2018
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.23624
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the osteological paradox: Skeletal stress in mass graves versus civilians at the Greek colony of Himera (Sicily)

Abstract: Our findings generally support the hypothesis that skeletal stress is evidence of frailty (i.e., leading to greater risk of mortality). However, the relationship between stress and frailty is complicated by social factors, when considering historical context. In particular, a possible "soldier-class" may have experienced less stress than the overall civilian population.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Regardless of whether the mass burials from Himera are indeed related to the battles fought in 480 and 409 BCE, they certainly represent a catastrophic sample and most likely two different samples, that is, a large number of persons who died together or during a very short time span. Catastrophic samples are thought to present demographic and epidemiological features that are more similar to living population than “attritional” mortality samples, although some papers fail to confirm this hypothesis (DeWitte & Wood, ; Kyle et al, ; Margerison & Knüsel, ; Milner, Anderson, & Smith, ). The sample from Himera is unique in the fact that both the “catastrophic” and the “attritional” samples are drawn from the same necropolis, whereas other works compare samples from different sites (DeWitte & Wood, ; Margerison & Knüsel, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Regardless of whether the mass burials from Himera are indeed related to the battles fought in 480 and 409 BCE, they certainly represent a catastrophic sample and most likely two different samples, that is, a large number of persons who died together or during a very short time span. Catastrophic samples are thought to present demographic and epidemiological features that are more similar to living population than “attritional” mortality samples, although some papers fail to confirm this hypothesis (DeWitte & Wood, ; Kyle et al, ; Margerison & Knüsel, ; Milner, Anderson, & Smith, ). The sample from Himera is unique in the fact that both the “catastrophic” and the “attritional” samples are drawn from the same necropolis, whereas other works compare samples from different sites (DeWitte & Wood, ; Margerison & Knüsel, ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, regardless of their relation with the aforementioned battles, skeletons in the FC can be considered as catastrophic samples, seeing that they represent the uncommon case of a large number of individuals dying in a very short time span (see also Kyle, Reitsema, Tyler, Vassallo, & Fabbri, ). The remaining nine multiple graves were double burials, three of these featuring either a female adult and child (W2373A‐W2373B and W3220A‐3220B) or two children (W3616‐W3617), their composition allowing to exclude them from a military sample.…”
Section: Materials Reference Sample and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rather than include a cursory caveat in publications that individual heterogeneity exists, bioarchaeologists need to make more earnest efforts to identify, explain, and contextualize hidden heterogeneity in their discussions of results and conclusions. This is not a universal failing of bioarchaeological studies-progress has been made in the way of well-developed hypotheses that test intra-and interpopulation heterogeneity (DeWitte 2014b; Kyle et al 2018;Redfern et al 2018)-but we believe it should be a major course for improvement (Boldsen and Milner 2012).…”
Section: Replymentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Collective burials serve many functions such as preserving family and community identity (Bentley, ; Bloch, ; Rott, Päffgen, Haas‐Gebhard, Peters, & Harbeck, ), companionship or sacrifice (Baadsgaard, Monge, Cox, & Zettler, ; Judd & Irish, ), health risk intervention (e.g., plague pits) (Grainger, Hawkins, Lynne, & Mikulski, ), and space or time constraints (Fiorato, Boylston, & Knüsel, ; Kjellström, ; Palubeckaite et al, ). Episodic commingled collections result from multiple interments following a single event such as a mass disaster or battle (Osterholtz, Baustian, & Martin, ), and may be laid in rows so that with careful excavation individuals are relatively complete (Fiorato et al, ; Kyle, Reitsema, Tyler, Fabbri, & Vassallo, ; Rott et al, ). Secondary long‐term use commingled collections result from fully or partially decomposed individuals interred with predecessors (Osterholtz et al, ), who may or may not be rearranged to accommodate the newest residents (Bocquentin & Garrard, ; Chesson, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%