• Find People
  • Campus Map
  • PiratePort
  • A-Z
    • About
    • Submit
    • Browse
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   ScholarShip Home
    • Dissertations and Theses
    • Master's Theses
    • View Item
    •   ScholarShip Home
    • Dissertations and Theses
    • Master's Theses
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of The ScholarShipCommunities & CollectionsDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeDate SubmittedThis CollectionDateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypeDate Submitted

    My Account

    Login

    Statistics

    View Google Analytics Statistics

    Comparing Methodologies for Documenting Commingled and Fragmentary Human Remains

    Thumbnail
    View/ Open
    SUSSMAN-MASTERSTHESIS-2017.pdf (9.624Mb)

    Show full item record
    Author
    Sussman, Emily
    Abstract
    Commingled and fragmentary human remains are a common occurrence in archaeological and forensic contexts, but only a few methods have been developed to record these complex assemblages. Conventional inventory methods, such as the Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains, referred to from here on out as Standards, document the presence and completeness of specific portions of skeletal elements and the minimum number of individuals (MNI) represented by each bone portion. This rather subjective method for MNI calculation does not provide much transparency for future researchers using these data. However, new techniques for recording and analyzing commingled assemblages and for MNI calculation have been developed using zooarchaeological zonation methods, which document specific features present rather than more general measures of completeness. This study identifies any significant differences in MNI calculation results using Standards versus Osterholtz's methods, through reanalysis of the assemblage of fragmented, commingled remains recovered during the 2012 season of the Petra North Ridge Project (preliminary MNI = 30). The MNI based on Osterholtz's visual-based system was notably different from that using Standards. Overall, the better metadata in Osterholtz's system suggests that Osterholtz's feature-based system should be the choice for individuals working with commingled and fragmentary remains.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10342/6361
    Subject
    bioarchaeology
    Date
    2017-07-28
    Citation:
    APA:
    Sussman, Emily. (July 2017). Comparing Methodologies for Documenting Commingled and Fragmentary Human Remains (Master's Thesis, East Carolina University). Retrieved from the Scholarship. (http://hdl.handle.net/10342/6361.)

    Display/Hide MLA, Chicago and APA citation formats.

    MLA:
    Sussman, Emily. Comparing Methodologies for Documenting Commingled and Fragmentary Human Remains. Master's Thesis. East Carolina University, July 2017. The Scholarship. http://hdl.handle.net/10342/6361. March 01, 2021.
    Chicago:
    Sussman, Emily, “Comparing Methodologies for Documenting Commingled and Fragmentary Human Remains” (Master's Thesis., East Carolina University, July 2017).
    AMA:
    Sussman, Emily. Comparing Methodologies for Documenting Commingled and Fragmentary Human Remains [Master's Thesis]. Greenville, NC: East Carolina University; July 2017.
    Collections
    • Anthropology
    • Master's Theses
    Publisher
    East Carolina University

    xmlui.ArtifactBrowser.ItemViewer.elsevier_entitlement

    East Carolina University has created ScholarShip, a digital archive for the scholarly output of the ECU community.

    • About
    • Contact Us
    • Send Feedback