Attempting to Distinguish Impairment from Disability in the Bioarchaeological Record: An Example from DeArmond Mound (40RE12) in East Tennessee

Understanding Disability Throughout History

“…Some secondary sources (e.g., art, written descriptions, and iconography) suggests marginalisation and mistreatment of the sick and disabled in some past populations, while other evidence suggests care and nondifferential treatment (Groves 2003, Bethard et al 2017. There is iconographic evidence of the use of devices, such as crutches and artificial limbs to aid impaired individuals, but little physical evidence of these implements is preserved today.…”

“…This being said, skeletal evidence of impairment does not directly reveal disability, regardless of the severity of bone changes, but may indicate that the individual faced decreased ability, function, or mobility for some period during their life (Bethard 2017). However, other scholars note that the extent of functional limitations associated with bodily impairments cannot be assumed because the same conditions are not necessarily experienced the same way between individuals or even populations (Kasnitz andShuttleworth 2001, Roberts 2000).…”

“…Other complications arise from changing understandings of pathological conditions over time, the disappearance and emergence of some diseases, inadequate translations of historical records, and the presence of concurrent conditions (Mitchell 2011). In the archaeological context we must attempt to frame our perspectives on past disability without inferring causative values about past social perspectives based solely upon pathological lesions, irregular skeletal development, and other variations (Roberts 1999, Zakrewski 2014, Bethard 2017).…”