeooooooooooooooocoo 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



85 



-O T3 TD "O "O 
JZ (N X! <N -C — 



II I II i I I I 



2P- * 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I iu iu iu eu iu I I I I I 



till 



<U U <u 



I I I I I 



E E E 

60 60 60 
I I I II I I II I 



E E 

60 60 

II I I 



I I I I I I I 



J J J 6i K DC 



a: j a; j a; a: 3 3 



_^ _^ _^ 

C C C C C 



K o£ o£ « 3 



u o 
Q S3 



3 3 3 3 



_ X X X X> X> X 

■rd ^ r3 ^ ^ r3 rt ~ 

I EEEEEEEEE 



j3 ^* c3 o3 c3 ^ 



E E 



£ I I I I 



I I I I I II I I I I 



I I I I 



e £ 2 s 2 u 



e/j y> Sj O O 
<N — (N aj o o p -3 "3 E 

SSSEEE^kSS^ 



E 

5 "3 



OOOOOOOOOO 



CHOOOOtCHCHOtOtOOOtOtOO 



0+0+0 0+ 



C3 X X X X X o O 

n-oflencimw- < - m * » 

N * * N N N - ' — ' (S (N - vO — 



ouuuuuuuuu uuuuuuouuuuuuuu 



u u u u u 



c c c c 

u o> u u 

4J l) (O u 



> E 



O O O O i 

Ills; 

^J- ^ <N (S <N 



\— ' W < W W ' W * ^ — ' ' »W v_ < 

i2^3 5 6 6 2 J 2 J 2 J 2 3 4 2 d J 2 2 2 



o o o o o 

22222 

N N N 



uuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuu u u u u uouuu 



S J3 



0C 00 0O0O00000O00CO00 0OOO0OOOO00O 00 0O0O0O 



oo oo oo 



00 00 00 00 00 oc 



86 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



3 S 



I I 



u 

■E 

|| 

I EU 



u u 

•£ S 

<U U 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I £ £ I | | | | | I 



I I 



<N 

c c c 

E E 6 

00 60 BO 



t/5 V) <fl </3 



1/5 </i </) </j cn </) 



c c c c c 



EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 

ooooooeoooooo06060&0606060600000 
I i (1 ci 



2 |2 2 



a) o> o a> 



E E E E E E E 

60 60 60 60 60 60 60 

| 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 



^ 



^ J<! ^£ J* Jxt 



33333333 



e c c c 



X 3 5 



I I II I 



1 1 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I II I I I I 



3 .2 .2 3 

"3 ~ 3 ^ £ 



X) X) 

C C m 



ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 


ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 
ified bone 


unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 


unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 
unident 



o o o 



60 C 

O 2 



•a -a T3 -a -a 



Tg-OT3-OT3T3-0-U-0 



o o+ o+ o+ o+ 



0+CH0+CHO+0+O+0+0+0+O+0+O+0+CH0+0+CHO+0+0+ 



CHO+0+CHO+0+0+0+0+ 



U d a us 

^tJ-OO-^O — t+u-, 
^t — — — t*l (N ^ ^ 



uuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu u uuuuuuuuu 



o 2 



ooooo oo ooooooooooooo 



3 2 2 3 2 2 2522222222 2 2 222 3m If If 2 22222335 



uuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu u UUUUUUUUU 



1 i 

2 X 



oc x » » oc 



ooooooooocoooooooooooo oo ^ooo^o^o^oct* 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



S7 



u u 

11 

ii 

i i 1 1 1 1 i i i i ii i i ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 

666 6 6 

I IllII 

! urn 

jijijiiijiiiiiijiiiiim 

lf J 1 JJJ 1« JJ llll.-i««Hl!S»1liillHll.« J . J 

ii If! Hi 

I I I I I I I EEE I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EEEEE 



j j nun 

!lllii! SSl jlfl!!!ll!ll!lll!!l?lIL, 5 == 

I -a ■§ ■§ ■§ -s ■§ ■§ -s -a ■§ -a "S ■§ -s ■a "a "a -a tj "s "§ is -a is "a -a .1 4 .= .1 .1 = .= .S, .= .1 .1 .1 .1 

JS <>CHOtC*CH<>C>0+CH<>CHO+0+CHC>CHCH(>C>+<>C><>^ 



o o o 



8888888S8SSSS 



U 333333S3333333SS3333SII3333333333333333 

D uuuouuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 

l J : r r r r r 5 ' , , ~ - , ' " > ~ 



88 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I 



3 



i 



6 r -i 6 2 

5S2"Sl 1 1 



CN (N (N tN 



I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I 

lllipipjf 1 1 

f f If i iiilllili , ,f, 



6 6 6 6 6 
E E E E E 

lipsi f 1 if mil 

llilli-.lslsli ,, ,11111 



I I 



i in fill 



1 1 1 1 1 1 




huh 1 



EEEEEEEEE 



ii IIS! 1 



§1111 I II I 



I c3 1 I ^ ^ ^ 

I E E I I E E E E 



lliis^lilllliilil ! Il 1 UJILoesI 



s .1. s .1. .1. .1. .1, .£ & .1. .1, .1, .1. .1. -a, -s -a -a 

lilllliilllli] 



13 13 13 1313.|.|l313131313131313 



*o *o *o *o 



11 



*o *o *o •0*0-0-000000000 



0000000000000 

iiiggggiiiiii 1 SS2S 



<N (N (N <N 



ON Ov 



* * a a 



Jif 



II 

^ t^-m so <-^ — </3i/> — — — — — — — — 



iiSiiii^iiiiiilSIl S 11 1 l!££££££££ll 



e S g g B g s R g g g g g 



00000000000000--- 



2 5 5 a s a a a a a a 



n n a s s s a a a a 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



89 



I I 



I I I 



(N (N (N 

6 6 6 

— _ — 
■ESS 

% % '$ 

T3 T3 T3 

u u i) 

X jr 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I 



— 

I 8 



iiili.iirE.tiii 



M 1 M I M M M M I 



I Itt I I I II I I I I 



E E E E E E 

M 60 M M 50 M 



J«4 ^ ^ J* J£ M 



<5 c$ 

E E E E E 



MM 



II II II I II I I 



E E 



I E E E 



MM 



I I I 



T3 T3 



s = 



E E 



d a c -g 
p. X) 5 4j 

g S3 § c c 



E E eu & E-^oaJ 



= 3 

o - 

_ > £ 

m ee aj 



OOOOOtOCHCHOCHOOOOOOOOCHOtCHOOOtOtOtCHCHCHO 



0+-0-0-OT3-0-0-0 



a" X T3 x x oo q. e ea ea ea 

OOVOOOCN— i — — — — — — — — — — — — O O e> 

666666600022222222^222222° 

u_u.iIEE£I£IiIiZiLutiIEH 



ea ea ea o 

» 3v - - 

— — > (N <N 

6 6 6 6 



22222222 
nEiiu.iIu.ix 



u. u. u. u. 



CT X T3 X X M 



1/) v> 



c o o o o 

OCOOOOOOC»e/i(«t/5(/5U5!/5W(/3t/J</ie/5t«t/5tG!/i(/5 
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 



o3ooooo6 

00CN0C0000v©vO(N 



22°222222222222222222222222222 



22222222 
Eu.EEijLu.ijLLu 



2 x 



^ ^ t ^ 



N (N N (N 



90 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



11 
I 

8 I 
2 a 



I I I I I I I I jf I I I I I I 1 I 



1 

WiifllllUJLJ! 



T3 "O 



I I I £ I I I I I 



1,1 , 

HUH 



f 



li ill 



i i i i 



ft I 



II I I 



1111111111111 



1 3 
3 3 



_j _j _j _ 



mill 



l! 



_ _ _ _ _ 



flf 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LI I I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 



1111! 



I 



biillllll.luiili.IHitiiif.illl II., 

.1 S .5 .5 * ,| * I. A .= .= 1 .1 i .1 = = i i I * .5 * * i i i * .1 .6, £, .= £, .5 * .1 § S 

llllllllllllillllllllllllllllllil Hill 



666666666666666666666666666666666 66666 
EiiliilEEililEEililEilE^EII^EililEEEiEEiE E E E E E 



i # ^ a 



£ £ « r l _ r 1 £ £ ^^o°f^ 



n 3 i I I 



g £ £ £ 



liliSIIiilllllllliilllililllllllS Hill 



ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg g 



o o o o 



h a a *q a jq a a a - - aaaaaaaa a 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I 



o 
E 

'I 

|5 
I I Ie 



o 
E 



a 2 



EE EE I 



<u _ 

*2 
E u. 



* E 



£ E 
E -a' 



I E & 



= 2 
«3 u. 



3" 2 



I I J I 



I I I I I ! I I 



I I 



I I I I 



■c3 * 



^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 



i i i c3 c3 c3 Cg <3 

I I I E E E E E 



III 



cd c3 cd 

E E E E E 



I I E 



u s 



U 2 2 m ? 

TD T3 T3 Dl. Q- 



2 2 



o 3 
a. <u 



5j S 13 u ij w 



T3 -a -a 



o o © 
E 



E E I I I I I I I 



I I I I I 



6 6 



xi -a is 

— < (N (N 

6 © © 

E E E 



OOOOOOOOOO CO Q © 

SOCNlCOOOOOOOOCflOOUIBlBIBlHW* vpoo 



w O O 



© 

OO CO V) 

5 o ci 



O <i © 



2222222222 
U.EEEEEEEEE 



O O O O O O tt- 



o o 

E UL 



o o o o o 



iom«r>irt«n«rt«n«n(niomv)«ninm>nm in m in in mm in »n in >n in in m 



92 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



Q. C3 Q. 03 

u O u O 

§ E § E I I 



6 6 



I I I I I I I I I I 



T3 -D -O T3 



q. a. q. a. 



a. 

S g 



I I I I I 



X <N X) <N 



B e *s e 'S e e c tj 
EE-nE-gEEE 
22 --"2 '-" 222 I 



W5 t/) lO 10 



I I I I I I I I 



E E E 

W) W) OJ) 
u ™ u 



E E E E E E 

60 00 00 60 Hi 60 



^4 



-s. ^ _^ 



^ ^ _^ 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



£ £3 X X £ £ 

■3 "3 "3 "3 K3 "8 

ci ^ § ^ § ^ 

E E E E E E 



I I I I I I I I I I I I 



X! 



2 2 



o TJ 



4) X) 

"y =3 



2 c 



g x> « * = u 
> C o E — 2 2 T3 



>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 



— (No 
TJ TJ .£ 

> 



TJ — 

5 o 2 
g. § ■& 
o a. y 

CA t/l O 



TJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJTJ 



"O "O "O 



(N — m X) X> W X 
— — <N — - * vO 



— — 00 

sO — — 00 — 

o o o o o 

x x x x x 



X X 03 c3 X 



u 



oooooooo 



O O Q O O 



vi v> oooo<^^irJvp\pvpn^Jtospr<rsi(-l(N(N<N(^ltooooo«oov£> O x oo i co f sp 

| I 3 1 | i <4 2 2 3 d> d> 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 <4 6 Z 6 6 6 2 2 6 2 2 & I 2 

00 00 >© >© O0 Tj-TfrTf OO-^- 00 sO vO 00 vO sC sO T n Tf 



oooooooooooooooocoo — oooco 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 



o o o o o — 

X X X X X X 



2 M 



~r t t 



t t -r 



t ^ n n t n n 



Tt f -J t t 



2002 LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 93 



o -a 
a — 



8 

1 2 



9P Tn-J 



E 2 



f ^ r- " r- 
E E E 



I I I 



— - c 

1 (n a 

- 2 - 

* _ 
■g d 

x: <n oo 

§22 

EOO 



T3 fN 

o 6 

o — 

•a O 



5 | 
— ? 



E I I 



I I I I I I I 



E 

2? 



5. E 
£ oo 

I I I 8 «£ 



E E 

60 00 



8 i 



^ ^ ^ .O ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 

EEEEEEEEE 



I I 



till 



a s £ 



— <N — g 

a s s s 2 

•o -a -a -o u 



BJ o 

E ^ 



3 T3 "O T3 -O 



.2 •£> 
rt CQ 



"0T3T3TD-O-O-O-0-O-0 



U 



II I I I I II I I I I I I 



I I 



c 


en 










<N 










6 


a 


6 




5 


5 


5 


5 


3 



2 2 



O .E 



-a 

3 g 



> E 

1) o 



ooooooooooo o 

«n OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOsO t~~ 

1 66666666666 6 



o o o 



o o o 

00 00 00 «5 (N vO 

1 6 6 6 6 6 6 



t-> r~ r- oo 



o o o — o o o 

5 5 o o 5 o a 



6 

00 CN 



22 



2 2 



CQ u 



-a o 
<u — 

£ o 



vo so r~ r- r- r~ 

N N (S N N tN (N 



I? 



94 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



* 3 

---! 

t" 5 3 

•8 0°. 

X N 00 

EGO 



"?6 
25.3 



-a - 
io . — 
.C \o — 

| 6 6 
EGO 



I I I I I I I I I I I 



■£■£■£■£ 

5 '$ '% I 

"O TD T3 T3 
« u ij aj 

S "3 "3 G H H f- f- (- H H (- 

a a a a 

TO TO 03 to _ _ 

ESE cacc:c: 

^7* r-- r — y i — . >^ i — ' " ~ — — 

5 > 1 > 2 > 2 > > > > > > > > > 

. P"0 P TD O-O 0T3T3T3TD-OT3-O-O-5 

I cL.E o..E cL.S c-.E .E E E E .E E E B 



2 * 



.a -S 1 
% 2 

- <e 
-5 «J 



I I I I I 



■2 g B- 5- 
w» S .2 .2 

C Q. T3 TD 



E E 

E E J J 

.2 .2 a H 



I I I I 



az a:. & oi % as 3 os a: a: 



J a: j ai a; j a: 



i i 



ii i i i 



i i i i i i 



i i 



i i i i i 



i i i i i i i i 



'5 2 

3 O 



s 

1 <" * 

§ 3 o fj ii 



9- ?3 4) O C «) 

5 £ E .2 = E 



5. .2- .2 « « « _ 

i §"11111 



W <U 4J W 

3 « 3 3 

c c c c 

E E E E 



•a •g t) td -o -o 



•g td -td t3 td td -o 



o+ o+ o o o* 



O 0+ Ot CH O O O O Ot O O CH Ot 



o+ooo+o+ooo 



~ 6 

5 3 



o o o o o 

3 3 5 5 3 



tr C M « £ £ 
\D Tf \0 — 

J. J. J, o — — 



tJ- N (N (N (N rt 
06666 — 



OOOOOO OOOOOOO 



— o 



I I I I I I 



«j u ca 60 



I I I I I I 



£ E 



o o 

» © 5 2 



O O 

6 6 6 5 6 6 

" 00 \D 



2 2 > > £ 6 6 

fN (N > > > 0O 



— o 
o o 



o o c o o 
OOOOO 



00000 



oooooccc 

00000000 



OOOOOO OOOOOOO 



ri r» r-< ri n n rs 



ri ri ri ri rsi 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



95 



H H E- 

33333333 = ==33333 

£ E .£ .£ .£ c c c < < < c c c c c 
><<<<< 

"a Sfc i. :> > 



<<<<<<<< 
> > > > > > > > 
-o-a-5-5-5-5 ; 5'S 



T3 T3 T3 T3 T3 



— Tt <N 



O 
O 

is 

a 2 
s 5 



a 2 
£ 5 



I I I £ £ 



I I I 



n f- f- h- 

S *5 

£ -j -j j 

£ S £ •£ 

jo r) < < < 

5 > > > > 

, I | p T3 -5 -5 -a 

I I I o..S .£ .£ .£ 



I I I I I I I I 



3 OS OS OS OS _J 



11 I I 

■a 



1 1 1 



c 

.22 T5 

2 !! 2 S 2 2 2 

■3 ? ■3 £ ■o -3 t 



a. o. o. 



8 
v 

8 

o. 
c 

o 

E 
o 



E 

I £ 



I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I 



I I I 



3 — 

E .g 



E x> 
.2 o 

S. 8. 



E E 



u o 



u C 

> u 

v. > 

rt _ 

X) 

£ y 



E | £ £ 

£Z Jz <£2 £2. 



s 

u 

£ .2 



xi _e o 



a. 



l"3 

I 8 



1 i 

3 -g 



S B C 



•O "3 13 T3 



■0-OT3-OT3-0-0-0-0-0-0-OT3-a-0 



T3 T3 TD 



O0+O00+0+0+0+0+0+CHO+CHO+0+0+*0 



"o*o f o f o f o ,1 o ,i o*o f o*o*o*o*o*o*o 



-a 

3 2 



I I I I I I II I I I I I 

i ii i i r i i i i i i i i i = 





ts 




•a 


6 


6 




a 


O 


O 


O 






-D U -O 



C3 X) O T3 X X 



Si 



^ *c3 "c9 "?3 "<3 "c3 "c3 "c3 *c3 "c9 



o o o o o o o 

\D \D \p \D \C N (N uj «5 W300 



t ^ ^ 



o o 

00 vO 

_ ci 2 

OO O 



£2222222222222222 
oooooaoooaaooaooo 



~22222222 ~ , ~ —,_ "° 
Soooooooaoooooo 



° 2 2 
a a a 



96 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



H E- H H H H 



< < < < < 
> > > > > 
■S "3 "3 "3 "3 



< .S 

a < 



1/1 VI (S N .3 .3 D..i3 O..S 



O T3 

B..S 



p -o p -o p -o 



E2 ! I I I 



I I I I I I I 



I I I I 



I I I I I I I I 3 I 



<U 4) <U 4) O 

E E E S o -q 

60 60 60 60 4> 4> 



it^i I I I 



I I I I I I I 



0£ -J Q£ »J 3 J 3 3 



^ M ^ .2 



J -J -J -J -J 



I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I 



ja jo ja jo £ 
3 -3 "3 *3 *3 3 3 



II I I I I I I E EE E 



E E E 



£ £ a 



oo cn 60 00 

60 60 § § c 

§ J J « J 

13 "3 a 

■a ^ f f 1 1 i" 

1 1 1 1 3 jj -a 

S cs x x "o "O ~c& 

« « o o s s i 

E E a a. E E 3 



•O T3 T3 -O 



•O T3 T3 T3 



E E = 2 U a 2 2 S E 



"O TD T3 "O "O "O T3 "O "O "O "O TD "O 



*o*o*o*o*o*o*o*oo+ 



o o+ at 



I I I I I I I I E 



u. a. x 



— — 0000000000000 
E E U U U U 



UUUUUOUOU 



■o 

I 8 



I I I I I I I 



1*1 c*l 1*1 ro 



II 



OOO 

00 ^© v© 



OOO 

00 00 

o o 

\osooooooooooooooo«oox 



WW V— ' W "w P 

22 niiiii^^^ici^ 



00000000E 



UL UL UL 



— — -0000000000000 

2:2; 2:EEEuuuu<juu<juuucju 



I j 



— ■ — ■ — . ^5 ^5 ^3 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ © ^ sC 



1 ct n n >. <r 

M N is rl ^ ,C 

s s s s 5 - 

<N wi w, iri _ \0 

N N o« — 



<<<<<<<<<<< 

^ *© \© \0 \0 s© *© sC v© 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



97 



SU 3 

I I I J I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I too I I I I I I I 1 § I I I I 

lltfill I * till 

\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ $££$£££ \ g \ | | § | | | | | J « i. S 
J «« 0! 111 ..ill 111 IlL^J llll 



j j a! a: o; a; 



ii uttHI! niiii 



E E E E E E E E I E E E E E 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I llll 

ii nil I i m 

i=i £s Ji 2 i SE2 ill!!i!lll! iiililli llll 

I liiillilililill-iliiilii iiliiill 111! 



* llilllllllillllgsi 



Fll-7 

GlO-5.3 

GlO-5.3 

GlO-5.3 

Gll-6b 

Gll-5.1 

GlO-11 


GlO-11 
GlO-11 
GlO-11 


6 6 6 6 6 
o o o o o 






!!!!! 




60-s 
60-s 
60-s 


%% $ % % 


- 2 2 2 - - 2 
E 5 o o o 5 5 


o o o 
DDO 


o o o o o 

5 5 o 5 5 



5^ 



£ - 



II 

.•a coooooooooooooo — — _-ooo 
5 uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu^Eooo 

II lllllllllllllllllllllllll iiililli llll 

.<<<<<<<<<<fflO!C0m ( j v ^„ rif r, m^oooooj oooooooooooooooc oooooooo 

1 c f ££££££££ £ £ £ £ 



ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I 



I 

o 

I 

j 

II 

J 

I 



11 

i 

II 



11 



I 



I I 



l I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I II l l l I I I I i i i I 

t 

i 1 
III ill I ! I 

i i & If i i i I if i i i i i s i i i i i-i i i r r i i i 1. 1 i i 1 1 
lllllllllll« J « J 11111«.,l JJ « JJJJJ 11««i 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



lllfffffffffff. 

i.iilll.iiinh.iliin........ii..i 



i 
1 

! 



llililiillllllllilliiiiilili]]]]]!]] 



oooooooooooooooooooooool I o 

— ! 



— — — — — — — — ~~ooooooooooooo — — — — — — — — — ~ — — — 

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 

llillilllliiilliiiillllliliiiliiiiil 



I 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



99 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I 



i i i i i i i i i i i i i i f Iff if if if if fif if i i i i i i i i i i i i i I 



ftijjjjjJDSaiaiJ 



ii iiiiiftlilliif Itl'mtrimr, 

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEl I I I I I I I I I IeeeeeeeeeeeeeI 

i ill!!!!! I 

ciSau&zsaiaiil 11111111 f 1 g u § « « I s s i I ! = a 1 

| i?i3i-siiiii?i?^i-ai^iii.UI,l,|.l,.tUi.l..U = l,i 

s Illlliiiliiiiiiiillllllillliiiillllllli 

u oooooooooo i I Iqqqqqqqqqquuuuuuouuooouuoq 

ii a ,*« a ^ 2 ffL„JJf!fffffffffffifff 



D OOOOOOOOOOOOOQQQQQQQQQQUUUUUUUUUU 

IS |||||||||||||&^ 



100 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



I 

1 
I 

I! 



n 
i 

li 



Q Q 

£ S 

5 'I 

I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I 



hi , , ilii liilllf i , . , , iilllllitlll , Hill 

1 « « m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

I ii i JI 

itfULillflllfffiillLJliilLiJll 

1. 1 1 .1 1 j, * £ £ £ .1 1 1 £ .1 1, .1 .1, .1, .1 .1 1 .1 1 £ £ | s = £ s J, £ £ -s -a -a •a * 

Ilililililiilliiillliiiiiillliiiiliiili 



: « « „ 2 S : = % S S . S S S S 2 S J 2„ „ . „ S ; « „ . 2 „S f 25 | 

llflfII!fISiRf!l 29a l 9 !lfISIIL.JJ.,J 

g 3 - 3 - - - - - 5 1 - - - - 5 ! g s s $ s 2 3 3 3 3 9 

SoccooooObfeSSoooooooooOSSoSool I I I I I I I I I 



n id ci n m o 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



101 



I 



i 

3 

I* 

II 
i 

SI 
j» 



II I I I I I II I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I 



I 



I 



i, , .llllilliilllllllillllll.lll.i.i, , , 

a^lllllllllllllllllllllllllflll^l^u 

ii 



I I g I G I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



iL.ttilllllifill 



innnnnm i 

uiiiiiiihilHiii 

■§-S"§-S"S"S'S'S'S'S'S'S'S"S'S"S'S"S"S'S'§'S'S'S'S"S"S'S'S'S'§'S.I,.|"S'S'S-S-S 

*-„ «i 111 « - _ _ i 

S § 5 i i 1 3-S S S 1 1 

°° § o o o oooo ooo 00008 

CN00000000000000<NO 00 00 00 00 OCCNOOCsOUoOvO^OOCvOsD — ooooooooso 

o,oo°2°oo2°oooo22222 M 22oo oc3 ,°:::^^:%2^^^ ,ovovc>2 



I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



102 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



= I o°;2 o°- 6 

U o ? - ? _ o 



62 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3 I I I I I I 200 I 200 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

1 1 , Hlllll f ,,,,!! ,, laiuiiiii 

.1 1111111111111 

11 liiiiiiii! 1 

D " 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 

'Ifllljilli.Hi.i.s.H il Jlil 

1 lllllilllliillllli]]] !! llllllliiiil] 

uuooxoouEl I I I I I I I I loo lo OOul2lu-OUUUUUu:0 

Ii iililSiilliiliilisiSl il mmiuidi 

s 2222o>2222 222^222^222 S 2 22^0222222° 

D UU00I00Ux2u-u.0u-u.u-uu0u.00 oo OOu-xu-OUUUUUuSO 

J] I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

I g I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



2002 



LARSEN: LATE PREHISTORIC GUALE BIOARCHAEOLOGY 



103 



I I II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I 



IllIIil , 1 , , , lltlilllllllllllllll 



S! 



i i ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 1 1 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 



111 



Ltiiilllli! 



Jil illlllllllllli 

slLiUllHHIIfliil 



IHilllliilllililllliillliiiiliilllilli 



8 

H 
i 

II 



3 S 2 2 H H "O H ^^^^ - $ „ * 2 

oo22222°S222o25j2^^ 

UUUUOOOUXUOOu-OOOOOOOUUEUWQUUUQujujujXXUUUU 
oooo ooooo^ o o 8 o ooo oog 

3COOOOOO>?>00^0(N (NOOTtTj-Tf(N<NvOvOOOOO<NOOTj-OOOOOOOOOCOC"* 



22222222^22222^^000000^0 000^ ^0 

UUUUOOOUXUOOu-OOOOOOOUUXUuJQUUUQuuaauJXXUUOU 



I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



104 ANTHROPOLOGICAL PAPERS AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY NO. 84 



ii 

a. o 



> E 



J i 

2 -c 



i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i a i i i i r i 



- > >, 
1 & I 

3 H e 

£ C W) 

|||U 

> — w O 



<A</>v>t/></></>u>v>i/></)t/>v> 



j« « ^ » M 



EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 

OQOOOOoQOOOObObOoO ' 



5*> w> w> wi w> w> 

O u u u S u | 



<b <ts o= <i: 



<£: <fc «fa * 



13 3 3 3 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



"c3 "<9 "c3 "c9 

'3 'x x '3 



T3 

Mill 



fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 


fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 


fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 
fied bone 


fied bone 


fied bone 
fied bone 

e 
e 
e 
e 


denti 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 
identi 


identi 
identi 


identi 

identi 
identi 


c 

T3 "3 


identi 
identi 
tebra 
tebra 
tebra 
tebra 
12 


cccccccccccccccccc 

333333333333333333 


c c c 

3 3 3 


c c c c 

3 3 3 3 


C X 

3 'S 


C C <U U <D O ^ 
3 3 > > > > T5 



T3 -o -a -a T3 



m m oo 
o o o 
U U U 



7 ? ? 
00 oo oo oo 



T T 



oo r- oo 

— CI C"> 


-r 


« 

in 


(S 

>n 


CI 
iri 


X) 
CI 
vO 


u-> 
r— 


(S 
OO 






VO 




00 00 oo 

uu uj uj 


op 


CO 
UJ 


oo 

UJ 


00 
UJ 


OO 
UJ 


X 
UJ 


00 

W 


Ov 
UJ 


UJ 


UJ 


oo 2 
U. X 



— Ul ^ — 



r~ oo c-i — <n 

0\ Os Qs o\ Q\ o\ 



a a 



4 e± 6 

OC OC 00 



I I I I 



o o o o o o 

\D O 00 O \D 00 (N 



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 



E E 



I I 



I I 



Anthropological papers of the 

St. Catherines Island, Georgia, has been the focus of 1 Amer ican Museum of Natural 

a century, beginning with excavation of mortuary loc History. 

Clarence Bloomfield Moore. Moore's pioneering resea American Museum of Natural 

prehistoric inhabitants of the region, including what a history 

tal remains. Following up on this work, Larsen and his R ece ived on i 08-09-02 
I, one of seven burial mounds first des ;ribed by Moore 
Mounds of the Georgia Coast (1897). 



AMNH LIBRARY 




Bioarchaeology of the Late Prehistoric Guale describ 200004535 aken by Larsen, 
which confirmed Moore's written comments that very tew 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. Folio wup 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 
Island 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 
Stale University w here he is the Distinguished Professor of Social and Behavioral Sciences. 



( lover: Frontispiece from C.B. Moore's Certain Aboriginal Mounds oj the Georgia Coast showing 
an urn burial from South End Mound I.