UOB: 21005866
Human remains portfolio
Introduction
The skeleton (numbered SK5) observed for this assessment was from a burial site located in
Chancel/sanctuary in Hickleton, South Yorkshire and is from the post medieval era (Buckberry,
pers.comm.YEAR). This era is dated between 1450-1700 (Guedens and Coesemans 2020). SK5 was
taken from St Wilfred’s church, which has been suffering from destruction for centuries due to
mining subsidence (Sydes 1983). SK5 was assessed to determine both sex and age at death using
various methods, which will be critiqued in this portfolio. When determining the sex of SK5, the
traits of the skull and Os Coxae were scored using figure 1 (see below) (After Buikstra & Ubelaker
1994).
Adult sex assessment of SK5
Methods-
Sex estimation scoring
U = unobservable
1 = female
2 = probable female
3 = ambiguous sex
4 = probable male
5 = male
Figure 1 – the scoring table used against all methods mentioned (After Buikstra & Ubelaker 1994)
When assessing the sex of SK5, the skull and os coxae aswell as metric methods were observed. The
areas of the Os Coxae include the ventral arc, the subpubic concavity, the ischiopubic ramus, the
subpubic angle (Washburn 1948), the greater sciatic notch and the preauricular sulcus (Buikstra and
Ubelaker 1994). Furthermore, the areas of the skull included: the skull's general size/shape
(Herrmann et al 1990), the nuchal crest, the mastoid process, the supra orbital ridge/glabella, the
supraorbital margin, the mental eminence and the gonial flare (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994).
Finally, osteometrics were measured on the humeral head, humeral epicondyles, femoral head,
femoral epicondyles (After Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994) and then the ischio-pubic index was
calculated from the pubic and ischium length (Washburn 1948).
1
,UOB: 21005866
Critique of methods-
When assessing SK5 to estimate the sex, certain traits of the OS coxae were assessed (Buikstra and
Ubelaker 1994). Although multiple traits were assessed, there are many more areas that could have
been mentioned to make the results more accurate (Garvin 2012). As well as this, the method only
looks at the extremes of the traits and this can disallow the understanding of the variations of the
pubis (Klales et al 2012). Population-specific changes that occur on the Os coxae can effect trait
scores, like on the obturator foramen (see figure 9 – appendix 1) and slightly in the greater sciatic
notch (Kilmer and Garvin 2020). To solve such issues, it would be necessary to set population-
specific methods for sex estimation (Moore et al 2016). Despite this (Klales et al 2012) mentioned
that using images to assess such traits is a quick and efficient process, this was found to be true
when assessing SK5. Even though there are variabilities in the greater sciatic notch, the accuracy for
this area in sec estimation remains as high as 80% even with population changes (Kilmer and Garvin
2020).
Traits of the skull (see figure 12 – appendix 1) were also assessed to help determine the sex of SK5
(Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994). However, the method cannot always be done, as the skull is not
always available (Spradley and Jantz 2011). In addition, these qualitative methods rely on the
experience of the observer (Bertsatos et al 2018). The population origin of the skeleton can
drastically change the scores of skull traits, and because of this population-specific methods are
needed for the skull (Tallman 2019). However, (Spradley and Jantz 2011) stated that they are easy
to apply, and the skull is the second-best area for sex estimation when available. In terms of SK5,
this method was easy to do, and the images could be compared successfully. The gonial flare of the
mandible (see figure 10 – appendix 1) was also assessed (Garvin 2012). A contrasting view to this
method is that a complete mandible is needed to look at this trait, if not complete, the method
cannot be used (Hu et al 2006).
Metric techniques were also used on the long bones of SK5 (After Buikstra and Ublelaker 1994). A
critique of this method is shown by (Mall et al 2001) who found that bones with trauma/fractures
or alterations can give unreliable measurements. In addition, muscle attachments can change the
diameters (Safont et al 2000). Overall, measurements can change dependent on the population of
the skeleton, such as from the humerus and scapula (Moore et al 2016). However, (Nagaoka and
Hirata 2009) supported the method by finding that using long bones provides accurate information
about the sex of a skeleton. The final measurements taken on SK5 were used to give the ischio-
pubic index (Washburn 1948) see figure 11 (appendix 1), which used figure 8 (see appendix 1) to
show where the measurements need to be taken. This method has been critiqued by (Drew 2013),
who believes this method could be seen as unreliable due to its subjectivity. Drew also found
traditional sexing methods to be quicker to implement than this method. Drew finally stressed that
it measures from an unidentified area of the acetabulum. Support from (Adhvaryv et al 2019)
mentioned that the ichio-pubic index has allowed for the sex estimation of a high percentage of
pelvic bones.
2
, UOB: 21005866
Assessment results-
The results obtained from the assessment were all noted into table 1 (for Os Coxae), table 2 (Skull)
and table 3 (Osteometrics) (see appendix 1). When scoring the areas of the Os Coxae the areas
were either scored as female or probable female, the simple reason for this is that certain areas
may have matched to different images in figures 1, 2 and 3 (see appendix 1). Furthermore, on the
skull figures 4 (Herrmann et al 1990) and 5 (see appendix 1) were used to determine the score of
each feature (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994). The areas of the skull were scored as female, probable
female or unknown sex – mental eminence. The reason for this could be human error or general
lack of experience and such errors could be avoided by gaining a second opinion from a third-party
observer. Finally, the iscio-pubic index was calculated using the equation in figure 9 (see below),
and resulted in a female result, and lead to an overall sex estimation of female.
Pubic length x 100
Ischium length
Figure 9 – the equation to calculate the ischio-pubic index (Washburn 1948).
Conclusion-
To conclude, the sex of SK5 could be determined using the areas mentioned, even though some
areas gave questionable scores. Generally, all the areas used gave good results, however the
ventral arc of the Os Coxae seemed most useful in this sex determination.
3
