Hoy me and Bass] SKELETAL REMAINS 331 



Approximately 80 burials were recovered. The following year, Miller 

 excavated the Tollifero component, site Ha6, on Occaneechi Island, 

 recovering about 43 burials. At the close of this season, the skeletal 

 material was transferred to the Division of Physical Anthropology, 

 U. S. National Museum, where it was cataloged under the supervision 

 of Dr. Marshall T. Newman, associate curator of that Division. At 

 that time, Newman made preliminary observations on the collection, 

 estimating age and sex. During the course of cataloging, a number 

 of specimens were discarded as being too fragmentary to merit preser- 

 vation. Catalog Nos. 380842-889 were assigned to the 48 skeletons 

 from the Clarksville site (Mcl4), and 380890-919 to 30 lots from the 

 Tollifero site (Ha6). 



During the summer of 1958, the skeletal material was examined 

 more fully by William M. Bass, a member of the staff of the Eiver 

 Basin Surveys. Bass measured the adult crania and long bones, 

 reevaluated the evidence for age and sex, and described some of the 

 individual features of the skeletons. Finally, during the summer of 

 1961, the collection was reexamined by Lucile E. Hoyme, of the Divi- 

 sion of Physical Anthropology, United States National Museum, in 

 order to prepare a final report for publication. It is only natural that 

 these various anthropologists, with differing backgrounds and degrees 

 of experience, working under quite different circumstances, should dif- 

 fer occasionally in their interpretation of the evidence for age and sex. 

 It should be noted, then, that the ages and sexes given by Miller in 

 his archeological report, are based on his initial field records, and 

 differ occasionally from those given here. The physical anthro- 

 pologist, working in the laboratory, with cleaned and restored mate- 

 rials, has a considerable advantage over the archeologist working 

 in the field. Unfortunately, revised determinations were not avail- 

 able to Miller at the time his report went to press, so he had no oppor- 

 tunity to make the necessary corrections in his data. 



A few more serious discrepancies will be noted between the de- 

 scriptions of the individual burials in the following pages, and those 

 given by Miller. These are due to confusion in the field numbers, 

 either in the laboratory, during cataloging, or in rearrangement of 

 Miller's data during his analysis. Although it would have been 

 preferable to correct these errors, it has not been possible. They are 

 few enough in number, however, to have little effect on the con- 

 clusions of either the archeologist or the physical anthropologist. 



In the study of the skeletal remains, we have followed a more or 

 less uniform procedure. After determining age and sex, as outlined 

 below, the skull and mandible were examined, and measured. Al- 

 though some of the sloills could not be restored sufficiently for meas- 

 urement, it was often possible to tell from inspection of the incomplete 



