Skeletal Biology and Mortuary Practice at the Kubinski Site (11WI1186), a Middle Woodland Ossuary

William Pestle, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1007 W. Harrison, Chicago, IL 60607, [email protected]

Scott Demel, Department of Anthropology, Field Museum of Natural History, 1400 S. Lake Shore Drive, Chicago, IL 60605, [email protected]

Michael Colvard, Department of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago, 569E DENT, Chicago, IL 60612, [email protected]

Robert Pickering, Department of Collections and Education, Buffalo Bill Historical Center, 720 Sheridan Avenue, Cody, WY 82414, [email protected]

© 2007 Illinois Archaeological Survey, Inc., Illinois Archaeology, vol . 19, pp. 47–84

47

Skeletal Biology and Mortuary Practice at the Kubinski Site (11WI1186), a Middle Woodland Ossuary

William Pestle, Scott Demel, Michael Colvard, and Robert Pickering

To date, the preponderance of studies of mortuary practice in the Middle Woodland period have focused on materials from sites in southern Ohio and the lower Illinois River valley. The discovery of a mass of commingled human skeletal remains on a bluff overlooking the Des Plaines River near Romeoville, Will County, Illinois, affords a unique opportunity to study the lives, deaths, and cultural practices of Middle Woodland individuals living at a “frontier” of the Hopewell world. This article presents a discussion of skeletal biology, paleopathology, and mortuary practice in prehistoric Illinois, as discerned from the skeletal assemblage from the Kubinski site (11WI1186). It is argued that certain cultural practices evidenced in this assemblage, and familiar from the Hopewell core, are the result of an affinity of the people represented to the Hopewell cultural complex.

Introduction

The Middle Woodland period (ca. 200 B.C.–A.D. 400) was an era of increasing population and escalating cultural complexity among the prehistoric peoples of Midwestern North America. Coupled with important changes in social and religious systems, long-distance trade and communication led to a widespread social and economic network, known gener-ally as the Hopewell Interaction Sphere. The cultural phenomenon of Hopewell is charac-terized by exotic and stylized artifacts found in both mortuary and habitation contexts at sites throughout the American Southeast and Midwest. Middle Woodland Hopewell sites can be recognized by a suite of diagnostic raw materials and finished prestige goods as well as distinct pottery vessels and ceramic decoration styles, projectile point types, burial mounds with log tombs, and other types of earthworks. Trade networks were widespread and resulted in the import and deposit in midwestern sites of such prestige items as pipe-stone from Ohio, shells from the Gulf and Atlantic coasts of the United States, galena from

Illinois Archaeology Vol. 19, 200748

northwestern Illinois and Missouri, alligator and shark teeth from Florida, copper from the Lake Superior region (in the form of earspools, breastplates, panpipes, and celts), mica from Arkansas, grizzly bear teeth from the uplands of the American West, and obsidian from the Yellowstone region of the Rocky Mountains (Hughes 2006:361; Milner 2004:82–85; Struever 1965:211).

The best-known data on the people and cultures of the Middle Woodland period come from the Ohio and Mississippi River valleys in Ohio and Kentucky, and the Illinois River valley in southern Illinois (Milner 2004:54–96). Studies of human osteology, skeletal biol-ogy, and mortuary variability in the Middle Woodland also have traditionally focused on individuals from sites in southern Ohio and the lower Illinois Valley (e.g., Buikstra 1976; Bullington 1988).1 There is, however, ample emerging archaeological evidence of Middle Woodland cultures in the Chicago region, well away from the more heavily studied south-ern regions of Illinois, and approaching the outer reaches of the traditionally understood Hopewell world. Much of this Middle Woodland cultural activity in northern Illinois is associated with a northern extension of the “Havana-Hopewell tradition” (Brown 1991; Markman 1991:62), the Illinois River valley being one of two Hopewell geographical centers recognized in the southern Great Lakes region (Jeske 2006:289). In recent years, archaeo-logical research in the Chicago area has begun to more fully elucidate Havana-Hopewell settlement patterns, subsistence strategies, and the broad dimensions of mortuary behaviors, helping to build a more complete picture of life in the region some 2,000 years ago (Asch et al. 1979:82–84; Markman 1991:68).

Within the Chicago region, there are numerous regional expressions of Middle Wood-land culture and a dearth of classic Hopewell diagnostic artifacts (Struever 1965:211–212). In the smaller river valleys close to Chicago, such as the Des Plaines River valley, regional expressions of Middle Woodland Havana ceramics have been discovered (e.g., David Wenner, as cited in Struever 1965:216, 218). As is typical in these settings, few status-symbolizing diagnostic Hopewellian artifacts are recovered in habitation or mortuary settings. In a relatively rare occurrence, one of the burials at the Adler Mound Group, a group of eight Hopewellian mounds on the Des Plaines River (Winters 1961:57), included a platform pipe of Ohio pipestone and mica. Winters (1961:81) suggests that this mound group is probably tied into the Utica Mound Group. Struever (1965:216) believes that these sites represent contemporaneous cultures within a general province of Hopewellian influence.

Further afield from Chicago, there are four regional Middle Woodland traditions in the southern Great Lakes area, including Crab Orchard to the south in Illinois; the Scioto tradi-tion further south and east in Indiana and Ohio; the Pike tradition in western Illinois along the Mississippi River; and the Upper Havana tradition covering the rest of the state and into Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan (Struever 1965:218–219). Mangold and Schurr (2006:207, 215) discuss how the original concept of a Goodall focus in northwestern Indiana and southwest-ern Michigan that was based on pottery has morphed into two phases: Utica and LaPorte. The Goodall phase is now considered more of an upper Kankakee River valley phenomenon; a regional subtradition of Havana-Hopewell (Mangold and Schurr 2006:222).

In northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin, Hopewell sites are part of the Waukesha phase (Jeske 2006:285). This is one of three Middle Woodland phases and is similar to the Steuben phase sites in the upper Illinois River valley in northern Illinois (ca. 100 B.C.–A.D. 150). The other two phases are Trempealeau (A.D. 100–A.D. 200) and Millville (A.D. 200–A.D. 500) (Jeske 2006:293). One characteristic feature of Waukesha phase sites are bundle burials,

Pestle, Demel, Colvard, and Pickering 49

or “bundled disarticulations,” which appear to have formed a key part of the phase’s mor-tuary ritual repertoire.

Thus, the Des Plaines River valley is within the more widespread Havana-Hopewell tradition, but is likely a regional expression thereof. This locality is south of the Wisconsin phase sites and more northern Wisconsin Norton tradition, and is west of the southern Lake Michigan basin phases described previously. This is one of the few north-south rivers that connects the central and southern part of the state with sites further north and across Lake Michigan, and is a primary route to reach the portage that connects to Lake Michigan.

In 1986, construction workers excavating for the foundation of a new home on a bluff over the Des Plaines River near Romeoville, southwest of Chicago, exposed a mass of com-mingled human skeletal remains. Named the Kubinski site after the property developer, this burial feature (11WI1186) has since been directly radiocarbon-dated to the heart of the Middle Woodland period. Given their location and apparent age, the individuals represented in this assemblage can likely be identified as representing the Havana-Hopewell cultural tradition. The recovery and subsequent analysis of the skeletal remains from the Kubinski site has provided physical anthropologists and archaeologists with a unique opportunity to study the lives, deaths, and mortuary practices of Middle Woodland individuals residing in the Chicago region, and has offered the promise of a more fine-grained understanding of the nature and variability of a regional variant of Havana-Hopewell cultural practices.

After detailing the environmental setting of the site and detailing the circumstances of its discovery and excavation, this article presents the results of a recently conducted bio-archaeological analysis of the skeletal sample from the Kubinski site. First, our discussion focuses on the elevated prevalence of inflammatory infection(s) observed in the skeletal material, which, we argue, serves as an admittedly imperfect barometer for population-wide health and well-being. Next, we present evidence for cranial deformation and postmortem skeletal retention and curation; the appearance of this at the Kubinski site is representative of a common cultural vocabulary shared with the core of the Hopewell world. Finally, we offer an explanation of the types of mortuary treatment reflected in the assemblage recov-ered at the Kubinski site, a combination of which help to explain the very existence of the skeletal assemblage.

At present, our understanding of life at the Kubinski site is based solely on data derived from a small sample of human remains, without the benefit of surviving cultural artifacts. Although evidence of many of the far-flung “exotics” synonymous with Hopewell have not yet been recovered from the Kubinski site, we propose that a number of cultural and mortuary practices observable in the analysis of the skeletal remains, and familiar from the heartland of the culture, would have served as a common symbolic vocabulary and linkage between inhabitants of this peripheral locale and individuals residing in the culture’s core.

Environmental Setting

The Kubinski site is located in Will County near Romeoville, Illinois, in Section 1, Township 36N, Range 10E. It is situated approximately 1.5 km east of the eastern edge of the current channel of the Des Plaines River at a point where the river channel travels briefly from north to south after turning from a west-southwest course (Figure 1). The position and flow of the river has been substantially modified from its pristine state in the area of Romeoville


by the construction of the Illinois and Michigan Canal and the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, both of which today run between the site and the Des Plaines River. The installation of a power plant and substation on the river’s eastern bank has further restricted the river’s course. Prior to the construction of these features, the river would have meandered freely through the entire low-lying floodplain, the whole of which is visible from the blufftop on which the site was discovered.

The bluff on which the site is situated rises approximately 20 m above the level of the river and the surrounding floodplain. The western face of the bluff rises quite steeply from the level of the floodplain and is today heavily forested and overgrown. The extent of the bluff is circumscribed at its southern edge by a small creek feeding into the Des Plaines River and to the north by a 15 m deep gully (possibly the location of another seasonal or occasional feeder creek). The top of the bluff rises gradually toward the northeast, and is today the setting for a number of private residences and yards. The excavation of a founda-tion for one of these homes led to the discovery of the skeletal remains. In a broader set-ting, the bluff has the appearance of an isolated peninsula of high land jutting toward the low-lying floodplain. In conditions of less heavy forestation, the site would have occupied a quite prominent position, one that would have been visible for substantial distances both up and down the river.

Figure 1: Location of Kubinski site, 11WI1186.


Discovery and Excavation

The Kubinski site was inadvertently discovered on November 17, 1986, during the construc-tion of a new home east of Romeoville, Illinois. Work was halted when mechanical excavation for the home’s foundation began turning up human bone and ultimately revealed a mass of commingled human skeletal remains. Thinking he may have discovered the scene of a crime, the construction foreman alerted his superiors who, in turn, contacted Bill Ferguson, who was at the time the Will County assistant coroner. With the help of one of the authors (Pickering), who was at the time an anthropological consultant for Will County and staff member of the Education Department of the Field Museum of Natural History, the county assistant coroner determined that the remains were of an archaeological, not a forensic, nature, thereby clearing the way for archaeological mitigation (Stramaglia 1986:28A).

A brief (five-day) pause in construction was permitted by the landowner for the excava-tion and removal of the remains from the exposed pit feature. The work was carried out by members of the construction crew and employees of the Will County Park District, under intermittent supervision of archaeologists from local universities and the Field Museum of Natural History (MacRae 2003). This style of excavation produced very little documentation, and today only a small number of photographs of the excavation and in situ remains exist (examples provided in Figure 2; prints are in the possession of the Illinois State Museum). Only two very rudimentary, and minimally informative, line drawings of the feature were provided to the Illinois Archaeological Survey.

Figure 2: Samples of Kubinski site excavation photographs, photographer unknown. Prints on file at the Illinois State Museum, Springfield.


The soil profile of the west wall of the only excavated unit (as represented by a photo-copy of a computer-generated drawing presumably made around the time of excavation and currently on file at the Field Museum of Natural History) shows that the burial feature penetrates four natural soil horizons. The upper 8 cm consisted of an artificial gravel fill over an in situ soil profile that is typical of blufftop forests of the region. It is unknown whether the gravel fill was from the mechanical excavation of the foundation for the adjacent home or if it had other origins. The second layer consisted of a dark brown silt that was 4–8 cm thick and was 8–14 cm below the surface. The burial feature cut through this AO-horizon, which was likely windblown loess and decaying organic matter. The third layer in the profile was a typical A-horizon, probably silty loam, about 23 cm deep, and was located 14–37 cm below the surface. Beneath this, the fourth layer consisted of dark brown illuviated clay. This B-horizon was 18–20 cm thick and was found 37–56 cm below the surface. Beneath this was a Bt-horizon transitional to the parent material below; this horizon was 8–15 cm thick and 56–68 cm below the surface. The underlying C-horizon, which was made up of glacial gravel, was a remnant of the glacial activity in the area some 10,000 years ago. It would appear to have been little modified by pedogenic forces and, as such, is essentially unaltered parent material. Taken as a whole, the surviving soil profile suggests that the feature was cut into what was natural (that is, culturally nonmodified) soils. Soils in the region are moderately deep, overlay gravel, and are gently sloping to level. The variously drained soils typically have loamy and silty subsoil formed in glacial outwash and in stream alluvium (Mapes 1979:100, 107; USDA 1980).

The paucity of recorded field information makes the reconstruction of further details of the excavation difficult. For instance, the volume of the exposed pit cannot be calculated with any greater degree of precision than between .75 and 3.0 m3. Additionally, the exact positioning of, and spatial relationships among and between, the recovered remains is documented in only a few photographs and the memories of the excavators. Based on these sparse data, it would appear that the remains were placed into the burial pit in a jumbled fashion because cranial and postcranial elements were mixed, remains from multiple in-dividuals were commingled, and there appears to have been no consistency in the place-ment of remains (e.g., parallel deposition of long bones). Some elements, such as ribs and vertebrae, appear in photographs from the excavation to have been deposited while still in some state of articulation. This finding would suggest that some soft tissues may have been present on these elements at the time of burial. No data were recorded at the time of excavation, however, on the state of articulation of skeletal elements or their respective de-grees of weathering or taphonomic alteration. Thus, definitive statements about the nature of the assemblage become more difficult to make.

According to notes on file with the Illinois Archaeological Survey, little cultural mate-rial (a small quantity of charcoal and two nondiagnostic lithic flakes) was recovered during the excavation, and, because of the expense entailed in further delaying construction, no further archaeological exploration of the feature or the surrounding area was permitted at the time by the property owner.2 After removal of the human remains, any remaining portion of the original feature is thought to have been destroyed as the construction of the house foundation continued.

Following excavation, the majority of the remains were removed for study to the Isle à la Cache Museum in nearby Romeoville and were later accessioned by the Anthropol-ogy Department of the Field Museum of Natural History in 1987 (Accession #3737).


One additional skeleton, retained after excavation by the Will County coroner’s office, was transferred in 1997 to the Illinois State Museum via the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency following a change in administration in Will County. In the years between their excavation and the beginning of the present study, no published account of the Kubinski material was made, although they were the subject of a conference paper given by one of the authors of the present work (Pickering 1987).

Direct radiocarbon dating of a human rib fragment from the Kubinski assemblage was performed in 1987, yielding a date of 1820 ± 80 (Beta-21888; bone collagen; not corrected for isotope fractionation). For this date, the two possible calibrated age ranges are 26–41 cal. A.D. (p = .01) and 48–396 cal. A.D. (p = .99) (calibrated at 2σ with the program CALIB 5.0 [Reimer et al. 2004; Stuiver and Reimer 1993]).

It deserves to be noted that, at the time of this discovery, state law did not require that the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency be notified of such finds, nor did the law adequately protect unregistered graves or prehistoric skeletal material. Today, any such discovery would have to be halted immediately and the county coroner would be contacted as well as the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency. Unmarked graves and skeletal material like those discovered at the Kubinski site are now protected under the Human Skeletal Remains Protection Act (20 ILCS 3440). This relatively new legislation was passed to protect both marked and unmarked graves and all skeletal materials and grave goods, regardless of age, ethnic origin, cultural, or religious affiliation. The law also requires a permit from the Historic Preservation Agency prior to further disturbance of such a find and provides the court with penalties should these laws be ignored. All such finds are now held in trust for the people of Illinois under the jurisdiction of the Historic Preservation Agency and are to be curated at the Illinois State Museum.

Osteological Analysis

Analysis of the skeletal remains from the Kubinski site took place in 2003–2004 at the Field Museum of Natural History and the Illinois State Museum. Analysis consisted of macro-scopic observation accompanied, when appropriate, by the use of a hand lens, binocular microscope, and scanning electron microscope. Cranial and postcranial metric data were recorded following the standards of Bass (1995), Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994), and Schwartz (1995). Cranial, dental, and postcranial nonmetric traits of Berry and Berry (1967), Turner et al. (1991), and Finnegan (1978) were also recorded. Skeletal elements of special inter-est—for example, those remains exhibiting signs of trauma or pathology—were examined radiographically.

Because the remains from 11WI1186 were commingled, individual skeletons could not be reliably reassembled. Thus, the unit of analysis of the osteological investigation neces-sarily changed from the individual to skeletal/anatomical units. Age and sex profiles, along with the prevalence of pathologies and trauma, were calculated based either on groupings of skeletal elements (e.g., humeri, femora, etc.), anatomical units (e.g., arm, forearm, thigh, leg), or the contiguous elements of a joint (knee, elbow, etc.). This approach bears some resemblance to that employed by Frankenberg et al. (1988) when dealing with fragmented, commingled remains.


General Description of Skeletal Assemblage

As observed today in their museum settings, the elements making up the skeletal assem-blage from the Kubinski site are notable for their exceptional state of preservation. The bones are, with few exceptions, dense and robust, and exhibit only minimal indications of taphonomic alteration or weathering. There are some minor differences in coloration and taphonomic alteration between individual specimens, perhaps indicative of variation in soil microcontext or differences in predepositional history. It is interesting to note that the few specimens at the Illinois State Museum are substantially more weathered than any of those housed at the Field Museum of Natural History. At both repositories, however, the individual skeletal elements were observed to be largely intact (although some had been reassembled postexcavation), and even the crania, typically subject to damage both before and after excavation, are largely complete and undamaged (only one adult cranium is entirely fragmentary). One anomaly, perhaps the result of the speedy excavation of the assemblage, is the lack of any unassociated (loose) teeth. In a typical mass burial, it is common to recover extra teeth that cannot be securely associated with any of the individuals present, but in the Kubinski assemblage, all teeth can reliably be placed in available tooth sockets (although not every socket is filled, suggesting either that loose teeth may not have been recovered or that they may not have been present in the first place). This observation is complemented by the fact that the assemblage lacks anything approaching the requisite number of small skeletal elements (e.g., phalanges) that one would expect given the calculated minimum number of individuals [MNI; see below]). These peculiarities are likely indicative, we argue, of this assemblage being a secondary reburial of gathered remains.

MNI

Following an inventory of skeletal and dental elements, the minimum number of individuals was calculated using a modified version of the procedure of Lyman (1994). Use of multiple variants of this technique produced a reliable, repeated MNI of 16 individuals. As noted by the excavators and again during our analysis, cranial remains outnumber postcranial remains in the assemblage from the Kubinski site. To test this observation, independent MNI were calculated for cranial and postcranial remains (Table 1). Use of an age-independent MNI (columns 1 and 2), which returns a simple aggregate minimum number for the entire sample, would suggest the presence in the assemblage of five extra crania (16 cranial individuals versus 11 postcranial).

Age Category (Years) Postcranial Cranial Postcranial by Age

Cranial by Age

FE (fetal) n/a n/a 0 0NE (<1) n/a n/a 1 1I1 (1-5) n/a n/a 1 1I2 (6-11) n/a n/a 2 (left first metatarsal) 0JU (12-18) n/a n/a 2 (right scapula, ulna) 1YA (19-30) n/a n/a 0 2AA (30+) n/a n/a 8 (right humerus, left

and right scapula)11

Total 11 (right humerus, scapula) 16 14 16

Table 1. Cranial and Postcranial MNI of Kubinski Skeletal Remains.


When a more accurate age-based MNI is employed, one that takes into account the variation in age of the collected remains (columns 3 and 4), only two extra crania are indi-cated (16 cranial individuals versus 14 postcranial).3 This latter calculation, while revealing that the assemblage included additional crania from the adult age classes (young and full adults), also indicated that far fewer infant and juvenile crania were included than one would expect based on the postcranial MNI. These irregularities in the age structure of the sample are, we argue below, the result of complex mortuary treatment afforded the Kubinski site remains.

Unfortunately, because of the commingled nature of the assemblage, it is not possible to designate which crania are the so-called “extras” because the adult cranial remains could not be reliably reassociated with their postcrania. As such, we cannot state categorically, for example, the sex or age of the extra crania, as any of the crania present could have been one of these “extras.”

Sex

Sex of adult skeletal specimens was assessed through analysis of pelvic, cranial, and man-dibular morphology (Schwartz 1995), postcranial metrics (Bass 1995), and the use of cranial, mandibular, dental, and postcranial discriminant functions (Ditch and Rose 1972; Giles 1970; Ousley and Jantz 1996). Initially, attempts were made to assess the sex of juvenile remains using the method of Schutkowski (1993). More recent studies, however, including Holcomb and Konigsberg (1995) and Loth and Henneberg (2001), have called into doubt the accuracy of this method, and thus the results of this analysis have been excluded from the present discussion.

On account of the unarticulated and occasionally fragmentary nature of the skeletal remains, it was not possible to identify the sex of each of the 16 individuals tabulated in the MNI, nor was it possible to evaluate the same element from each of the 16 individuals present. Additionally, results of some of the sex identification methods employed (such as postcranial metric techniques) would give the impression that far more than 16 individu-als were present, as they produce a sex determination based on the observation of a single bone. Consequently, and to avoid confusion, we have chosen to calculate and display both raw numbers of individuals of each sex class and percentage membership in each sex class (male, female, and unidentified) in Table 2. The total number of elements included in each type of analysis are also provided in Table 2.

This analysis of the Kubinski remains revealed that the sex distribution of the assem-blage was highly skewed (a 50–50 sex distribution being taken as normal). Regardless of the method employed, the assemblage was found to be predominantly to overwhelmingly male, averaging nearly 71 percent male, just over 14 percent female, with some 15 percent unidentified (Table 2). Chi-squared testing of the observed values (removing the unidenti-fied remains and recalculating values accordingly) confirmed that the observed distribution differed significantly (p < .01) from the expected equal sex distribution of a living, normally distributed, population. When cranial and postcranial sex distributions are compared, as would seem justified given the variance found in the calculation of cranial and postcranial MNI, one again finds a significant degree of differentiation (unidentified remains again being removed from calculation), at a level of p < .05.4


Although we contend that the observed inequality in the relative representation of the sexes is the result of some sort of deliberate cultural/mortuary behavior (see the discus-sion section that follows), it must be acknowledged that it may, instead, be a result of small sample size, better preservation of larger and generally more robust male skeletal elements, or a peculiarity of our analytical methods. It would appear that the Kubinski site popula-tion, both males and females, were larger and more robust than the known-sex populations used in the construction of many of the sexing techniques that we employed in our analysis. Thus, even the females of the Kubinski population would appear to be males on the basis of some of our battery of metric and morphological analyses. This possibility is given support by the fact that the discriminant metric functions employed in sexing the remains routinely identified cranial and mandibular remains as male, while other discriminant functions em-ployed in the determination of ethnic heritage—e.g., those used in FORDISC 2.0—identified nearly one-fifth of the individuals sexed as male with females of various populations of Asian descent (Ousley and Jantz 1996).

Age

Juvenile age was determined through assessment of long bone growth (Hoppa 1992; Scheuer et al. 1980), dental formation and eruption (Moorrees et al. 1963; Olivier 1960; Smith 1991; Ubelaker 1989; Vallois 1960), epiphyseal fusion (Schwartz 1995), and the state of centers of ossification (Schwartz 1995). Adult age was determined through evaluation of the pubic symphysis (following Brooks and Suchey 1990; Todd 1920), auricular surface (Buckberry and Chamberlain 2002; Lovejoy et al. 1985), cranial sutures (Meindl and Lovejoy 1985), dental wear (Miles 1962), and the state of ossification of the sternal end of the ribs (İşcan et al. 1984, 1985).

Table 2. Sex Distribution of Kubinski Site Skeletal Remains by Method of Assessment.

SexPelvic

Morphology

Cranial/ Mandibular Morphology

Dental Discriminant

Function

Mandibular Discriminant

Function

Cranial Discriminant

FunctionMale 6 (46.1%) 7 (38.9%) 3 (100%) 2 (100%) 7 (100%)Female 1 (7.7%) 2 (11.1%) 0 0 0Undetermined 6 (46.1%) 9 (50%) 0 0 0Total no. 13 18 3 2 7

Sex

Femoral Discriminant

Function

Tibial Discriminant

Function

Humeral Discriminant

FunctionFORDISC

CraniaPostcranial

MetricsMale 8 (57.1%) 11 (91.7%) 9 (64.3%) 10 (58.8%) 33 (36.7%)Female 4 (28.6%) 1 (8.3%) 4 (28.6%) 4 (23.5%) 27 (30.0%)Undetermined 2 (14.3%) 0 1 (7.1%) 3 (17.6%) 30 (33.3%)Total no. 14 12 14 17 90


The commingled nature of the remains, our inability to reliably reunite the remains of any individuals, and the discrepancy between individuals represented in the cranial and postcranial remains made it impossible to assess age for each of the individuals denoted in the MNI. Instead, an age was determined for every single skeletal element (both cranial and postcranial) for which such a determination was judged possible. In an effort to make these results directly comparable to other published mortality profiles, the age categories employed were slightly different from those used in calculating the MNI. For these purposes, the infant II and juvenile categories were combined to form a 6- to 18-year grouping, and the full adult group was subdivided into prime adults (30–45 years) and mature adults (45+ years). Percentage membership in each age class was then calculated and is displayed in Figure 3. For the purposes of Figure 3, individuals whose age could not be determined with greater precision than simply “adult” have been distributed across the adult age categories by a weighted distribution (that is, they were assigned proportionally to each of the three adult age categories, thereby maintaining the relationship between them). It deserves to be noted that the nature of the age distribution did not differ significantly when changes were made to the method by which these individuals were distributed (equally across the adult age categories or with a weighted distribution).

Figure 3. Age distribution of Kubinski site skeletal remains by percentage membership in each age category. For the rationale behind use of percentage membership rather than raw numbers of individuals, see text.

Per

cen

t


As is seen in Figure 3, the best-represented age group in both the cranial and postcranial remains is adults between 30 and 45 years of age (so-called prime adults). The mortality profile also displays an extreme underrepresentation of infants. It is interesting to note that the observed difference in the age structure of the cranial and postcranial remains was not judged to be statistically significant at any reasonable significance level, despite the apparent inclusion of “extra” adult cranial remains observed in the calculation of MNI.

Stature

Living stature of the adult members of the Kubinski population was reconstructed using the methods of Trotter (1970) and Feldesman et al. (1990). Calculations were based on the maximum lengths of both upper and lower limb long bones, with the exception of the technique of Feldesman et al. (1990), which utilizes the physiological or bicondylar length of the femur.5 Living stature of the population had a mean of 167.8 cm (5 ft 6 in), ranging from a minimum of 140 cm (4 ft 7 in) to a maximum of 183 cm (just over 6 ft). These find-ings agree with the ranges of reconstructed statures for the skeletal assemblages from other Middle Woodland sites, including the Albany Mound Group (Conner and Link 1991), the Gibson site (Buikstra 1976), and the Fitzgibbons site (Conner and Brandon 1986). It is inter-esting to note, however, that the distribution of living heights, depicted in Figure 4, which pools male and female reconstructions, deviates significantly from the normal distribution. This observation of abnormality is confirmed by the results of the Shapiro-Wilk W-test, which confirms the distribution’s departure from normal at a significance of p < .001. From the expected normal curve imposed on Figure 4, it is apparent that more taller-than-ex-pected individuals are included in this distribution than would be expected. This result is

Figure 4. Histogram of reconstructed Kubinski site adult statures.


compatible with the skewed sex distribution discussed above because the inclusion of ad-ditional males (typically the taller of the sexes) in a sample would be expected to produce a result similar to that seen in Figure 4.

Pathology and Trauma

Assessment of pathological and traumatic processes followed the guidelines of Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin (1998), Lovell (1997), and Ortner (2003). Prevalence data provided for each pathology or group thereof combine all age and sex categories, unless noted otherwise. In all figures, both percentage prevalence and number of affected elements over total number of elements are provided. Although arthropathies (diseases of the joint, commonly grouped under the term arthritis) and trauma were only a mild to moderate concern for the health of the Kubin-ski site’s ancient inhabitants, infectious diseases and dental pathologies resulting from heavy wear/attrition were observed to be a much more serious and widespread health concern.

To begin with, we noted a generally low (fewer than 5%) population-wide prevalence of degenerative joint diseases (arthropathies). Exceptions include an elevated frequency of spondylar arthritis in the various elements of the vertebral column (34 of 106 total cases, 33%) as well as a high prevalence (4 of 19 cases, 21%) of osteoarthritis in the temporoman-dibular joint (Figure 5). To begin with, the age of the sample, detailed above, can help us to understand the high frequency of vertebral osteoarthritis. The presence of significantly more adults than juvenile remains in the assemblage would explain this elevated frequency, as vertebral arthritis is a degenerative condition that has a strong positive correlation with advancing age (Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998:96; Ortner 2003:549).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

TMJ

Should

erElbo

wW

rist

Hand

Sacro

liliac i

Knee

Ankle

Foot

C Ver

t

TVer

t

L Ver

t

Total

Vert

4/19

1/55

2/551/34

2/851/32

4/48

7/71

8/24

20/64

6/1834/106

Skeletal Element/Anatomical Region

Per

cen

t

Figure 5. Prevalence of degenerative joint diseases, by skeletal element/anatomical region.


Similarly, dietary or activity-related factors, discussed below, help to explain the high prevalence of arthritic changes in the temporomandibular joint (Figure 6). Although the strength of the relationship between dental attrition and deterioration of the temporoman-dibular joint has been a topic of some debate, we are of the belief that heavy dental attrition fundamentally alters occlusal patterns and thus will inevitably lead to changes in the joint surfaces at the TMJ (Richards 1990; Richards and Brown 1981; Seligman et al. 1988). This conclusion is supported by the fact that every one of the Kubinski individuals possessing the heaviest degree of anterior dental wear (discussed below) also displayed changes con-sistent with osteoarthritis in their temporomandibular joints.

Figure 6. Osteoarthritic changes in temporomandibular joint, FM 269162.

The final arthropathy observed in this population was an instance of rheumatoid ar-thritis, the lesions of which were found on six adjacent tarsals and metatarsals of what was, presumably, one individual (the affected right third metatarsal is illustrated in Figure 7). This particular pathology, the rarest of the arthropathies observed archaeologically (Aufderheide and Rodriguez-Martin 1998:101), was presumptively identified in this instance because the observed lesions concord well with those characteristics established by Rothschild et al. (1990) as typical of the condition. These include the polyarthritic pattern of lesions, its tendency toward the small joints of the hand or foot, and the character of the lesions them-selves—erosive, with rounded margins and smooth underlying trabeculae (Rothschild et al. 1990). Again, because the affected elements could not be reliably associated with the remains of any particular individual, it was not possible to determine if other joints of the same individual may also have displayed lesions characteristic of rheumatoid arthritis.

Interestingly, pathological analysis revealed the frequent occurrence of inflammatory, nonspecific infection in elements of the appendicular skeleton, with prevalence approaching 50 percent in some observed elements (including 9 of 21 humeri, 11 of 22 tibiae, and 10 of 20 fibulae) (Figure 8). Expression of the infections(s) ranged from localized mild periosteal


Figure 7. Erosive arthropathic lesion attributed to rheumatoid arthritis, right third metatarsal, FM 269157-61.

Figure 8. Prevalence of nonspecific infections, by skeletal element/anatomical region.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Craniu

m Rib

Scapu

la

Humer

us

Radius Ulna

Meta

carp

al

Os Coxa

Femur

Tibia

Fibula

Tarsa

l

Met

atar

sal

Per

cen

t

2/1917/203

2/21

9/21

3/18

4/16

1/40

2/24

6/26

11/21

10/20

1/104/33


0 5 cm


reaction (periostitis) to whole-bone involvement, including stenosis of the medullary canal and the formation of cloacae (osteomyelitis). In only a small portion of these cases (6 of 43 elements exhibiting lesions characteristic of inflammatory infection) was there evidence suggesting that the infection had been directly preceded by any type of traumatic incident. As such, the presence of some sort of population-wide, systemic, opportunistic (and mainly proliferative) pathogen is the most likely explanation. Infections of this type are most typi-cally caused by bacteria such as Staphylococcus aureus or members of the genus Streptococcus, which all humans carry on their skin in abundance and encounter with frequency during their daily peregrinations (Ortner 2003:181). Although infection with either of these organ-isms can cause both resorptive and proliferative lesions, in the present cases we observed almost exclusively the latter, with the cranium currently housed at the Illinois State Museum being an exception. On that specimen, there was a diffuse resorptive lesion on the frontal bone and adjacent areas of the parietal and sphenoid.

The one infection observed in the Kubinski skeletal remains that can be traced (at least presumptively) to a single causative agent is brucellosis (an infection by bacteria of the genus Brucella). Two lumbar vertebrae from the assemblage displayed lesions characteristic of bru-cellosis (Figure 9) (Capasso 1999:281–282). The observed lesion possesses the characteristic macroscopic, microscopic, and radiographic manifestations that differentiate the spondylar lesions of brucellosis from other possible causes such as tuberculosis, degenerative disk

Figure 9. Lesion at anterior-superior margin of lumbar vertebra, attributed to brucellosis, FM 269154-68.


disease, traumatic anterior disk herniation, staphylococcic spondylitis, or salmonellosis. Moreover, preliminary genetic analysis has confirmed the presence in the affected vertebrae of recoverable fragments of ribosomal DNA of the genus Brucella (Pestle et al. 2007).

Brucellosis is a zoonotic disease that is capable of being transmitted to humans through the consumption of infected meat, marrow, or secondary products (e.g., milk); through contact with urine, feces, or birth products; or through the inhalation of such products (Acha and Szy-fres 1987). The pathogen can also enter the human system through skin abrasions or mucous membranes. The overwhelming majority of human cases are contracted as a result of living in close proximity to domesticated animals (Acha and Szyfres 1987:26), so its appearance in the Middle Woodland period of midwestern history, a time of little faunal domestication (only the dog had been domesticated in the American Midwest by the Middle Woodland), is perplexing. In addition, the prehistoric distribution of the various species of Brucella is quite poorly understood, especially as it pertains to the New World. As such, this diagnosis is all the more perplexing and potentially important. Further research on this subject is cur-rently under way, with the goal of identifying the particular species of the Brucella complex responsible for the observed infection(s), as well as the likely vector or infectious pathway (Pestle et al. 2007). Intriguingly, although presumptive evidence for brucellosis was found in this assemblage, no lesions consistent with tuberculosis or any treponemal infection, which reportedly were quite common in the Middle Woodland, were noted (Buikstra 1979).

Shifting focus to trauma, it would appear that traumatic injury was a less common occur-rence for the prehistoric population of the Kubinski site than were the infectious processes detailed above. We observed a very low rate of severe muscle trauma (that which would conceivably leave some sort of osteologically observable lesion; e.g., an enthesophyte), peak-ing at a mere 3 percent by anatomical region. Moreover, there was a low overall frequency of fractures in the postcranial remains, and the fractures we did observe occurred most fre-quently, as one might expect, in the elements of the forearm (Figure 10). All of the observed postcranial fractures were well-healed, indicating the successful long-term survival of the injured individuals after the incidence of trauma, and suggesting compassionate communal care, if not some degree of medical treatment, among the site’s Middle Woodland occupants. The low level of trauma seen in the postcranial skeleton stands in strong contrast to the conspicuously higher frequency of traumatic injury in the crania of the sample (see Figure 10). These cranial injuries included three depressed fractures of the cranial vault, and one malar (facial) fracture. As in the postcranium, however, all of these traumatic injuries in the crania were observed to be well-healed. Overall, the low fracture frequency in the Kubinski sample is in concordance with similarly low levels of interpersonal violence seen at other Woodland Period sites (Milner 1998, 2004).

In the dentition, we encountered a moderate to high rate of attrition (wear), stemming from an elevated grit content in the diet (Figure 11). The most likely source of this grit would have been the local glacially derived metamorphic and igneous rocks utilized by the site’s inhabitants in the preparation of starchy seeds and nuts. This high-grit-content diet produced heavy wear to the occlusal surfaces of the teeth, spurring the formation of reac-tive secondary dentin, and, ultimately, the exposure of large numbers of pulp cavities. No sexual difference in the wear of the posterior teeth (premolars and molars) was observed, but wear was, not surprisingly, positively correlated with advancing age. Notably heavy wear was also observed in the anterior dentition (incisors and canines) (Figure 12), and was likely the result of nonmasticatory use of these teeth (Milner and Larsen 1991; Molnar 1972).


Figure 10. Prevalence of fractures, by skeletal element/anatomical region.

Figure 11. Extreme dental wear/attrition of posterior teeth, FM 269162.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Cranial Arm Forearm Thigh Leg Vertebrae

Per

cen

t

3/16

2/56

3/35

1/43

1/106



Some sex difference was seen in the distribution of this anterior wear (with males exhibit-ing more severe wear), but only one female in the sample possessed enough anterior teeth to be evaluated for comparison. As such, the observed difference ought to be considered to be highly tentative.

On the one hand, the high levels of dental attrition seen in the Kubinski assemblage ef-fectively precluded the formation of carious dental lesions (cavities). As a result, the caries frequency for the assemblage was zero (0 of 126 total erupted teeth). This caries frequency, while exceedingly low, is not out of the ordinary when compared to other Early or Middle Woodland skeletal/dental samples (Larsen et al. 1991). However, the exposure of the pulp cavities of large numbers of teeth as a result of this wear provided an ideal means for the communication of bacterial infections to the adjoining alveolar bone. This process ultimately resulted in the formation of a large number of periapical abscesses, examples of which can be seen in Figure 13. The contribution of this attrition and the subsequent infections to antemortem tooth loss is discussed below.

All erupted teeth were evaluated for the presence of linear enamel hypoplasias (LEH), a growth disruption of the tooth enamel that results from a wide variety of childhood nutri-tional or health stressors (Hillson 1996). In the Kubinski sample, only one tooth of a single individual (a mandibular canine of FMNH 269169M) out of 126 adult teeth was determined to exhibit any indication of LEH. This paucity of LEH can be interpreted as evidence for relatively stressor-free childhoods for the members of the Kubinski population.

The population’s likely reliance on a starchy diet (including, for example, goosefoot, knotweed, maygrass, and squash, all of which were cultigens by the Middle Woodland) is also attested to by the dentition, specifically in the mild to moderate amounts of observed dental

0 5 cmFigure 12. Extreme dental wear/attrition of anterior teeth, FM 269162.


calculus (Smith 2006; Yerkes 2006). This calculus not only provided an ideal medium for the growth and maintenance of large colonies of exogenous bacteria, but also independently hastened the processes of alveolar resorption, periodontitis, and the exposure of the peri-odontal ligament, thus providing other possible routes for the introduction of bacteria into the alveolar margins. These multiple dental factors together gave rise to an approximately 13 percent rate (by tooth) of antemortem tooth loss in the adult dentitions. By individual, antemortem tooth loss occurred in approximately one-third of the population (that is, one-third of people had lost at least one permanent tooth prior to death).

Cultural and Mortuary Practices

The most obvious nonmortuary cultural practice observable in the Kubinski site remains is that of intentional cranial deformation, the appearance of which we documented follow-ing the procedures of Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994). This practice, frequently seen in both prehistoric and ethnographic North American examples (Neumann 1942), is expressed in 12 of the 13 (92%) sufficiently well-preserved adult (18+ years) and juvenile (12–18 year old) crania. No evidence for cranial deformation was observed in the two crania of indi-viduals under 12 years of age, nor in the one heavily fragmented cranium (FM 269169). The deformation is uniformly characterized by the flattening of the squamous portion of the occipital and the area of the adjoining parietal in the region of the lambdoid suture. In 11 of the 12 crania possessing deformation, the deformation occurred asymmetrically, with force being exerted solely on the posterior of the right side of the cranium (Figure 14a). This primary deformation was accompanied in nine instances (and in one case where posterior

Figure 13. Example of periapical abscesses, FM 269162.


deformation was not observable on account of postmortem breakage) by deformation of the frontal bone achieved through the application of force to the frontal region (Figure 14b). The frontal deformation had both central and asymmetrical left expressions, which served to exaggerate the perceived visual effect of the posterior modification (or vice versa). These two elements of deformation combined to produce facial asymmetry, sutural elevation (particularly of the coronal and sagittal sutures), and postcoronal depression, as well as sutural asymmetry and differing rates of bilateral suture closure. Although the osteological expression of these processes was readily observable, it seems unlikely that, except in the

Figure 14a and b. Posterior and frontal cranial deformation, FM 269162.

a

b


most extreme instances, the deformation would have been visible or noticeable in life. As is discussed below, this is a likely indicator that while this deformation was intentional, its primary motivation was not cosmetic.

This antemortem deformation was accompanied in a number of cases by postmortem curation and modification of adult skulls or crania. Postmortem alterations can be broadly grouped into two main classes. The first type, seen in eight of the crania, involves the peri-/postmortem removal of some portion of the inferior or posterior region of cranium. Although the exact timing of these removals vis-à-vis the death of affected individuals is unclear, it is evident from the pattern of fracture that the breakages occurred while the bone was at least somewhat “wet” or in its in vivo condition, and, from the coloration of the breaks, that they happened prior to deposition of the crania. The amount of material removed ranged from an enlargement of the foramen magnum (Figure 15a) to the complete avulsion of large portions of the posterior/inferior cranial vault, affecting both the occipital and one or both of the parietals (Figure 15b).

The second type of perimortem/postmortem modification, which resulted in the polishing of the bone, was observed on five of the crania as well as on two postcranial ele-ments, a humerus and a femur. This type of modification would appear to be the result of repeated handling of the bone, to the point of a marked smoothing and eburnation of the exterior/cortical portion of the bone. Although such handling seems a likely explanation for the observed changes to the bone (especially given the patchy distribution of the polish-ing), another possibility is the storage or movement of the bones in animal or plant fiber bags or sacks. Contact with these sacks could have resulted in the observed polishing of the bones’ surfaces. The most obvious example of this class of alteration was, interestingly, on the skull of an individual that exhibited marked polishing around the margins of two healed depressed cranial fractures (Figure 16).

Discussion

The type and scope of the inference that can be drawn from the analysis of the Kubinski site remains is necessarily constrained by the shortcomings of the archaeological excavation, the secondary nature of the deposit, and the small size of the sample. The results of the analysis can be used, however, to develop a basic understanding of the reason for the deposit’s exis-tence, and to frame working hypotheses about the nature of health and cultural practice on the Hopewell frontier of northern Illinois, both of which will assist in the crafting of future prospective research both on the site and in the wider region.

Nature of the Assemblage

Because of the circumstances of excavation, relatively little can be gleaned about the depo-sitional nature of the skeletal assemblage at the Kubinski site from archaeological lines of inquiry. Those present at the time of excavation, including one of the authors of this paper (Pickering), unanimously support the notion that the excavated feature was the result of a single depositional event (MacRae 2003). The little documentary evidence available from the time of the excavation, particularly the section drawing of the west wall of the excavated unit, supports this interpretation because no subsequent openings or alterations of the pit were documented in the soil profile. Statements of those present at the excavation are also


unanimous that the remains found in the pit were unarticulated and commingled, suggest-ing that the individuals were deposited in a disarticulated and/or defleshed state (although some of the excavation photographs would appear to belie this conclusion).

Assuming, then, that the discovered assemblage was indeed the result of a single event in which the disarticulated remains of a number of individuals were simultaneously interred, three potential explanations for the deposit could be envisioned: (1) a mass burial follow-ing a catastrophic event; (2) a group burial resulting from a period of normal attritional

Figure 15a and b. Postmortem modification of crania: (a) enlargement of foramen magnum; (b) FM 269162, avulsion of posterior of cranium, FM 269165.

Figure 16. Polishing on margins of depressed cranial fracture, FM 269163.

a

b


die-off; or (3) as we will suggest, an instance of secondary reburial. Because so little cultural material was recovered, the process of determining the origin of the assemblage instead focused on demographic composition, pathological/traumatic analysis, and a comparison with archaeological data from contemporary regional sites. As detailed below, these diverse lines of inquiry and analysis, in spite of the paucity of useful excavation data, all support the conclusion that the assemblage from the Kubinski site was the result of a Middle Woodland practice of secondary reburial known as bundle burial.

From the outset, paleodemographic analysis was hampered by the small size of the excavated sample. Age-adjusted, the MNI of the assemblage was calculated at only 16 individuals and, as such, the sample was not judged to be large enough for true paleode-mographic analysis or comparison against the sort of models developed for distinguishing catastrophic and attritional death assemblages detailed in Margerison and Knüsel (2002). Such complex paleodemographic modeling aside, three observed compositional peculiari-ties of the sample are suggestive of something other than an unadulterated attritional origin for the assemblage.

First, as was noted above, depending on the age criteria employed for calculation of MNI, between two and five “extra” crania were found in the assemblage (Table 1). This inequality alone undermines the suggestion of some of the excavators that the assemblage represented all of those who died from normal attritional processes during the winter months, when the ground was frozen, and who were simultaneously buried following the spring thaw. Regardless of season, in a purely attritional assemblage, one would expect to find the number of heads equal to the number of bodies. Second, the age profile calculated for the Kubinski assemblage deviated notably from the expected bimodal distribution found in ideal instances of attritional die-off (Figure 17a). In such attritional skeletal assemblages, there is one peak of deaths and thus, archaeologically speaking (if the recovery strategy is fine-grained enough), a relative abundance of remains, from the youngest age categories (less than five or 10 years), and another peak among mature adults (Margerison and Knüsel 2002:138). In the case of the Kubinski population (Figure 3), we found instead a significant underrepresentation of infants and juveniles, and a relative abundance of prime adults (30–45 years). Both of these deviations merit comment. On the one hand, the absence of very young individuals (under 10 years of age) from the burial assemblage is especially indicative of a departure from an expected attritional norm, as members of this age group typically form such a large portion of any given preindustrial skeletal assemblage. Although the apparent abundance of prime adults could be the result of biases in the ageing methods employed in our analysis, we argue that it is, in fact, the result of mortuary practices and not the result of a prime adult die-off. Third, and finally, as was discussed above, the sex distribution (as calculated for both cranial and postcranial remains) of the Kubinski remains was found to be highly skewed, indicating an assemblage that was predominantly to overwhelmingly male (Table 2). Again, this result is not consistent with what would be expected were the assemblage purely attritional.

Pathological and traumatic evidence, taken together with these demographic patterns, also provide strong arguments against a cataclysmic origin for the assemblage. A violent calamity seems unlikely because there were no definitive examples of perimortem trauma observed in this sample. There were two examples of trauma that may have been perimortem in nature (on crania FM 269172 and FM 269166), but the evidence for their timing relative to death is equivocal. Consequently, we are reluctant to draw conclusions based on such tentative evidence. All of the remaining examples of trauma were, as stated above, of a


definitely well-healed, antemortem nature. Moreover, there was no pathological evidence for a catastrophic disease event, although, by the very nature of the pathogens typically responsible for such events, one would not necessarily expect to find evidence of their pres-ence represented osteologically. That being said, if the assemblage was the consequence of an epidemic, one would expect to see a demographic profile similar to that seen in Figure 17b, with a greater representation of infants and juveniles than were encountered in the Kubinski remains (Margerison and Knüsel 2002).

Although the physical evidence undermines the possibility of an attritional or cata-strophic origin for the assemblage, comparison of what is known about the Kubinski site with contemporary regional sites suggests that the most likely explanation for the genesis of the assemblage is secondary reburial. As mentioned above, the individuals recovered from the Kubinski site can likely be identified with a northern extension of the Havana-Hopewell tradition. Most cemetery mound locations of the period were deliberately placed in prominent places, like blufftops, overlooking river valleys (Bullington 1988:234). These prominent, persistent places in the landscape were often established at regular intervals

Figure 17. (a) Attritional death curve, (b) catastrophic death curve, from Beverley J. Margerison and Christopher J. Knüsel, “Paleodemographic Comparison of a Catastrophic and an Attritional Death Assemblage”, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 119, No. 2, 2002, 138. © 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc; Reprinted with permission of Wiley-Liss, Inc., a subsidiary of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.


along river courses and served not only as ancestral burial grounds, but also as ceremonial centers and ritual precincts (Markman 1991:68). Although there is no evidence from the original excavation of the assemblage for or against the presence of a mound at the Kubinski site, we believe that the patterning of the assemblage is consistent with that found on the outskirts of other Middle Woodland mortuary mounds.

Typical Havana-Hopewell mortuary sites consist of earthen mounds or ramps sur-rounding and covering a partially sunken, log-walled, central burial chamber or tomb (Markman 1991:64). The tomb would have served as a crypt or charnel house, with a means of repeated access to allow for the introduction of new individuals, and would have housed bodies at various stages of decomposition (Leigh et al. 1988:47).6 Periodically, as new bodies were deposited, older bones would have to be gathered up and relocated, in essence serving as a sort of tomb cleaning (Brown 1979:218). The posthumous collections of remains would be moved from their original resting place to a new location, often at the periphery of the tomb chamber itself, but also at the edge of the main mound where they would be deposited (Markman 1991:65). Within such a burial it would be fairly common to find extra or missing skeletal elements (i.e., burials without feet or skulls, skulls with-out bodies, disturbed burials, or other discrepancies in articulation) (Perino 1968:14, 38). Features of the Kubinski site burial are also consistent with other aspects of this practice in that grave goods are uncommon in such bundled burials (Jeske 2006:295). Similarly bundled burials without grave goods were found in both Mounds 1 and 4 of the Adler Mound Group, and the assemblage from Mound 4, which was described as a bundle of skulls and disarticulated skeletal material, sounds particularly similar to the Kubinski as-semblage (Winters 1961:60, 68).

Taking together the biological and cultural evidence from 11WI1186 and contemporary regional sites, we feel confident in concluding that the genesis of this assemblage was the secondary redeposit of those who had succumbed to normal attritional death patterns. In the absence of any compelling pathological, traumatic, or archaeological evidence of catas-trophe, there is no reason to suspect that the assemblage is anything more than the result of noncatastrophic, attritional die-off, the hallmarks of which are simply obfuscated by the phenomenon of secondary deposit. From contemporary regional sites, we know of the practice of tomb cleaning and the resulting reburial, and that within these bundled burials it would be fairly common to find extra or missing skeletal elements (Perino 1968:38, 115). This practice of removal and reburial well explains two of the three demographic peculiari-ties discussed above. Not only can the overrepresentation of crania begin to be explained, but also the underrepresentation of smaller skeletal elements, both infant/juvenile bones (thus possibly explaining the skewed age profile) and, for example, phalanges and carpals, relative to larger skeletal elements (Harn 1980:56, 76). One can easily imagine entering a cramped, dark, poorly lit tomb and gathering up large (that is, adult), easily recognizable skeletal elements, while passing over smaller, less easily identifiable bones. The cause for the skewed sex distribution observed in the assemblage remains, however, an open question, although it is not uncommon in both contemporary Middle Woodland and later Mississip-pian mounds to find such sexually skewed distributions in skeletal assemblages (Demel 1994; Leigh et al. 1988:48). And, as is detailed above, the observed inequality may be wholly the result of our analytical shortcomings.


Population Health

The osteological analysis of the remains from the Kubinski site provides unique insight into the state of population-level health in Middle Woodland northern Illinois. As is detailed above, the Kubinski population displayed a relatively low overall prevalence of degenera-tive joint diseases, and those that were observed can be understood as being the result of particular biological or cultural practices. Similarly, there was a paucity of observed indica-tors of trauma, a result that meshes well with the apparent decrease in societal violence in the Early and Middle Woodland noted by other authors (e.g., Milner 1998:74, 2004:85). In contrast, the Kubinski population appears to have suffered widely from the effects of one or more nonspecific inflammatory infections. Such a high prevalence of infection, most of which appears to have no connection to incidents of antecedent trauma, paints a picture of an ill population continuously beset by endemic infection. This recounting does run afoul, however, of the so-called osteological paradox, which calls into question the assumption that those individuals recovered from archaeological contexts can be conceived of as being truly representative, in terms of health, of a given past population (Wood et al. 1992:344). The crux of this paradox is that one cannot be certain if the individuals we recover from an archaeological context represent the most frail portion of the population, because they succumbed to a given pathological process, or the most healthy, as they survived long enough to exhibit signs of fighting against, and recovering from, a given pathology (Wood et al. 1992:353). Another possible obscuring factor, and one that we feel is not given enough weight in dealing with these theoretical discussions on the process of reconstructing popu-lation health, is the relative strength of the pathogen in question. Obviously, a less virulent pathogen would, by its nature, leave a host alive longer, thereby allowing time for lesions to form, whereas a more virulent strain would cause rapid death.

In order to determine how well our, or for that matter, any, given skeletal sample might represent the general health of a population, we have to take four interrelated variables into account: (1) whether the pathogens present in the study sample produced osteological manifestations; (2) the virulence (relative mortality or fatality potential) of the pathogen; (3) the duration of infection; and (4) the relative strength or frailty of the individual. This last variable is, itself, a composite of a suite of factors including immune response, nutrition, age, and the presence or absence of other pathologies. Our interpretation of the interplay of the three latter factors is represented graphically in Figure 18, with the individuals whom we might interpret from an osteological analysis as being “sick” represented in the gray shaded area. In this interpretation, the categorization of an individual from a skeletal population as being affected by a particular disease process, on the basis of observed osse-ous lesions, has three complementary implications: (1) the individual survived for a long time with the disease, enough time to exhibit the osteological hallmarks of the pathology; (2) the individual was relatively well suited to respond to the pathology (something that could have a host of different meanings, depending on the particular pathogen) (Wood et al. 1992:355); and (3) the pathogen itself was only moderately or mildly virulent. Had the individual been frail, whatever that means, had they not fought the pathogen for a long time, or had the pathogen been a so-called slate wiper, a disease that kills most people extremely rapidly, insufficient osteological response would have developed for us to categorize an individual as being ill.


In the terms of the Kubinski site, then, when we look at those individuals expressing the hallmarks of inflammatory infection, which in some skeletal elements exceeded 50 percent, we are seeing representatives of a hardy portion of the populace. These individuals, who successfully fought infection for a long period of time (in this case months or years, before possibly succumbing to that disease or something else entirely), also had the advantage of being exposed to what was, after all, only a mildly virulent pathogen. In general terms then, the Kubinski site’s prehistoric populace had a high disease load of only mild to moderately virulent pathogens. This conclusion is further strengthened by the dearth of linear hypo-plasias observed in the population, the presence of which would have been suggestive of bouts of severe childhood nutritional or pathological stress.

Cultural Practices

The paucity of recovered artifacts does not hamper our ability to draw certain inferences about the sociocultural practices, available technologies, and lifestyles of the prehistoric inhabitants of the Kubinski site. In fact, we argue that a suite of these practices can facilitate the affiliation of these remains with the Hopewell cultural complex.

To begin with, the dental health of the Kubinski population is best seen as the direct result of several distinct culturally based practices. In the advanced state of wear seen on the posterior teeth we find confirmation of the state of food processing technology available at the site, in particular the use of grinding stones. Similarly, the heavy wear on anterior teeth is a likely indicator of some sort of nonmasticatory function of the teeth, or “teeth as tools” (Milner and Larsen 1991). One such nonmasticatory use, known from ethnographic

Figure 18. Interplay of host frailty, duration of infection, and pathogen virulence on the recognition of “sick” individuals. Only those individuals in the gray-shaded area would be recognizable as having been affected by the given pathogen.


examples and a candidate for the cause of the wear in the Kubinski population, is the chew-ing of deer or other animal hides for processing and softening (Molnar 1972). Rope or sinew processing seems an unlikely cause of the observed dental changes because neither occlusal nor interproximal grooves were observed in this assemblage (Milner and Larsen 1991). Although more males show the heaviest degrees of wear to their anterior teeth, anterior teeth were only present for one of the sample’s females, making any discussion of sexual difference in the use of anterior teeth speculative. Lastly, the high rates of dental calculus, periodontitis, and alveolar infections confirm the high-carbohydrate, starchy diet of the site’s inhabitants, providing independent confirmation of previous paleobotanical studies of Middle Woodland subsistence (e.g., Asch et al. 1979).

The long-term survival of a large number of individuals afflicted by infections and likely painful dental pathologies, as well as potentially brucellosis, speaks to the practice of at least compassionate care, if not some basic form of homeopathic medicine, among the Kubinski site’s prehistoric populace. All of the observed infectious processes, and brucel-losis in particular, can have seriously debilitating effects, including severe fevers, vomiting, diarrhea, and, potentially, incapacitation (Acha and Szyfres 1987:26). Without the care of other members of the group, it is likely that at least some of the individuals bearing the signs of these chronic infections would have passed away much more quickly, certainly before the osteological signature of infection could have formed. Moreover, a number of successfully healed, but misaligned, fractures in the skeletal material attests to the limits of the prehistoric medical know-how and technology among the site’s inhabitants. While it would appear that splinting technologies were available to facilitate the immobilization and healing of broken limbs, the process of fracture reduction, especially in cases of fractures of more robust, heavily muscled elements, was either unknown or judged to be more harmful than simple maintenance of a poorly aligned break.

Another cultural practice clearly reflected in the skeletal remains is cranial deformation. As is detailed above, the deformation occurred most often in the occipital area, at the rear of the cranium, followed closely by alteration to the frontal area, the bone of the forehead. Although it is, as Neumann (1942:306) observes, difficult to make a distinction between in-tentional and unintentional deformation, the generally mild degree of deformation observed in this population suggests that this deformation was not primarily cosmetic. As with the cranial deformation practiced by the Hopi, for example, the observed deformation is more likely the result of the cumulative effect of Havana-Hopewell child-rearing practice (Hrdlička 1935:251–252); more specifically, cradleboarding. From both archaeological and ethnographic examples, we know of cradleboarding that involves infants up to one year old being placed on the board for 20 or more hours a day (Harn 1980:70; Kohn et al. 1995:175). All we need imagine in addition to fully explain our observations is a strap across the forehead of the cradleboarded child, which would help to account for the observed frontal deformation.

An interpretation of this deformation as a consequence of cradleboarding is also in agreement with the findings of Neumann and Winters, both of whom found similar de-formation expressed in both Middle Woodland and Mississippian populations of Illinois (Neumann 1942:308–309; Winters 1961:65, 73, 80). Neumann argues that this deformation is the result of “practical” cradleboarding, but, as Hrdlička points out, a differentiation between cosmetic and practical deformation may well be artificial. As in the Hopi case, in which intentional deformation was consistently denied by informants, the resulting shape of the head was something that was, nonetheless, much admired (Hrdlička 1935:251). This


production of a secondary, but nonetheless sought-after, shape may help to explain why all of the crania from the Kubinski site showed asymmetric deformation of the right side of the cranium, a marked deviation from the more regular distribution of deformation loca-tion that one typically sees in cases of noncosmetic cradleboarding. Perhaps this resulting asymmetrical shape was something the site’s prehistoric inhabitants desired and actively helped to create. Regardless of the ultimate attempt, the practice of “Hopewell-style” cranial modification at this marginal locale could possibly attest to the cultural affinity between core and periphery.

It is intriguing to note that all of the examples of cranial deformation at the Kubinski site were observed in adult crania. None of the three subadult individuals exhibited any evidence of the intentional reshaping of their crania. The absence of such reshaping among the youngest individuals in the assemblage can be interpreted as evidence that cultural practices at the site had undergone some sort of change in the period between the childhood of the adults in our assemblage and those that had died as children. Alternatively, it may be possible that either the children or the adults in our assemblage were representatives of a distinct population (nonlocal) or some subset of the local population that did not practice such deformation (kin or sodality membership, for instance).

The postmortem alterations of the adult crania found in this sample also argue for a cultural affinity to the larger Hopewell cultural phenomenon. The removal of portions of the cranium and the polishing of certain elements indicate the practice at the Kubinski site of postmortem cranial curation. This evidence is suggestive of a custom referred to as the keeping of “trophy skulls.” Indeed, there are stylistic similarities to other occurrences of trophy skulls (e.g., those seen in Nasca, Peru; Williams et al. 2001), and there is ample con-textual support for this practice in the Midwest in periods ranging from the Archaic to the Woodland and beyond (Demel 1994). As was mentioned earlier, the mixed character of the assemblage precluded the identification of the specific cranial remains that would have been curated. Based on the evidence available, all we can state is that more adult crania were found in the assemblage than would be expected based on the number of postcranial individuals. As a result of this confusion, it is difficult to state categorically whether the retained crania and skulls would have been derived from vanquished foes or venerated ancestors.

The manner in which the crania were modified at the Kubinski site, while conforming closely to descriptions of that found by other authors (e.g., Silverburg 1968), differs dramati-cally from that seen in the most “classic” Middle Woodland Hopewell examples (see Seeman 1988). Specifically, the Kubinski crania lack distinct drill holes or notches, and the degree of cleaning or polishing seen in the Kubinski assemblage is not nearly as extreme as at Ohio Hopewell sites such as Harness, Marriott, Hopewell, and Turner (Seeman 1988). Nonethe-less, we propose that although the exact manner of modification might differ between the Hopewell center and periphery, the symbolic importance of the maintenance of the crania could be a common thread across the extent of the culture.

In sum, we would argue that the presence in the Kubinski burial of at least one (and possibly five) additional cranium, most likely curated, would have been in accordance with an important cultural/religious practice (perhaps ancestor worship) in which trophy skulls were deposited as an accompanying grave good or ancestral memento (Demel 1994:30; Peebles 1974:94). This practice of depositing the curated skulls of adults in mass burials is one that is well-known from other regional Hopewell sites (Seeman 1988:572).


Conclusions

The burial assemblage from the Kubinski site (11WI1186) was a secondary burial placed along the bluff ridge overlooking the Des Plains River. It is unclear if this secondary reburial was placed at the edge of a Middle Woodland burial mound of the Havana-Hopewell culture. It may also represent a nonmound mortuary repository. Based on our relatively small skeletal sample, the inhabitants of the Kubinski site exhibited signs of bearing a significant load of disease and discomfort resulting from a combination of exogenous pathogens (nonspecific infections and brucellosis) and their own cultural practices (cranial trauma and dental changes). When one fell ill or was injured, however, treatment with at least rudimentary medical practice was afforded.

The intentional modification of head shape, the manner in which the dead were being disposed of, and the postmortem retention and modification of heads were expressions at the Kubinski site of cultural practices familiar from across the Hopewell Interaction Sphere. These practices would have provided these marginal inhabitants of the Hopewell world with a link to those at the core, and their presence at this remote location speaks to the per-vasiveness of Hopewell cultural practices and not just its exotic trade goods.

Future Work

At present, the authors have planned further efforts aimed at the recovery of data useful in refining and building upon our understanding of the health and mortuary behaviors of the Middle Woodland inhabitants of the Kubinski site. Remote-sensing techniques (both electrical resistivity and ground-penetrating radar) will be brought to bear on the area around the original excavated feature in an attempt to gauge the location and nature of the bundle burial pit in relation to the rest of the (presumed) Havana-Hopewell mound. Further efforts at excavation are anticipated pending the findings of these remote-sensing techniques. Ultimately, the recovery of additional skeletal materials from the site, par-ticularly if a log tomb can be located, would have the advantage of allowing a number of the necessarily preliminary conclusions drawn above to be confirmed and their statistical likelihood determined.

Furthermore, the authors intend to broaden their investigations to include other sites, both additional mortuary features as well as settlement sites, in the Des Plaines River val-ley. It is our hope that a more refined understanding of the place of this single mass burial vis-à-vis other mortuary features and contemporary settlements in the region might pro-vide further insights into both the cultural affinity and biocultural practices of the Middle Woodland inhabitants of the Chicago area.

Endnotes

1. The work performed on the Norton Mounds of western Michigan being the notable exception (Griffin et al. 1970).

2. A recent site revisit by several of the authors (WP and SD) discovered a surface scatter in the area of the excavated feature containing nondiagnostic lithics and one nonlocal shell


of the genus Oliva, the native range of which extends only as close as the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States (Gerber 2004).

3. Using age categories modified from Martin and Saller (1957): fetal, neonate (<1 year), infant I (1–5 years), infant II (6–11 years), juvenile (12–18 years), young adult (19–30 years), full adult (31+ years)

4. This significance does rise above p = .05 if one applies the Yates correction for small sample size, but only to a level of p = .0623.

5. Determination of stature using Trotter (1970) entails comparison of maximum long bone length of humerus, radius, ulna, femur, tibia, and fibula with tables of data for each bone derived from known-stature individuals. The method of Feldesman et al. (1990) uses the following formula: femoral physiological length (cm) x 3.74 = stature (cm).

6. Based on the typology of Brown (1979), and barring any further information on the design of the presumed central tomb chamber at the Kubinski site or, for that matter, any archaeological evidence for the activities that took place in or near the tomb (or if, in fact, there is even a mound present at the Kubinski site at all), it is impossible to determine whether the presumed nearby tomb would be properly termed a burial crypt or a charnel house.

Acknowledgments

The authors first would like to thank Jonathan Haas of the Field Museum of Natural History and Terrence Martin of the Illinois State Museum for providing access to the skeletal materi-als from the Kubinski site. We also would like to thank Antonio Curet and Stephen Nash for their support and assistance in this research. Lastly, the authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers whose comments greatly improved the quality of this work.

References Cited

Acha, Pedro N., and Boris Szyfres 1987 Brucellosis. In Zoonoses and Communicable Diseases Common to Man and Animals,

edited by P. N. Acha and B. Szyfres, pp. 24–45. Pan American Health Organiza-tion, Washington D.C.

Asch, David L., Kenneth B. Farnsworth, and Nancy B. Asch 1979 Woodland Subsistence and Settlement in West Central Illinois. In Hopewell Archae-

ology: The Chillicothe Conference, edited by D. S. Brose and N. Greber, pp. 80–85. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.

Aufderheide, Arthur C., and Conrado Rodriguez-Martin 1998 The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Paleopathology. Cambridge University Press, Cam-

bridge.Bass, William 1995 Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual. Special Publication No. 2. Mis-

souri Archaeological Society, Columbia, Missouri.Berry, A. Caroline, and Robert J. Berry 1967 Epigenetic Variation in the Human Cranium. Journal of Anatomy 101:361–379.Brooks, Sheilagh, and Judy M. Suchey 1990 Skeletal Age Determination Based on the Os Pubis: A Comparison of the Acsadi-

Nemeskeri and Suchey-Brooks Method. Human Evolution 5(3):227–238.


Brown, James A. 1979 Charnel Houses and Mortuary Crypts: Disposal of the Dead in the Middle Wood-

land Period. In Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference, edited by D. S. Brose and N. Greber, pp. 211–219. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.

1991 Aboriginal Cultural Adaptations in the Midwestern Prairies. Garland, New York.Buckberry, Jo L., and Andrew T. Chamberlain 2002 Age Estimation from the Auricular Surface of the Ilium: A Revised Method.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology 119:231–239.Buikstra, Jane E. 1976 Hopewell in the Lower Illinois Valley: A Regional Approach to the Study of Human

Biological Variability and Prehistoric Behavior. Northwestern University Archaeo-logical Program Scientific Papers No. 2. Evanston, Illinois.

1979 Contributions of Physical Anthropologists to the Concept of Hopewell: A Histori-cal Perspective. In Hopewell Archaeology: The Chillicothe Conference, edited by D. S. Brose and N. Greber, pp. 220–233. Kent State University Press, Kent, Ohio.

Buikstra, Jane E., and Douglas H. Ubelaker, editors 1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Arkansas Archaeological

Survey Research Series No. 44. Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Fayetteville.Bullington, Jill 1988 Middle Woodland Mound Structure: Social Implication and Regional Context. In

The Archaic and Woodland Cemeteries at the Elizabeth Site in the Lower Illinois Valley, edited by D. K. Charles, S. R. Leigh, and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 218–241. Center for American Archeology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Capasso, Luigi 1999 Brucellosis at Herculaneum (79 A.D.). International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 9:

277–288.Conner, Michael D., and E. Brandon 1986 Appendix C: Analysis of Skeletal Remains. In Archaeological Excavation at the

Fitzgibbons Site, Gallatin County, Illinois, edited by C. A. Robinson, pp. 197–217. Research Paper No. 53. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.

Conner, Michael D., and David W. Link 1991 Archaeological and Osteological Analysis of Mound 38 at the Albany Mound

Group (11-Wt-1). Illinois Archaeology 3(1):23–55.Demel, Scott 1994 Disarticulated Heads Tell No Tales: Mississippian Use of Human Skulls. Unpublished

paper on file in the Anthropology Department, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois.

Ditch, Larry E., and Jerome C. Rose 1972 A Multivariate Dental Sexing Technique. American Journal of Physical Anthropology

37:61–64.Feldesman, Marc R., J. Geoff Kleckner, and John K. Lundy 1990 Femur/Stature Ratio and Estimates of Stature in Mid- and Late-Pleistocene Fossil

Hominids. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 83:359–372.Finnegan, Michael 1978 Non-Metric Variation of the Infracranial Skeleton. Journal of Anatomy 125:

23–37.


Frankenberg, Susan R., Donald G. Albertson, and Luci Kohn 1988 The Elizabeth Skeletal Remains: Demography and Disease. In The Archaic and

Woodland Cemeteries at the Elizabeth Site in the Lower Illinois Valley, edited by D. K. Charles, S. R. Leigh, and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 103–119. Center for American Ar-cheology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Gerber, Jochen 2004 Personal Communication. Identification of a Shell (Oliva sp.) Found in the Vicin-

ity of the Kubinski Burial Site, Romeoville, Illinois. Collection of the Manager of Invertebrates, Zoology Department, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois.

Giles, Eugene 1970 Discriminant Function Sexing of the Human Skeleton. In Personal Identification

in Mass Disasters, edited by T. D. Stewart, pp. 99–107. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Griffin, James B., Richard E. Flanders, and Paul F. Titterington 1970 The Burial Complexes of the Knight and Norton Mounds in Illinois and Michigan.

Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, no. 2. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Harn, Alan D. 1980 The Prehistory of Dickson Mound: The Dickson Excavation. Illinois State Museum

Reports of Investigations No. 35. Illinois State Museum, SpringfieldHillson, Simon 1996 Dental Anthropology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Holcomb, Susan M. C., and Lyle W. Konigsberg 1995 Statistical Study of Sexual Dimorphism in the Human Fetal Sciatic Notch. Ameri-

can Journal of Physical Anthropology 97:113–125.Hoppa, Robert D. 1992 Evaluating Human Skeletal Growth: An Anglo-Saxon Example. International

Journal of Osteoarchaeology 2: 275–288.Hrdlička, Ales 1935 The Pueblos. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 20:235–460.Hughes, Richard E. 2006 The Sources of Hopewell Obsidian: Forty Years after Griffin. In Recreating Hopewell,

edited by D. K. Charles and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 361–375. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

İşcan, Mehmet Y., Susan R. Loth, and Ronald K. Wright 1984 Age Estimation from the Ribs by Phase Analysis: White Males. Journal of Forensic

Sciences 29:1094–1104. 1985 Age Estimation from the Rib by Phase Analysis: White Females. Journal of Forensic

Sciences 30:853–863.Jeske, Robert J. 2006 Hopewell Regional Interactions in Southeastern Wisconsin and Northern Illinois:

A Core-Periphery Approach. In Recreating Hopewell, edited by D. K. Charles and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 285–309. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Kohn, Luci Ann P., Steven R. Leigh, and James M. Cheverud 1995 Asymmetric Vault Modification in Hopi Crania. American Journal of Physical

Anthropology 98:173–195.


Larsen, Clark Spencer, Rebecca Shavit, and Mark C. Griffin 1991 Dental Caries Evidence for Dietary Change: An Archaeological Context. In

Advances in Dental Anthropology, edited by M. A. Kelley and C. S. Larsen, pp. 179–202. Wiley-Liss, New York.

Leigh, Steven R., Douglas K. Charles, and Donald G. Albertson 1988 Middle Woodland Component. In The Archaic and Woodland Cemeteries at the

Elizabeth Site in the Lower Illinois Valley, edited by D. K. Charles, S. R. Leigh, and J.E. Buikstra, pp. 47–59. Center for American Archeology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Loth, Susan R., and Maciej Henneberg 2001 Sexually Dimorphic Mandibular Morphology in the First Few Years of Life.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology 115:179–186.Lovejoy, Owen C., Richard S. Meindl, Thomas R. Pryzbeck, and Robert P. Mensforth 1985 Chronological Metamorphosis of the Auricular Surface of the Ilium: A New

Method for the Determination of Adult Skeletal Age at Death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:15–28.

Lovell, Nancy C. 1997 Trauma Analysis in Paleopathology. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:139–

170.Lyman, R. Lee 1994 Quantitative Units and Terminology in Zooarchaeology. American Antiquity 59(1):

36–71.MacRae, Jack 2003 Personal Communication. 1986 Excavation of the Kubinski Site (11WI1186). For-

est Preserve District of DuPage County, Fullersburg, Illinois.Mangold, William L., and Mark R. Schurr 2006 The Goodall Tradition: Recent Research and New Perspectives. In Recreating

Hopewell, edited by D. K. Charles and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 206–226. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Mapes, Rex D. 1979 Soil Survey of DuPage and Part of Cook Counties, Illinois. U.S. Department of Agri-

culture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station, Washington, D.C.

Margerison, Beverley, and Christopher Knüsel 2002 Paleodemographic Comparison of a Catastrophic and an Attritional Death As-

semblage. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 119:134–143.Markman, Charles W. 1991 Chicago Before History: The Prehistoric Archaeology of a Modern Metropolitan Area.

Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, Springfield.Martin, Rudolf, and Karl Saller 1957 Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart.Meindl, Richard S., and C. Owen Lovejoy 1985 Ectocranial Suture Closure: A Revised Method for the Determination of Skeletal

Age at Death Based on the Lateral-Anterior Sutures. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:57–66.

Miles, Albert E. W. 1962 Assessment of the Ages of a Population of Anglo-Saxons from their Dentitions.

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 55:881–886.


Milner, George R. 1998 Archaeological Evidence for Prehistoric and Early Historic Intergroup Conflict in

Eastern North America. In Deciphering Anasazi Violence: With Regional Comparisons to Mesoamerican and Woodland Cultures, edited by P. Y. Bullock, pp. 69–91. HRM Books, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

2004 The Moundbuilders: Ancient Peoples of Eastern North America. Thames and Hudson, New York.

Milner, George R., and Clark Spencer Larsen 1991 Teeth as Artifacts of Human Behavior: Intentional Mutilation and Accidental

Modification. In Advances in Dental Anthropology, edited by M. A. Kelley and C. S. Larsen, pp. 357–378. Wiley-Liss, New York.

Molnar, Stephen 1972 Tooth Wear and Culture: A Survey of Tooth Functions Among Some Prehistoric

Populations. Current Anthropology 13(5):511–526.Moorrees, Coenraad F. A., Elizabeth A. Fanning, and Edward E. Hunt Jr. 1963 Formation and Resorption of Three Deciduous Teeth in Children. American Journal

of Physical Anthropology 21:205–213.Neumann, Georg K. 1942 Types of Artificial Cranial Deformation in the Eastern United States. American

Antiquity 3:306–310.Olivier, Georges 1960 Pratique Anthropologique. Vigot Frères, Paris.Ortner, Donald J. 2003 Identification of Pathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains. Academic Press,

San Diego.Ousley, Stephen D., and Richard L. Jantz 1996 FORDISC, version 2.00a. Forensic Anthropology Center, University of Tennessee,

Knoxville, Tennessee.Peebles, Christopher S. 1974 Moundville: The Social Organization of a Prehistoric Community and Culture. Unpub-

lished Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Perino, Gregory H. 1968 The Pete Klunk Mound Group, Calhoun County, Illinois: The Archaic and

Hopewell Occupations. In Hopewell and Woodland Site Archaeology in Illinois, edited by J. A. Brown, pp. 9-124. Illinois Archaeological Survey, Bulletin No. 6. Illinois Archaeological Survey, Springfield, Illinois.

Pestle, William J., Michael Colvard, and Richard Jurevic 2007 Morphological, Radiological, and Genetic Evidence for Brucellosis in Middle

Woodland Illinois. Article in preparation.Pickering, Robert 1987 Examination of a Middle Woodland Ossuary from Will County, Illinois. Paper

presented at the Midwest Archaeological Conference, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.


Reimer, Paula J., Mike G. L. Baillie, Edouard Bard, Alex Bayliss, J. Warren Beck, Chanda J. H. Bertrand, Paul G. Blackwell, Caitlin E. Buck, George S. Burr, Kristen B. Cutler, Paul E. Damon, R. Lawrence Edwards, Richard G. Fairbanks, Michael Friedrich, Thomas P. Guilderson, Alan G. Hogg, Konrad A. Hughen, Bernd Kromer, F. Gerry McCormac, Stuart W. Manning, Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Ron W. Reimer, Sabine Remmele, John R. Southon, Minze Stuiver, Sahra Talamo, Fred W. Taylor, Johannes van der Plicht, and Constanze E. Weyhenmeyer. 2004 IntCal04 Terrestrial Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 26–0 ka BP. Radiocarbon 46:

1029–1058. Richards, Lindsay C. 1990 Tooth Wear and Temporomandibular Joint Change in Australian Aboriginal

Populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 82(3):377–384.Richards, Lindsay C., and Tasman Brown 1981 Dental Attrition and Degenerative Arthritis of the Temporomandibular Joint.

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 8(4):293–307.Rothschild, Bruce M., Robert J. Woods, and William Ortel 1990 Rheumatoid Arthritis “in the Buff”: Erosive Arthritis in Defleshed Bones. American

Journal of Physical Anthropology 82(4):441–449.Scheuer, J. Louise, Jonathan H. Musgrave, and Stuart P. Evans 1980 The Estimation of Late Fetal and Perinatal Age From Limb Bone Length by Linear

and Logarithmic Regression. Annals of Human Biology 7:257–265.Schutkowski, Holger 1993 Sex Determination of Infant and Juvenile Skeletons: 1. Morphognostic Features.

American Journal of Physical Anthropology 90:199–205.Schwartz, Jeffrey H. 1995 Skeleton Keys. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Seeman, Mark F. 1988 Ohio Hopewell Trophy-Skull Artifacts as Evidence for Competition in Middle

Woodland Societies Circa 50 B.C.–A.D. 350. American Antiquity 53(3):565–577.Seligman, D. A., A. G. Pullinger, and William K. Solberg 1988 The Prevalence of Dental Attrition and Its Association with Factors of Age,

Gender, Occlusion, and TMJ Symptomatology. Journal of Dental Research 67(10): 1323–1333.

Silverburg, Robert 1968 Mound Builders of Ancient America. New York Graphic Society, Greenwich, Con-

necticut.Smith, B. Holly 1991 Standards of Human Tooth Formation and Dental Age Assessment. In Advances

in Dental Anthropology, edited by M. A. Kelley and C. S. Larsen, pp. 143–168. Wiley-Liss, New York.

Smith, Bruce D. 2006 Household, Community, and Subsistence in Hopewell Research. In Recreating

Hopewell, edited by D. K. Charles and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 491–509. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Stramaglia, Laura 1986 Bones Show Ancient Indians Roamed Romeoville. Naperville Sun, November 28,

28A.


Struever, Stuart 1965 Middle Woodland Culture History in the Great Lakes Riverine Area. American

Antiquity 31(2–1):211–223.Stuiver, Minze, and Paula J. Reimer 1993 Extended 14C Data Base and Revised CALIB 3.0 14C Age Calibration Program.

Radiocarbon 35(1):215–230.Todd, Thomas W. 1920 Age Changes in the Pubic Bone I: The Male White Pubis. American Journal of

Physical Anthropology 3:285–334.Trotter, Mildred 1970 Estimation of Stature from Intact Long Limb Bones. In Personal Identification

in Mass Disasters, edited by T. D. Stewart, pp. 71–83. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Turner, Christy G., Christian R. Nichol, and G. Richard Scott 1991 Scoring Procedures for Key Morphological Traits of the Permanent Dentition.

In Advances in Dental Anthropology, edited by M. A. Kelley and C. S. Larsen, pp. 13–31. Wiley-Liss, New York.

Ubelaker, Douglas H. 1989 Human Skeletal Remains: Excavation, Analysis, Interpretation. Manuals on Archeol-

ogy Series No. 2. Taraxacum, Washington, D.C.United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1980 Will County Soil Descriptions. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service, Washington, D.C.Vallois, Henri V. 1960 Vital Statistics in Prehistoric Populations as Determined from Archaeological

Data. In The Application of Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, edited by R. F. Heizer and S. F. Cook, pp. 186–222. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Williams, Sloan, Kathy Forgey, and Elizabeth Klarich 2001 An Osteological Study of Nasca Trophy Heads Collected by A. L. Kroeber during the

Marshall Field Expeditions to Peru. Fieldiana Anthropology, New Series No. 33. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

Winters, Howard D. 1961 The Adler Mound Group, Will County, Illinois. In Chicago Area Archaeology,

edited by E. A. Bluhm, pp. 57–88. Illinois Archaeological Survey Bulletin No. 3. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Wood, James W., George R. Milner, Henry C. Harpending, and Kenneth M. Weiss 1992 The Osteological Paradox: Problems of Inferring Prehistoric Health from Skeletal

Samples. Current Anthropology 33(4):343–370.Yerkes, Richard W. 2006 Middle Woodland Settlement and Social Organization in the Central Ohio Val-

ley: Were the Hopewell Really Farmers? In Recreating Hopewell, edited by D. K. Charles and J. E. Buikstra, pp. 50–61. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Skeletal Biology and Mortuary Practice at the Kubinski Site (11WI1186), a Middle Woodland Ossuary

Documents

Transcript of Skeletal Biology and Mortuary Practice at the Kubinski Site (11WI1186), a Middle Woodland Ossuary