Life and death at the "The Land of Three Lakes": Revisiting the non-adults from Roman Aventicum, Switzerland (1st-3rd century CE)

A macroscopic assessment of porosity and new bone formation on the inferior pars basilaris: Normal growth or an indicator of scurvy?

OBJECTIVES

This research aims to determine the aetiology of porosity and subperiosteal new bone formation on the inferior surface of the pars basilaris.

MATERIALS

A total of 199 non-adult individuals aged 36 weeks gestation to 3.5 years, from a total of 12 archaeological sites throughout the UK, including Iron Age (n=43), Roman (n=12), and post-medieval (n=145) sites, with a preserved pars basilaris.

METHODS

The pars basilaris was divided into six segments, with porosity (micro and macro) and subperiosteal new bone formation recorded on the inferior surface in scorbutic and non-scorbutic individuals. Scurvy was diagnosed using criteria from the palaeopathological literature that was developed using a biological approach.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in microporosity between scorbutic and non-scorbutic individuals in four out of the six segments analysed. There was a significant negative correlation between age and microporosity in non-scorbutic and scorbutic individuals. A significant difference in subperiosteal new bone formation was observed between scorbutic and non-scorbutic individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

Microporosity on the inferior pars basilaris should not be considered among the suite of lesions included in the macroscopic assessment of scurvy in non-adult skeletal remains (less than 3.5 years).

SIGNIFICANCE

This study highlights the risk of over diagnosing scurvy in past populations.

LIMITATIONS

It is difficult to distinguish between physiological (normal) and pathological (abnormal) bone changes in the skeleton of individuals less than one year of age.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Future research should focus on the analysis of individuals over 3.5 years of age.

A growth area: A review of the value of clinical studies of child growth for palaeopathology

Studies of living children demonstrate that early life stress impacts linear growth outcomes. Stresses affecting linear growth may also impact later life health outcomes, including increased cardiometabolic disease risk. Palaeopathologists also assess the growth of children recovered from bioarchaeological contexts. Early life stresses are inferred to affect linear growth outcomes, and measurements of skeletal linear dimensions alongside other bioarchaeological information may indicate the types of challenges faced by past groups. In clinical settings, the impacts of stress on growing children are typically measured by examining height. Palaeopathologists are limited to examining bone dimensions directly and must grapple with incomplete pictures of childhood experiences that may affect growth. Palaeopathologists may use clinical growth studies to inform observations among past children; however, there may be issues with this approach. Here, we review the relationship between contemporary and palaeopathological studies of child and adolescent growth. We identify approaches to help bridge the gap between palaeopathological and biomedical growth studies. We advocate for: the creation of bone-specific growth reference information using medical imaging and greater examination of limb proportions; the inclusion of children from different global regions and life circumstances in contemporary bone growth studies; and greater collaboration and dialogue between palaeopathologists and clinicians as new studies are designed to assess linear growth past and present. We advocate for building stronger bridges between these fields to improve interpretations of growth patterns across human history and to potentially improve interventions for children living and growing today.

Studies of living children demonstrate that early life stress impacts linear growth. Stresses affecting linear growth may also impact later life health, including cardiometabolic disease risk. Palaeopathologists also investigate if children and adolescents recovered from bioarchaeological contexts experienced growth disruptions due to early life challenges. In clinical settings, the impacts of stress on growing children are typically measured by examining height. Palaeopathologists are limited to examining bone dimensions directly and must grapple with incomplete pictures of childhood experiences that may affect growth. Here, we review the relationship between contemporary and palaeopathological studies of child and adolescent growth. We advocate for: the creation of bone-specific growth reference information using medical imaging and greater examination of limb proportions; the inclusion of children from different global regions and life circumstances in contemporary bone growth studies; and greater collaboration and dialogue between palaeopathologists and clinicians as new studies are designed to assess linear growth past and present. These steps may improve interpretations of growth patterns across human history and interventions for children living and growing today.

Toward a bioarchaeology of urbanization: Demography, health, and behavior in cities in the past

Urbanization is one of the most important settlement shifts in human history and has been the focus of research within bioarchaeology for decades. However, there have been limited attempts to synthesize the results of these studies in order to gain a broader perspective on whether or how urbanization affects the biology, demography, and behavior of humans, and how these potential effects are embodied in the human skeleton. This paper outlines how bioarchaeology is well-suited to examine urbanization in the past, and we provide an overview and examples of three main ways in which urbanization is studied in bioarchaeological research: comparison of (often contemporaneous) urban and rural sites, synchronic studies of the variation that exists within and between urban sites, and investigations of changes that occur within urban sites over time. Studies of urbanization, both within bioarchaeology and in other fields of study, face a number of limitations, including a lack of a consensus regarding what urban and urbanization mean, the assumed dichotomous nature of urban versus rural settlements, the supposition that urbanization is universally bad for people, and the assumption (at least in practice) of homogeneity within urban and rural populations. Bioarchaeologists can address these limitations by utilizing a wide array of data and methods, and the studies described here collectively demonstrate the complex, nuanced, and highly variable effects of urbanization.