University of Virginia Library

II. Appendix II

BURIALS FROM MOUND 50 AND MOUND 51

By Donovan Senter

The physical anthropologist must work hand in hand with the
archaeologist in solving the problems of the migrations of peoples and
of cultures. Every skeleton should be worked up as an integral part
of the data of archaeology to aid in solving the problems of cultural
relations. Certainly a physical type will change less than a pottery
type in a given stretch of time. Eventually, the cross finds of skeletons
as well as cross finds of pottery will figure in reports. Each skeleton
should be treated as an "artifact" to be studied in its relations to the
rest of the archaeological data pertaining to the site, period, and
complex.

As a study grows and we reach the point of planning our digging
to fill in hiatuses in our knowledge of relationships in sequences of pottery,
wall types, other material cultural manifestations, and physical
types, we shall fill in the chapters of the culture history of a region with
more precision and with infinitely less loss of time than is possible in
earlier and more hit or miss work. Why should the culture carrier not
be studied as closely as his manifestations? Each excavation report
should include measurements and other physical anthropological data,
with an analysis, as an integral part of the problem, and the archaeologist
should consider it as one of the factors to be considered in his distribution
studies. It is not true that "men interbreed but pots do not,"
but certainly when there is a blending of techniques of pottery making,
future pots are much less likely long to show the results of that amalgamation
than are the carriers of the two techniques, who likewise
blended. The physical combination may be analyzed and associated
with the two pottery techniques, or at least with the culture complexes
that accompanied those techniques.

The few skeletons which may appear from a small excavation do
not constitute an adequate series for conclusions, but the archaeologist
should measure and observe those skeletons and publish the raw measurements,
at least, with a clear statement of their cultural association.
Later, when sufficient data on any culture aspect have been accumulated
in this manner, the raw data may be collected from the
smaller publications and analyzed. One cannot analyze three skeletons
but he can at least present their measurements so that they may be
statistically analyzed by someone when a sufficient series has been collected,
even though it be by small bits here and there. There is, of
course, possibility of divergence of techniques in anthropometry but

any honest measurements and observations are far better than nothing
at all. Anthropometrical techniques are not difficult and most archaeologists
have had the elements of this training, so that a few days
taken from the study of pottery or of stone work would be sufficient to
work up a few otherwise neglected bones.

There is much to be said for the "validity of the argument in
favor of the delayed publication of a final report,"[1] but many times
these withheld data published in preliminary form would aid many
workers in continuing their own research problems. Often two or more
heads are better than one if they are working separately with all
possible data toward the solution of a problem.

One may look forward to the day when excavations will be made
especially to find the relations between certain physical types and to
fill in their gaps, just as excavations were made at the previously
carefully selected site of Showlow[2] to fill in a troublesome gap in the
tree ring chronology.

Disposal of the Dead in the Chaco

Ever since the first excavations were begun in Chaco ruins, archaeologists
have wondered at the amazing dearth of burials there. The
canyon was the home of thousands of people at one time, as is proved
by the number of rooms of the same building date in the large pueblos,
and an archaeologist acquainted with the burial customs of the northern
prehistoric Southwestern Pueblo people would expect to find thousands
of graves. Instead, entire seasons have passed without the uncovering
of a single skeleton, and the location of sixteen at Tseh So in 1936,
fragmentary as they were, was reason for rejoicing.

As early as Jackson's expedition a skull was taken from a stratum
sixteen feet below the surface near Pueblo del Arroyo.[3] At this point the
profile of the canyon showed the ancient river bed, since filled, and "an
undulating stratum of broken pottery, flint-chippings, and small bones
firmly embedded in a coarse gravelly deposit" which represented "the
ancient surface of the grounds about the pueblo, and was probably the
sloping bank of the stream, which during the occupancy of the pueblo
may have been a considerable river. Since the desertion of this region
the old bed has become filled to the depth of at least fourteen feet, and
through this the arroyo has made its present channel. A system of
thorough excavation would undoubtedly reveal many interesting things
and is probably the only method by which anything satisfactory will
ever be learned of the industrious people who once filled this narrow
valley."[4]

During the August, 1936, session in the Chaco, the University dug
a trench south of Chetro Ketl, with two main objects in view: (1) to
explore the possibility of a burial ground deep below the present surface
of the canyon, and (2) to ascertain some indications of the precise
profile of the landscape between Chetro Ketl and the present arroyo.
No burials were found, but dated erosion surfaces show that many a
Chaco burial ground could be so well covered with silt deposits, sixteen
feet above the old surface at this point, that even if indications of it
were found by trenching, a major excavation project would be required
to remove the skeletons.[5] Other evidences of the deep fill which has
covered the Chaco floor since the time burials would have been interred
into it was the fourteen-foot fill found at the back wall of Chetro Ketl,[6]
the twelve-foot fill observed in 1936 over a pit house cut in half by a
break of the arroyo bank below Shabik'eschee Village, the twelve-foot
fill observed by Judd in 1922 above a pit house cut in half by falling
arroyo banks one mile east of Pueblo Bonito,[7] and the two to six-foot
fill around the low mound on which Pueblo Bonito itself was built as
indicated by Judd's three trenches cut to a depth of twelve feet.[8] Whatever
burials may have been made in the canyon floor must await uncovering
by teams and scrapers or by another period of erosion.

To the southwest of Chaco Canyon but in the Chaco culture district,
a cemetery was pilfered a few years ago by the Navajos and the
vessels sold to a trader. The pottery indicated its period as Pueblo III
and possibly as Pueblo II, as well. No large ruin was near, but potsherd
areas were found on the surfaces of low mounds near the burials.

The principal reason for supposing that the ancient people of the
Chaco buried their dead in cemeteries on the canyon floor is that this
was the general custom for the majority of people in the northern part
of the Pueblo area. There is evidence, however, that more than one
type of burial was made in the Chaco.

Pepper removed about 30 skeletons from a mound near Peñasco
Blanco and a mound just south of the gap which opens out from the
Chaco south and west of Pueblo Bonito.[9] These may have represented
any period from Pueblo I to Pueblo III. He also removed a few burials
from the room fills of Pueblo Bonito,[10] and Judd uncovered seventy-one
burials in four rooms of the same village.[11] Most of Judd's burials were
disturbed and the bones mixed, the vessels overturned and often broken.

He suggests prehistoric grave robbery as the motive for this vandalism;
the burials found undisturbed by Pepper were rich in turquoise,
and turquoise was as valuable to prehistoric thieves as diamonds
to those of today. Both Judd's and Pepper's series are now in the
National Museum at Washington.[12]

A series of thirteen skeletons from Chetro Ketl, Talus Unit No. 1,[13]
Rinconada, and near Una Vida were removed by the University of New
Mexico and the School of American Research before 1936; they are at
present in the Museum of New Mexico, Santa Fe.[14] Of these, all but
two came from rooms. One was found in the refuse dump of Chetro
Ketl,[15] and one was discovered partly washed out from its position beneath
the edge of a large boulder of the talus slope about one-half mile
east of Una Vida. Both the latter were flexed and accompanied by
offerings, and most of those from Pueblo Bonito and from Chetro Ketl
appear to have been flexed, although a few were extended and many
were so badly disturbed as to give no indication of their original position.
Almost all were accompanied by mortuary offerings of pottery,
and many had jewelry of turquoise and of shell beads, turquoise inlay,
and jet, shell, and pink stone carved into small animals (perhaps
fetishes). Morris found most of the Aztec Ruin burials flexed, wrapped
with matting, accompanied with pottery, and frequently disturbed.
With Judd, he suggests ancient grave robberies as the cause.[16]

Pepper noted a number of burials of children beneath the floor
of rooms in Pueblo Bonito and concluded that this "must have been a
custom among the people who inhabited this pueblo."[17]

This gives six types of burials: burials in the valley floor, burials
in mounds, burials in room fills, burials in refuse heaps, burials beneath
the boulders of talus slopes, and child burials beneath room
floors. There are two other possibilities to be considered in the disposal
of the Chaco dead, and those are that cremation and perhaps cannibalism
were practised.

Pepper found "a number of worked human bones"[18] in one room
of Pueblo Bonito and cracked and calcined bones in another.[19] In one
room of Peñasco Blanco he uncovered calcined bones which appeared to
have been split open, and he concluded that these people may have

eaten human flesh occasionally either for religious purposes or because
they were starving.

Hewett referred to the ash and charcoal filling the vaults of the
great kiva of Chetro Ketl, but he found no identifiable bones there. He
suggests that the vaults are "large enough to have served for the roasting
of a whole buffalo, and they would have served perfectly for the
incineration of the dead."[20] There is no reason to suppose that they
used these vaults for the cremation of the dead, however, except that
their size would have been adequate, that some burned human bones
had been found in the other ruins, and that inhumations are scarce.
The possibility that burial grounds have been deeply covered with
drift since the period of prhistoric occupation of the pueblo has been
discussed, and it seems that bones from burials which must have been
disturbed when new graves were made, or which were disturbed at
one time or another by thieves, might have been worked and utilized,
or cracked open and burned. Ceremonial cannibalism and hunger remain
as alternative explanations, but in the district where almost
every burial uncovered shows disturbance in ancient times, the scattering
of human bones and their occasional use scarcely seems to require
those explanations. Cremation was the custom for southern Arizona,
but inhumation was customary for the northern area, in spite of a few
rare evidences of cremation reported from Hawikuh and the Jeddito
district[21] and from around Flagstaff, where Hohokam dwellings and
shards indicate strong influence from the South.[22]

The sixteen burials removed from Tseh So and from the one room
opened in the adjoining ruin, Mound 51, were all from room fills, with
the exception of one infant interred just above a Pueblo I wall and
later covered by the Pueblo II wall of the western edge of the site. All
of the five Pueblo I burials had been so disturbed that the original
position of the body could not be ascertained. Of the eleven burials of
Pueblo II from the two sites, the group of seven adult and one adolescent
skeleton showed five flexed, one extended, and three too disturbed
to indicate original position. Of the three infants, two were extended,
and one too disturbed for data.

On the basis of what is known concerning Chaco burials at present,
we can conclude that adult bodies were usually flexed but frequently
extended for inhumation in open cemeteries or in room fills,
and that occasionally they were placed along the talus slopes or in a
refuse mound. Infants were frequently buried extended, although the
number observed is too small to indicate what the general custom may

have been. They were placed in room fills or beneath the floor of a
room. Cremation for disposal of the dead or for preparation of the
body for ceremonial or for simple cannibalism may have occurred, but
we are yet without data to substantiate such a theory.

Burial Removal and Preservation of Bones

The present tendency is for archaeologists to know enough about
metric and morphologic observations so that they may work up the
skeletal material from their excavations. With the exception of measurements
such as skull capacity, these usually can be done in the field.
Thus one determines just what material should be saved, and the bulk
of the "scrap" can be discarded without first carrying it back into
town, thus saving both storage space and shipping expenses.

It is highly desirable to preserve and to catalog all skeletons in the
field, if the conditions permit. Alvar,[23] a commercial preparation, has
been found to be very well adapted to the preservation of friable bones,
and with it many which could not otherwise be used are saved for
measurements. Sizing glue in a rather thin, warm solution may be
brushed over bones or may serve as a liquid into which to dip and thus
to preserve bones which are chalky or fairly friable.

All bones should be cleaned of as much dirt and mud as possible at
the time of their removal from the ground. The transportation of
skulls full of earth should be avoided. Should a skull crack and break,
it should not be fitted together again before transportation, for the
broken edges are easily shattered by motion during transportation.
Each broken portion should be wrapped separately in newspapers to
protect it so that eventual restoration is facilitated. Many bones, and
especially skulls, may be treated with a preservative in situ, thus avoiding
any fractures at the time of removal.

Most important from the point of view of the archaeologist is the
culture stratum with which the skeleton and burial goods may be
correlated. Therefore, in the excavation of a skeleton two things must
be determined: (1) does the burial appear to have been intruded into
the deposit within which it rests, or (2) was it laid down with the
deposit? If it was intruded into the deposit, from what archaeological
level did it come? Such problems as these are solved only by carefully
searching for the outline of a pit into which the burial was laid
and for the level from which the pit originated. If the burial is accompanied
by mortuary offerings of pottery, these may aid in determining
its horizon.

Fig. 6—Burial Records from Mounds 50 and 51

Burial Customs of Mounds 50 and 51

Of the sixteen burials (fig. 6) removed from the two mounds, six
were oriented north-south, and two east-west; the others were too disturbed
for observations. All of the five Pueblo I burials were infants,
three found in Room 3 and one in Room 7, Mound 50, and the other
beneath the Pueblo II west wall of the same pueblo. All were disturbed:
hence their body position is unknown. Remains of twilled grass mats
which wrapped two were evident; three had never been wrapped in
matting or the matting had disappeared through decay. Two were
accompanied by one Red Mesa bowl apiece; three burials yielded no
grave goods, but the femur from one of these was encircled with six
stripes of dark paint.

These Pueblo I burials were given period identification by their
accompaniment of Red Mesa Black on White bowls and by their position
in the Pueblo I fill of Room 3 and, in one case, location beneath the
wall of a Pueblo II room.

Seven burials representing Pueblo II were found in Mound 50 and
four in Mound 51. Of the former, four were adults, two males, one
female, and one undetermined. Three were flexed; one was disturbed.
Of the whole group, two were found in Room 6, four in Room 22, and
one in Room 11. Two of the adults were wrapped with matting, one section
showing its twilled weave. One infant was wrapped in a twilled
mat. Morris found most of the Aztec Ruin burials similarly wrapped.[24]

All were accompanied with pottery offerings. One adult had only
a crude undecorated jar, one had a vessel of McElmo Black on White
and one of Escavada Black on White, one had a vessel of Gallup Black
on White, and one had a vessel each of Tusayan polychrome, of Wingate
Black on Red, of Escavada Black on White, and of Gallup Black
on White. With the body were also one bone awl and two small
malachite balls.

Of the infants, one was accompanied by a large shard of Wingate
Black on Red, one with a small shell earplug, and one with a McElmo
bowl, fourteen bone beads, and some walnuts which appear to have
been beads.

Four burials were removed from the single room opened in
Mound 51. Three were adults, one an adolescent, one male, one female,
and two unidentified. Two were flexed, two disturbed. One was lying
on coarse yucca cord matting. One showed a clump of grass adhering
to his left parietal, perhaps having been placed beneath the head as a
cushion. One adult was accompanied with vessels of McElmo Black
on White, of Kana-a Gray, and of Exuberant Corrugated. The others
were without pottery except for shards.

Table IV
MEASUREMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS ON BURIALS FROM MOUNDS 50 AND 51
Cranial Observations

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

	Bc50 60/5	Bc50 60/9	Bc50 60/10	Bc51 60/1	Bc51 60/4
Sex	Male	Female	Female	Female	Male
Condition	frag.	frag.	frag.	frag.	frag.
Sex Criteria	certain	certain			uncertain
Muscularity	large	small			medium
Age	56-75	18-20			21-35
Weight	light	light
Deformation	lambdoid	lambdoid			lambdoid r.
Degree	pron.				medium
Cause	artificial	artificial			artificial
Frontal Region
Brow Ridges
Type	divided	median			median
Size	medium	small			small
Glabella	medium	small
Height	medium	medium			medium
Slope	medium	slight			slight
Metopism	traces	traces
Postorbital Costr.	medium	medium			small
Bosses	medium	small			medium
Median Crest	abs.	abs.
Breadth	large	large
Parietal Region
Saggital Elevation	small	small			small
Postcoronal Dep.	small	small			medium
Bosses					small
Foramina	small				small
Temporal Region
Fullness	large
Mastoids	medium	small			medium
Supramastoid Crest	large	small			medium
Sphenoid Depression	medium
Occipital Region
Curve	pron.	small			pronounced
Inion	none	none			none
Torus size	medium	small			medium
Torus shape	mound	mound			mound
Lambdoid Flattening	pron.	medium			pron.
Transverse Suture	trace	absent			absent
Serration
Lambdoid	medium	medium			submedium
Coronal	simple	simple			simple
Saggital	?	simple			submedium
External Occlusion
Coronal	complete	open			open
Saggital	complete	open			open
Lambdoid	advanced	open			open
Os Incae	absent	absent			absent
Wormian Bones	few	few			few
Pterion Form	H
Median Occipital Fossa	absent	absent
Condyles Elevation					large
Basion
Styloids	small				small
Pharyngeal Tubercle	absent				small
Pharyngeal Fossa	absent				absent
Lacerate Foramina					small
Glenoid Fossa Depth	small	small			medium
Postglenoid Process	small	small			absent
Tympanic Plate	medium				thin
Auditory Meatus	oval				oval
Petrous Depression
External Pterygoid Plate	small
Internal Pterygoid Plate	medium
Pterygo-basal Foramina	indicated
Orbits Shape	rhomboid
Inclination	medium
Lacrimo-ethmoid Art.	medium
Infra-orbital Suture	none
Suborbital Fossa	absent	slight
Os Japonicum		absent
Malar
Size	medium	small
Lateral Projection	large
Anterior Projection	medium
Marginal Process	absent	absent
Zygomatic Process
Nasion Depression	medium	small
Nasal Root Height	medium	low
Breadth	medium	large
Nasal Bridge Height	medium
Breadth	large
Nasal Profile	concavo-conv.
Nasal Sills	dull	sharp			sharp
Nasal Spine	medium	small
Subnasal Grooves	small	absent			absent
Mid-facial Prognathism	absent
Alveolar Prognathism	slight
Total Prognathism	slight
Alveolar Border Absorb.	pron.	none
Preservation	poor
Palate Shape	parabolic
Palate Height	low	low
Palatine Torus Form	absent	absent
Size
Transverse Suture	anterior
Postnasal Spine	medium
Mandible
Size	medium	medium
Chin Form				median
Chin Projection	medium
Alveolar Prognathism	slight
Genial Tubercles	small			slight
Mylo-hyoid Ridge	pron.			medium
Gonial Angles
Pterygoid Attachment	medium			medium
Eversion	small
Tooth Eruption	complete
Lost	29-32
Mandibular Torus	none			absent
Teeth Wear		slight		pron.
Quality		good
Accessory Cusps
Caries		none		pres.
Abscess	4-X			4-X
Size	medium			small
Pyorrhea	present	none
Shovel Incisors
Bite		edge
Crowding
Molar Cusps

Measurements, Indices, and Observations

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

	Bc50 60/5	Bc50 60/9	Bc50 60/10	Bc51 60/1	Bc51 60/4
Cranial Index
Height-Length
Height-Breadth
Fronto-parietal
Auricular Height-Length
Cranial Module
Facial
Upper Facial
Cranio-facial
Nasal	53
Left Orbital	79.4
Nasalia-Transverse	65.
Interorbital	22.2
External Palatal
Mandibular
Zygo-gonial
Fronto-gonial
Zygo-frontal
Horizontal Circumference
Nasion-Opisthion
Transverse Arc
Glabello-occipital Length
Maximum Width
Basion-Bregma Height
Mean Thickness L. Parietal	5
Minimum Frontal Diameter	92
Auricular Height
Frontal Height
Frontal Angle
Total Facial Angle
Mid-facial Angle
Alveolar Angle
Bizygomatic Diameter
Nasion-Menton Height
Nasion-Prosthion Height	71
Basion-Nasion Length
Basion-Prosthion Length
Nasal Height	51
Nasal Breadth	27
Orbital Height—Left	31
Orbital Breadth—Left	39
Orbital Height—Right	31
Orbital Breadth—Right	40
Nasalia—Upper Breadth	13
Nasalia—Lower Breadth	20
Interorbital Breadth	22
Biorbital Breadth	99
Palate—External Length
Palate—External Width
Condylo-symphysial Length					103
Bicondylar Width					117
Height of Symphysis
Bigonial					89
Minimum Br. Ascending
Ramus		35			39
Mean Angle Mandible		118			113
Stature (Pearson Formula)
Cranial Capacity
Right Humerus
Shape of Shaft	Plano-convex
Perf. of Olecranion Fossa	absent
Supracondyloid Process	absent
Maximum Length
Maximum Middle	22
Minimum Middle	15
Max. Diam. Head
Middle Index	68
Humero-fem. Index.
Left Humerus
Shape of Shaft	Plano-convex			Prismatic
Perf. of Olecranion Fossa	absent			present
Supracondyloid Process	absent			absent
Maximum Length				322
Maximum Middle	22			18
Minimum Middle	15			14
Max. Diam. Head				42
Middle Index	68			33
Humero-fem. Ind.
Right Radius
Bowing
Shaft Shape
Interosseous Crest
Maximum Length
Humero-rad. Ind.
Left Radius
Bowing	slight
Shaft Shape	prism
Interosseous Crest	medium
Maximum Length
Humero-rad. Ind.
Right Ulna—Max. Length
Left Ulna—Max. Length
Right Scapula
Superior Border	concave
Notch	submedium
Vertebral Border	straight
Teres Insertion	small
Shape of Acromion
Clavicular Facet
Age Plaque
Glenoid Shape
Glenoid Lipping				beginning
Pleating				medium
Buckling				present
Atrophic Patches				pronounced
Left Scapula
Superior Border	concave
Notch	submedium
Vertebral Border	convex
Teres Insertion	small
Shape of Acromion	interm.
Clavicular Facet	lipped
Age Plaque	pron.
Glenoid Shape	oval
Glenoid Lipping	beginning
Pleating	medium
Buckling	present
Atrophic Patches	pron.
Right Scapula
Total Height	152
Inferior Height	119
Breadth	103
Total Index	67.7
Inferior Ind.	86.5
Left Scapula
Total Height	152
Inferior Ht.	118
Breadth	100
Total Index	65.3
Inferior Ind.	84.7
Right Clavicle
Maximum Length
Left Clavicle
Maximum Length
Claviculo-Humeral Ind.
Right
Left
Sternum
Fusion
Foramen
Suprasternal Ossif.
Sternal Ribs
Right Femur
Third Trochanter	absent			medium
Crista	medium			medium
Fossa	absent			absent
Torsion
Poirier's Facet	present
Bowing				medium
Shaft Section	oval			oval
Bicondylar Length
Maximum Length
Max. Diam. Hd.	44
Subtrochanter AP.	26			29
Subtrochanter Lat.	30			34
Middle AP	30			27
Middle Lateral	24			28
Platymeric Index	86.6			55.8
Middle Index	80			96
Left Femur
Third Trochanter	absent
Crista	medium
Fossa	absent
Torsion
Poirier's Facet	present
Bowing
Shaft Section	oval
Bicondylar Length
Maximum Length
Max. Diam. Hd.	44
Subtrochanter AP.
Subtrochanter Lat.
Middle AP.
Middle Lateral
Platymeric Index
Middle Index
Right Tibia
Proximal Retroversion	medium
Shape of Shaft (Hrd.)	III
Squatting Facets	absent
Maximum Length (l. s.)
Middle AP.
Middle Lat.
Nutrient For. AP.
Nutrient For. Lat.
Middle Index
Platycnemia Ind.
Left Tibia
Proximal Retroversion	medium
Shape of Shaft (Hrd.)	III
Squatting Facets	present
Maximum Length (l. s.)
Middle AP.
Middle Lat.
Nutrient For. AP.	36
Nutrient For. Lat.	20
Middle Index
Platycnemic Ind.	55.5
Right Fibula
Max. Length
Left Fibula
Max. Length
Tibio-Femoral Indices
Right
Left
Right Innominate
Phases of Symphysis	IX
Bony Outgrowths	absent
Ischiatic Notch
Preauricular Sulcus
Ilium
Ischiatic Spine
Innominate Height	209
Innominate Breadth
Innominate Index
Left Innominate
Phases of Symphysis	IX		IX
Ischiatic Notch
Preauricular Sulcus	absent		large
Ilium	flaring
Ischiatic Spine	broken
Innominate Height	211
Innominate Breadth	152
Innominate Index	72
Pelvis as a Whole
Subpubic Angle	narrow		large
Brim Shape	heart
Pubic Rami	lipped
Total Brd. (bi-iliac)
Max. Brd. (superior str.)	133
AP. Diam (sup. strait)	103
Bi-ischiatic Brd.
Interspinous Diam.	93
Brim Index	77
Total Pelvic Index
Sacrum
Segments	5
Sacral Curve	pron.
Curve Begins	three
Simian Notch
Sacral Type	homobasal
Spinal Closure Begins	five
Hiatus
Arthritic Changes	present
Height	117
Breadth	117
Index	100
Lumbars
Centra Hts. (ant.)	132
Centra Hts. (post.)	150
Lumbar Vert. Ind.	88.8
Right Calcaneum
Axis of Tuberosity
Tendon Attachment
Lateral Process
Astragalar Facets					separate
Max. Length			64
Max. (s. t.) Brd.			33
Length-Brd. Ind.			51.5
Left Calcaneum
Axis of Tuberosity	medium
Tendon Attachment	medium
Lateral Process	submed.
Astragalar Facets	fused
Max. Length	74		64
Max. (s. t.) Brd.	39		34
Length-Brd. Ind.	52.7		53
Right Astragalus
Angle of Diversion					small
Squatting Facets					absent
Obliquity External Facet
Torsion Head
Max. Length
Max. Breadth
Height
Length-Ht. Ind.
Left Astragalus
Angle of Diversion	small				small
Squatting Facets	absent				absent
Obliq. Ext. Facet	medium				small
Torsion Head	medium				large
Max. Length	51
Max. Breadth	39
Height	30
Length-Ht. Ind.	58.7

The Pueblo II burials were distinguished for period by their
accompanying pottery types and complexes, by their position in Pueblo
II fill in rooms (which probably places them as late rather than as
early Pueblo II in these ruins) and by the obvious high levels of origin
of the graves.

Conclusions on Burial Customs

The burials from these two mounds were predominantly in room
fills, predominantly flexed, wrapped in or placed upon matting, and accompanied
by pottery. Infants may have been buried in the extended
position rather than flexed. Most of the graves were disturbed, the
bones were out of place, and bones from two skeletons were frequently
mixed together. Other skeletons were represented by but a few bones
or fragments. Prairie dogs, grave robbers, or superposition of burials
may have been responsible for the general state of disturbance of
burials.

Conclusions on Bone Material

This season's series, if we may grace this fragmentary group of
bones with that title, offers little scope for the wielding of calipers.
The empty spaces in the above schedule clearly point to the unsatisfactory
condition of the skeletons, but those filled in call attention just
as strikingly to the fact that although a skeleton may be crushed, its
usefulness is not entirely lost.[25] "Morphological features which can be
observed and described but cannot be measured are probably of greater
anthropological significance than diameters and indices."[26] A majority
of these observations can be taken on skeletal material which in the old
days would have been considered osteometrically hopeless.

"Unfortunately the personal equation of the observer inevitably
enters into the graduation of such morphological observations. It has
long been my custom to grade and record morphological features with
respect to their development as compared with my judgment of average
development in adult male Europeans. The reader may inquire, `What
kind of "adult male European" is referred to?' My conception of the
adult male European is essentially that of a Northwestern European
of stature 170 cm. or more, of moderate muscularity, with a cranium
neither markedly dolicocephalic nor pronouncedly brachycephalic, and
with a face neither short and broad nor long and narrow, but of medium
proportions. Other features, such as are individually observed and
graded, would conform to the mode. Brow-ridges would not be very
strongly marked, for example, nor would the chin eminence be poorly
developed. Taking this hypothetical average male European as a
standard, I grade features on the following scale: absent, small or

submedium, medium, large or pronounced, and very pronounced. I
am confident that an experienced anatomical observer who has practised
this method for many years, as I have done, can attain to a considerable
degree of accuracy and consistency in making these morphological
observations. Of course, sets of observations made by different
observers are not necessarily strictly comparable. However unsatisfactory
one may consider such qualitative observations, he must admit
that they are better than nothing at all. They lend themselves to a
measure of statistical treatment and are certainly superior to the
vague and general descriptions of skull `types' which many craniologists
append to their metrical studies."[27]

In view of T. Dale Stewart's recent note[28] concerning "different
types of cranial deformity in the pueblo area," it is interesting to find
that, where the skulls of this group were not too broken for observations,
the lambdoid type of deformation prevailed. He pointed out that
this type of deformity seems to be limited to Southwestern Colorado,
Chaco Canyon, and the Zuñi and Allentown regions. It is in these
same areas that we find a spread of the Chaco type culture. Thus a
skeleton becomes just as much an artifact as a potsherd is an artifact.
Wherever the Chaco people migrated after 1100 A. D., they probably
carried with them their custom of lambdoid deformation.

Arthritis was a common ailment in Chaco, if we can judge by this
fragmentary collection. Skeleton No. Bc 50 60/5 had an arthritic foot
and showed compression fractures in the dorsal vertebrae. Bc 51 60/1
exhibited the head of a radius with arthritic lesions.

No. Bc 51 60/4 displays an ossification of the ligamentum apicis
dentis epistrophei.

In themselves the observations above prove nothing. They represent,
however, all that could be done in a physical anthropological way
to what appeared to be on first sight nothing but a pile of broken
bones. A sufficient number of seasons' analyses will compile into a
series adequate for conclusions, where otherwise existed a vacuity.
Such a small series of fragmentary skeletons, even though from a single
identified culture level, Pueblo II, offers little in significant results, but
its immediate importance lies in the possibility of comparisons of data
from other larger groups. T. Dale Stewart, Assistant Curator of Physical
Anthropology in the National Museum, has ready for publication his
measurements and observations on a series of about 100 skeletons from
the Chaco Canyon, and this material may be expected to throw considerable
light upon our problems.[29]