238 • Charlotte Roberts 



The final problem with x-ray analysis is the age of the 

 fracture. The complete healing process, in normal circums- 

 tances, takes about one year; after that time there is little 

 change histologically or radiographically in the fracture ap- 

 pearance. It is, therefore, difficult to ascertain at what age the 

 fracture occurred in the individual unless the incident oc- 

 curred just prior to death. At present, in paleopathology, ages 

 of individuals with fractures are meaningless in terms of the 

 timing of the fracture. 



We hope that work to be undertaken in the near future will 

 give more accurate indicators of the age of fractures in an- 

 cient populations. Modem, documented, clinical x-rays 

 from the Institute of Orthopaedics in London will be studied. 

 The x-rays will be comparable in terms of the following 

 features: nonoperatively treated fractures, i.e., those treated 

 with basic reduction and splinting; simple, not compound, 

 fractures; all adult individuals; fractures resulting from acci- 

 dents not related to modem technology. 



These x-rays will be compared with the archeological 

 films, and clinical records will be consulted to ascertain the 

 age of the fracture. The same recording fomi will be used to 

 record the modem x-rays. The availability of clinical records 

 now provides an additional potential to assess the causes of 

 particular fractures in the ancient data, to know exactly how 

 the fractures were treated and whether infection was present, 

 and to observe the fracture on x-ray pre-, during and post- 

 treatment. Modem clinical x-rays give an added time dimen- 

 sion. 



Summary discussion and concluding remarks 



This paper has outlined the author's methodological ap- 

 proach to trauma and treatment in the British Historic Period. 

 It is fortunate for paleopathology that there has recently been 

 a strong move toward this type of multidisciplinary approach 

 in the interpretation of archeological sites. 



Skeletal remains from cemeteries do not represent individ- 

 uals who lived cocooned in isolation from their environment. 

 These people were constantly interacting with their environ- 

 ment. As Calvin Wells said in 1964 (17): 



The pattern of disease or injury that affects any group of 

 people is never a matter of chance. It is invariably the ex- 

 pression of stresses and strains to which they are exposed, a 

 response to everything in their environment and behavior. It 

 reflects their genetic inheritance (which is their internal en- 

 vironment) the climate in which they lived, the soil that 

 gave them sustenance and the animals or plants that shared 

 their homelands. It is intlucnccd by their daily occupations, 

 their habits of diet, their choice of dwelling and clothes, 

 their social structure, even their folklore and mythology. 

 The.se words hold true over 20 years later. Archeological 

 data, in whatever form, is fragmentary and reflects a sample 

 of the original deposit. The nature of this deposit and its later 



interpretation, whether of human skeletal remains or pottery, 

 is influenced first by the individuals who ensured its burial or 

 created an environment in which it was discarded, second by 

 burial conditions in the ground, third by the people who 

 excavated and processed the material, and last by the person 

 who examined the remains. The complete picture of particu- 

 lar aspects of societies in the past is gradually lost through all 

 these processes. As time proceeds from true life to a distant 

 past, interpretation becomes more difficult, especially when 

 only one type of evidence is being assessed. All types of 

 archeological data are fragmentary but the maximum amount 

 of information must be generated. Perhaps this is why re- 

 searchers in human skeletal remains are beginning to realize 

 the vast potential of using other sets of data to help them 

 interpret data generated from human skeletal remains. This 

 approach, however, is still in its infancy. 



There will always be a special place in the literature for 

 unusual and isolated pathological conditions, but in the fu- 

 ture there will be an increasing demand for more wider rang- 

 ing analyses of human skeletal data. It will no longer be 

 deemed acceptable to consider skeletons as a single entity, 

 unresponsive to their surroundings. The use of modem clini- 

 cal data in paleopathology will further help to broaden our 

 horizons and help interpretation go further than mere diag- 

 noses of cases. More epidemiological considerations in the 

 future will enable paleopathologists to look upon their data 

 more critically. There is much to be learned by all parties 

 whether they be clinicians, paleopathologists, art historians, 

 or ethnographers. There is also a move toward multi- 

 disciplinary conferences (e.g., Dieppe and Rogers 1986) 

 where exchange of ideas is encouraged. 



In this particular type of study it has already been noted 

 that the use of multiple sets of evidence creates problems 

 which can, with care, be solved. Reliance on individuals who 

 are experts in their own fields to produce data relevant to the 

 questions being posed is essential. However, these data can 

 then be assessed by the paleopathologist and considered rele- 

 vant or rejected. The limitations of each type of evidence 

 being used have already been outlined and due consideration 

 will be taken of these limitations in the final interpretation. 



The end results of this study will be (1) to assess the 

 healing of each fracture observed, taking into consideration 

 all the factors relevant to healing, and extensively consulting 

 modem clinical data and x-rays; and (2) to consider the evi- 

 dence for diagnosis and treatment in all periods examined, 

 including all subject areas already mentioned relevant to di- 

 agnosis and treatment, and to work the two sets of data 

 together to interpret how well fractures in the British Historic 

 Period were being treated, what techniques, equipment and 

 knowledge were available, in what kind of environments did 

 fractures have to heal, and whether the type of diet individu- 

 als were eating was good enough for fracture healing to 

 occur. 



Zagreb Pateopiithttloiiy Symp. I9fi!i 



