Skeletal identification · Scope of work
Scope of work
At the beginning there is often a basic question: is human material present or not? The distinction between human and animal material is therefore often the first decisive step. This is followed by the state of preservation, completeness, number of individuals, and the possibility of a biological profile. Where the material allows usable conclusions, this includes assessments of sex, age at death, stature, as well as indications of pathological or treatment-related changes.
Many bone finds first require an assessment of evidential value and of the additional records or comparison findings needed for further identification work.
The range of services therefore includes first the distinction between human and animal material, assessment of the number of individuals, a basic anthropological finding according to preservation, completeness, and abnormalities, and—where assessable—a biological profile with sex, age at death, and stature. In addition, there may be indications of pathological changes, fractures, traces of treatment, or other individualising features.
Typical questions include whether the remains are human or animal, whether they derive from one or several individuals, which biological profile can be derived, whether there are individualising findings and which comparison records would be helpful for any further attribution.
Skeletal identification · Question and aim
Identification context
Personal identification may be based, among other things, on dental status, disease- or treatment-related changes, fractures, or other individualising features. Here too, the core lies in comparing findings and stating their evidential value. Particularly important in this context are antemortem comparison records, for example dental documentation, radiological prior findings, or other medical records against which individualising findings can be compared on a sufficiently documented basis.
Reconstructive approaches or superimposition procedures may play a supplementary role. Antemortem comparison records improve the later classification.
Without suitable antemortem comparison records, personal attribution remains markedly limited in many cases.
Skeletal identification · Comparative foundations
Helpful documents
For the later assessment, documentation of the find location, recovery records, indications of associated finds, and already available comparison records are central. Particularly helpful are dental, radiological, or other antemortem records that may support an individual allocation. Good records improve the later identification assessment.
Lost small finds, damaged dental or facial regions, and poorly documented positional relationships often reduce the later evidential value more strongly than any missing additional method.
Skeletal identification · Handling the material
Recovery and documentation
In skeletal finds it is especially clear that later evidential quality may be lost already at an early stage. For that reason, documentation of the find location is not a side issue. Position, orientation, stratification, the relationship of finds to one another, and careful handling of fragile regions often determine what can later be assessed at all. The practical evidential value of the later examination therefore often depends more on the quality of the early preservation than on any later supplementary method.
Skeletal identification · Key practical points
Key points
Osteological examination gains strength from the linkage of several findings. Skeletal identification depends on early care: complete recovery, good documentation, and intact comparison records.
Skeletal identification · Clarifying the assignment
Initial enquiry
In bone finds, early consultation, initial photographic documentation, and details of the find context, packaging, and steps already taken are particularly helpful. This makes it possible at an early stage to clarify whether initially a basic finding, a distinction between human and animal material, or already an identification-related in-depth examination is sensible. Even a few sufficiently informative details on the find context often help to avoid unnecessary follow-up questions in the further proceedings.
Skeletal identification · Further reading