Documented Skeletal Collections and Their Importance in Forensic Anthropology in the United States

Documented skeletal collections are the backbone of forensic anthropology due to their associated biohistories. This paper describes the identified skeletal collections and their relevance in forensic anthropological research, education and training in the US. The establishment of documented skeletal collections in the US can be distinguished into two modus operandi, depending on the stance towards the dead, legislation, and medical and forensic practices. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, anatomists amassed skeletons from cadaver dissections, shaped by European influences. Those skeletons compose the anatomical collections—such as the Robert J. Terry Anatomical Collection—predominantly representing impoverished and unclaimed individuals. Ethical concerns for the curation and research of African American skeletons without family consent are growing in the US. In contrast, since the 1980s, modern documented skeletal collections originated from body donations to human taphonomy facilities, such as the William M. Bass Donated Skeletal Collection. The establishment and testing of osteological methods essential to establish one’s identity—such as age at death and sex—have been developed with skeletons from documented collections. Therefore, the analysis of identified skeletons has been crucial for the development of forensic anthropology in the US.

Repatriation and the End of Scientific Freedom

Weiss and Springer feel repatriation laws impede scientific research by limiting skeletal collections and by removing freedom of inquiry of skeletal remains.

Paleodemographic Simulations at Xcambó, Yucatan: Early and Late Classic Population Dynamics in the Northern Maya Territories

Paleodemographic simulations are rare in the Maya region, because generally the skeletal collections do not represent well the ancient living population, are poorly preserved, and lead to flawed age-at-death estimations. The skeletal collection of Xcambó, however, is suitable for paleodemographic analysis and is large enough to enable comparison of paleodemographic trends between the Early (AD 250–550) and Late Classic (AD 550–750) periods. Three demographic simulations were generated; two relied on growth rates calculated from the site's previous archaeodemographic data, and a third simulation was based on a stationary scenario by applying Weiss's (1973) and Séguy and Buchet's (2013) models. All simulations indicate that Xcambó’s Late Classic population was growing faster than its Early Classic peers, with higher rates of survivorship and more severe mortality rates. We argue that the differences are more likely due to shifts in lifestyle and wealth than to environmental changes, as is confirmed by other bioarchaeological and skeletal indicators.