1 Concepts in Teaching Forensic Anthropology

8/11/2019 1 Concepts in Teaching Forensic Anthropology

1/4

Concepts in Teaching Forensic Anthropology

Author(s): M. Yaar IcanSource: Medical Anthropology Newsletter, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Nov., 1981), pp. 10-12Published by: American Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/648007.

Accessed: 18/09/2011 11:51

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Anthropological Associationis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Medical Anthropology Newsletter.
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anthrohttp://www.jstor.org/stable/648007?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/648007?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=anthro


2/4

DISSERTATIONSNPROGRESS: ing, human (1979:ix).

Similarly, in a brochure

explaining

functions anl procedures of the American Board of Forensic

A CALL OR APERS

Anthropology, forensic anthropology is defined as the

study and practice of the application of the methods

of

Again this year the student members of the Medical physical anthropology to the process

of the law.

Both

Sociology Section Council of the American Sociological definitions, however,

are narrow in the sense that they fail

to

Association are organizing an evening session, Dissertations

incorporate the concepts and methods of other

subdis-

in Progress, to be held at the Annual Meeting in September ciplines of anthropology, especially archeology; yet, in

a

1982 in San Francisco. Graduate students in medical sociol- forensic sense, archeological

techniques may be the most

ap-

ogy, medical anthropology, public health, or nursing are in- propriate for the investigation of an outdoor crime scene

vited to deliver a 15-minute talk on the substantive

content (Morse, Crusoe, and Smith

1976).

of their dissertations and on an issue involved in the disser- In addition, forensic anthropology is far from being

solely

tation process (e.g., negotiating with gatekeepers, emergent a field of human

skeletal identification, as the former

defini-

ethical problems, dealing with advisors, funding). The

tion seems to imply. Rather, it is best conceptualized

more

dissertation

need not be completed; works in the planning broadly as a field of forensic assessment of human

remains

stage are acceptable. Papers will be assessed on the basis of and their environments.

This assessment includes not

only

topical interest and research design. Contributions are the identification

process (e.g., of age, sex, race,

and

solicited

from graduate students who will have received their stature) but also the determination of cause and manner

of

degrees no earlier than December 1981. death. Reconstruction of an ante-mortem

biological

biog-

Contributions should include a paper on the substantive raphy, including attempted

reconstruction of a victim's

way

issues of the dissertation and the particular process

issues to of life up to the time of death, is also a part of the

assess-

be discussed, and carry the contributor's name, year of ment. This modified definition also places forensic

anthro-

study, departmental affiliation, and address. Papers must pology alongside the other forensic

disciplines, on

equal

be submitted in duplicate, one copy each to the following: footing, in terms of its achievement, with forensic pathol-

Robe rta Lessor, Department of Social and Behavioral

ogy. This last statement is particularly significant

because

Sciences, N-631Y, University of California, San Francisco, before the formal organization of forensic anthropology,

the

CA 94143 (415/666-3407); and Barbara Altman, Sociology forensic pathologists

played the most authoratative role

in

Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

the entire forensic profession, a role still justified

because

20742 (301/454-5036).

most of the medical examiners are also professionals

trained

in pathology.

A short history of forensic anthropology may be useful

in

CONCEPTSNTEACHING order to understand

the processes the subdiscipline has

gone

through to reach its current level of sophistication.

Accord-

FORENSICNTHROPOLOGY* ing to Stewart (1979)

the field started in 1878 with

a

publication

by Thomas Dwight on the use of skeletal re-

by M. Ya,ar Ican (Dept. of Anthropology, Florida Atlantic mains

in

medicolegal

practice. From that date until

about

University) 1970, research on human skeletons increased but

the

number of practitioners remained marginally small. Among

In the last

10 years, a new subdiscipline of anthropology the most active anthropologists in these earlier periods

were

has received increasing attention from anthropologists and W. M. Krogman

(in the 1930s and 1940s), T. D. Stewart

(in

various nonacademic agencies such as law enforcement

and the 1940s and 1950s), and J.L. Angel (in the 1960s), all

of

jurisprudence. This new subspecialty, now called forensic whom are widely known in the forensic

and law enforcement

anthropology, is a multidisciplinary field combining

field.

physical anthropology, archeology, and other

fields of an- Although the number of practicing anthropologists

was

thropology

with the forensic sciences, including forensic few during the pre-1970 era, it was the most scientifically

ac-

dentistry, pathology, and criminalistics. Since many of the tive time, a developmental period

in which sound

osteolog-

principal practitioners of this new subdiscipline are or will ical techniques and methods were devised and tested.

These

be anthropologically trained, it is timely to think about

how achievements may be attributed, first, to two major

wars

a course in forensic anthropology

can be most appropriately (World War II and the Korean War), and second,

to

structured and taught. The purpose of this paper, therefore, assemblage of several large skeletal series with known

in-

is to introduce essential concepts that can be used in teach- dividual identity (i.e., the Terry and Todd Collections).

ing a course in forensic anthropology. These

two major but unrelated events led physical

anthro-

In his recent book, T. Dale Stewart defines forensic

an- pologists to refine the techniques used in estimating

age

thropology as that branch of physical anthropology which, (McKern and Stewart 1957; Stewart and Trotter

1954),

for forensic purposes, deals with the identification of more determining

sex, assessing race, and approximating

stature

or less skeletonized remains known to be, or suspected of be- (Trotter 1970). The results

of these and many other

studies

were immediately utilized by forensic pathologists

in their

Dr.

I5can is an assistant professor of anthropology at Florida Atlantic University,

practice

and incorporated into reference

books.

Boca Raton, Florida 33431. He is also Associate Medical Examiner for the Medical Ex. A few anthropologists sensed the need to demonstrate

the

aminer's Office,

west

Palm Beach, Florida. The author wishes to thank Dr. walda value of the anthropological perspective to other

forensic

Ican for her editorial assistance, and Dr. Harry F. Todd, Jr., for his

constructive

criticisms

and comments.

specialists,

law enforcement agents, and criminal

lawyers,

10

DISSERTATIONSNPROGRESS: ing, human (1979:ix).

Similarly, in a brochure

explaining

functions anl procedures of the American Board of Forensic

A CALL OR APERS

Anthropology, forensic anthropology is defined as the

study and practice of the application of the methods

of

Again this year the student members of the Medical physical anthropology to the process

of the law.

Both

Sociology Section Council of the American Sociological definitions, however,

are narrow in the sense that they fail

to

Association are organizing an evening session, Dissertations

incorporate the concepts and methods of other

subdis-

in Progress, to be held at the Annual Meeting in September ciplines of anthropology, especially archeology; yet, in

a

1982 in San Francisco. Graduate students in medical sociol- forensic sense, archeological

techniques may be the most

ap-

ogy, medical anthropology, public health, or nursing are in- propriate for the investigation of an outdoor crime scene

vited to deliver a 15-minute talk on the substantive

content (Morse, Crusoe, and Smith

1976).

of their dissertations and on an issue involved in the disser- In addition, forensic anthropology is far from being

solely

tation process (e.g., negotiating with gatekeepers, emergent a field of human

skeletal identification, as the former

defini-

ethical problems, dealing with advisors, funding). The

tion seems to imply. Rather, it is best conceptualized

more

dissertation

need not be completed; works in the planning broadly as a field of forensic assessment of human

remains

stage are acceptable. Papers will be assessed on the basis of and their environments.

This assessment includes not

only

topical interest and research design. Contributions are the identification

process (e.g., of age, sex, race,

and

solicited

from graduate students who will have received their stature) but also the determination of cause and manner

of

degrees no earlier than December 1981. death. Reconstruction of an ante-mortem

biological

biog-

Contributions should include a paper on the substantive raphy, including attempted

reconstruction of a victim's

way

issues of the dissertation and the particular process

issues to of life up to the time of death, is also a part of the

assess-

be discussed, and carry the contributor's name, year of ment. This modified definition also places forensic

anthro-

study, departmental affiliation, and address. Papers must pology alongside the other forensic

disciplines, on

equal

be submitted in duplicate, one copy each to the following: footing, in terms of its achievement, with forensic pathol-

Robe rta Lessor, Department of Social and Behavioral

ogy. This last statement is particularly significant

because

Sciences, N-631Y, University of California, San Francisco, before the formal organization of forensic anthropology,

the

CA 94143 (415/666-3407); and Barbara Altman, Sociology forensic pathologists

played the most authoratative role

in

Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD

the entire forensic profession, a role still justified

because

20742 (301/454-5036).

most of the medical examiners are also professionals

trained

in pathology.

A short history of forensic anthropology may be useful

in

CONCEPTSNTEACHING order to understand

the processes the subdiscipline has

gone

through to reach its current level of sophistication.

Accord-

FORENSICNTHROPOLOGY* ing to Stewart (1979)

the field started in 1878 with

a

publication

by Thomas Dwight on the use of skeletal re-

by M. Ya,ar Ican (Dept. of Anthropology, Florida Atlantic mains

in

medicolegal

practice. From that date until

about

University) 1970, research on human skeletons increased but

the

number of practitioners remained marginally small. Among

In the last

10 years, a new subdiscipline of anthropology the most active anthropologists in these earlier periods

were

has received increasing attention from anthropologists and W. M. Krogman

(in the 1930s and 1940s), T. D. Stewart

(in

various nonacademic agencies such as law enforcement

and the 1940s and 1950s), and J.L. Angel (in the 1960s), all

of

jurisprudence. This new subspecialty, now called forensic whom are widely known in the forensic

and law enforcement

anthropology, is a multidisciplinary field combining

field.

physical anthropology, archeology, and other

fields of an- Although the number of practicing anthropologists

was

thropology

with the forensic sciences, including forensic few during the pre-1970 era, it was the most scientifically

ac-

dentistry, pathology, and criminalistics. Since many of the tive time, a developmental period

in which sound

osteolog-

principal practitioners of this new subdiscipline are or will ical techniques and methods were devised and tested.

These

be anthropologically trained, it is timely to think about

how achievements may be attributed, first, to two major

wars

a course in forensic anthropology

can be most appropriately (World War II and the Korean War), and second,

to

structured and taught. The purpose of this paper, therefore, assemblage of several large skeletal series with known

in-

is to introduce essential concepts that can be used in teach- dividual identity (i.e., the Terry and Todd Collections).

ing a course in forensic anthropology. These

two major but unrelated events led physical

anthro-

In his recent book, T. Dale Stewart defines forensic

an- pologists to refine the techniques used in estimating

age

thropology as that branch of physical anthropology which, (McKern and Stewart 1957; Stewart and Trotter

1954),

for forensic purposes, deals with the identification of more determining

sex, assessing race, and approximating

stature

or less skeletonized remains known to be, or suspected of be- (Trotter 1970). The results

of these and many other

studies

were immediately utilized by forensic pathologists

in their

Dr.

I5can is an assistant professor of anthropology at Florida Atlantic University,

practice

and incorporated into reference

books.

Boca Raton, Florida 33431. He is also Associate Medical Examiner for the Medical Ex. A few anthropologists sensed the need to demonstrate

the

aminer's Office,

west

Palm Beach, Florida. The author wishes to thank Dr. walda value of the anthropological perspective to other

forensic

Ican for her editorial assistance, and Dr. Harry F. Todd, Jr., for his

constructive

criticisms

and comments.

specialists,

law enforcement agents, and criminal

lawyers,

10


3/4

and

began

to

publish

review articles in

nonanthropological

periodicals-in

law

enforcement

journals

(Krogman

1939),

criminal law

journals

(Brues

1958),

and

in

general

forensic

science

books

(Stewart 1968).

The

general

theme in

these

publications

by

anthropologists

was

simply

what

nonanthro-

pologically

trained

specialists

could learn from

a

skeleton.

The

writings

of

the

post-1970 period,

on the other

hand,

emphasized

an almost

completely opposite

theme,

that

is,

what

anthropologists

can

tell

specialists

from

analyzing

a

skeleton. Thus, the transition from one period to another

was

from

one

of

being

an

advisor to one of

being

an

authori-

ty.

The

year

1971

signified

this

change

in role

due to

the

establishment of forensic

anthropology

as a branch of

the

American

Academy

of

Forensic

Sciences,

an action that

led

to forensic

anthropologists becoming

an

integral

part

of

forensic

investigation

teams. Forensic

anthropologists

in-

creasingly

came to be included as

part

of

forensic teams

for

various

mass disasters

(e.g.,

C.

C. Snow

in

the

1979

DC-10

disaster

and M.

Charney

in

the 1976

Big

Thompson

Flood),

mass

murders

(e.g.,

C.

P. Warren in the

Gacy

Case),

and an

assassination case

(E.

R.

Kerley

and

C. C. Snow

in

a recent

reinvestigation

of the

1963 assassination of

John

F.

Kennedy).

As the

teaching

of

detailed

gross

anatomy

courses

in

medical

schools

has declined

and

emphasis

on

skeletal

struc-

tures

has

diminished,

and as

anthropologists

have

refined

their

forensic

techniques, pathologists,

dentists,

criminal

lawyers,

and law

enforcement officers

have

increasingly

called

upon

anthropologists

to

provide

this kind

of

training.

Now,

it

has

become

almost

mandatory

for

a

prosecuting

or

defense

attorney

to call

on an

anthropologist

for

his

expert

opinion

in

court when

the

investigation

was handled

by

an

anthropologist

or when

the case

involved

skeletonized re-

mains.

The

American Board

of

Forensic

Anthropology

was

es-

tablished

in

1977 to control the

quality

of

practicing

an-

thropologists,

to

provide

assistance to the

judicial

system,

and to

encourage

research

in

forensic

anthropology.

To

be

certified

by

this

board,

candidates

must meet

certain re-

quirements, among

them,

a doctoral

degree

in

physical

an-

thropology,

an

examination,

and

professional experience

or

postdoctoral

training.

The

courts,

however,

have

yet

to

establish

strict criteria for

selecting

their

expert

witnesses

and

hence often

fail

to

recognize

the

soundness

of

the foren-

sic

anthropologist's

training,

and

have

yet

to

capitalize fully

on

this

training.

It is

perhaps

for this

very

reason that

the

number

of

anthropologists assisting

medical

examiners

and

law

enforcement

agencies

is

probably

equal

to,

if

not

greater

than,

those who

meet the

board

requirements.

It would be helpful at this point to define the function of

forensic

anthropology.

Two main

issues form the

essence of

a

forensic skeletal

investigation

(I4can

1980).

The first is

when a

forensic

anthropologist

identifies

the

general

biology

of the

victim.

This

procedure

simply

classifies an

unknown

individual as a member of a

population

with a

specific

sex,

age,

race,

and

stature. Most

anthropological

efforts

are

spent

trying

the

techniques

for

determining

these four

aspects.

As

Kerley (1978)

has

noted,

our

ability

to

detect

these

biological

characteristics at the

population

level has

been

fairly

reliable.

Today,

however,

practically

every

forensic

specialist (e.g.,

dentists

and

pathologists),

and

some

crime scene

investigators

and

law

enforcement

officers have

been

exposed

to

forensic

anthropology

in

their formal or

continuing

education and

are

capable

of

estimating

the

above

mentioned

biological

characteristics.

Therefore,

the

improvement

in

the

profession

of forensic

anthropology

has

not been due

only

to the

ability

to

estimate

the

general

biology

of a

specific

individual.

It

is,

rather,

the

second

aspect

of forensic

anthropology-

assessment of individual biology--that has made the field a

successful forensic

science. The

assessment

of the life

history

and

the

determination of the

individuality

of a

skeleton in-

volve

an

in-depth

understanding

of

skeletal

biology,

related

anomalies,

pathology,

health,

and

disease

status;

these

establish

an

ante-mortem

skeletal

biography.

The

added

ability

to detect

handedness,

estimate

the

possible

occupa-

tion,

and

perform

a

facial

reconstruction

from the

skul

enables the

forensic

anthropologist

to relate

the

post-

mortem

condition to

the

living

morphology

of the

victim.

Precise

detection of

pathology

and trauma

from the

bones,

whether

it be

ante-mortem or

post-mortem, may

aid the

legal

authorities in

understanding

both

cause of

death and

how

death occurred.

In

short,

an

understanding

of the

variation in a single skeleton as well as skeletons of a larger

sample

is essential

to forensic

anthropologists.

Furthermore,

once the

skeletal

biography

is

assessed,

positive

identifica-

tion

of the

victim

may

become easier.

This is

especially

true

when

dental

evidence is not

available,

and

the

skeletal

data

(e.g.,

disease,

anomaly,

trauma,

and

the

like)

may

be the

only

data

available for

determining

whether

the characteris-

tics of the

remains

match

those of

persons

reported

to

be

missing.

The

role

of

archeology

in

the

above

two

issues

falls

into

the

assessment

of

individuality.

Archeological

techniques

try

to

establish

environmental

conditions at the

time

o

death.

The

nature of

the

body

(buried,

on

the

surface,

and

direction

buried),

prevailing

climate,

terrain,

physical

re

mains,

and

macroorganismal

and

microorganismal

ac

tivities are

all

archeological

techniques. They

determine

when

and

how

the

victim

died

and

what

post-mortem

changes

occurred

to the

body.

Another

aspect

of the

discipline

is that

physical

anthropo-

logical

and

archeological

techniques

are

being

tested for the

first

time in

history.

Although

such a

test

may

improve

our

ability

to

understand

prehistoric

people's

biology

and

behavior,

the

immediate

implication

of

this test

is

that in

correct

identification

could

affect

both

the

adequacy

and

reliability

of

anthropological

techniques

and

also

assess

the

educational

training

of

the

practicing

anthropologists.

A

the other

extreme,

a

wrong

interpretation

of

biological

characteristics could

present considerable problems for the

legal

system.

For

example,

if

the

sex

of a

victim

is de-

termined

incorrectly,

the

law

enforcement

officer

will

face

the

insoluble

problem

of

trying

to

determine the

identity

of

someone

who

never

existed.

Once

these

concepts

are

understood,

teaching

a

forensic

anthropology

course could

be a

real

challenge.

If

a

course i

being

offered at the

undergraduate

level,

one must

make the

assumption

that

the

student will

come

from

several

aca-

demic

departments

including

law,

criminal

justice,

criminalistics,

anthropology,

and

premedical

programs.

Ex

11


4/4

cept

for

the

anthropology

student,

few

other

students

will

have been

exposed

to

anthropology,

or their

exposure

will

have been

limited,

at

best,

to a

survey

course.

Areas such

as

osteology, osteopathology

and

trauma,

genetics,

growth,

skeletal

anomalies,

osteometry,

and,

of

course,

archeolog-

ical

techniques

will be areas

in

which

many

of

these

students

will be

deficient.

Obviously,

no

one-semester course could

possibly

cover all of these

teaching

areas

in

depth,

any

more

than

any

one such

course

could

produce

a

forensic anthro-

pologist.

The

compromise

course that is outlined

below,

however,

covers

the essential areas

within

forensic anthro-

pology.

It

is

intended as

a

broad

introduction

to the issues

and

concepts

in

the field for a

wide-ranging

student

au-

dience,

and can

be

taught

in

one semester.

The

syllabus

for

such an

introductory

course

is the

following:

1.

History

and nature

of

forensic sciences.

Reading Assignments:

Eckert

1980;

Myers

and

Brit-

tain

1968.

2.

History

of forensic

anthropology.


Stewart 1979.

3.

Archeological

techniques.


Brothwell

1972;

Hester, Heizer,

and

Graham

1975;

Morse, Crusoe,

and

Smith

1976.

4. Human osteology.

Reading

Assignments:

Bass 1971

5.

Osteometry.

Reading

Assignments:

Bass 1971

6.

Sex determination.


Bass

1971;

Giles

1970;

Krogman

1962;

Stewart 1979.

7. Race determination.

Reading

Assignments:

Howells

1970;

Krogman

1962;

Stewart 1979.

8.

Estimation

of

age.

Reading

Assignments:

Bass

1971;

Kerley

1970;

Krogman

1962;

McKern

1970;

Stewart

1979.

9.

Body

size and stature.


Bass 1971; Steele 1970; Stewart

1979;

Trotter 1970.

10.

Human

handedness.


Stewart 1979.

11. Burned

bodies.

Reading

Assignments:

Stewart

1979.

12.

Facial

reconstruction,

photograph,

radiograph

and

skull

superimposition.

Reading

Assignments:

Krogman

1962;

Stewart

1979.

13.

Skeletal

pathology

and

trauma.

Reading

Assignments.

Brothwell

1972;

Steinbock

1976.

14.

Expert

witness.

Reading

Assignments:

Philipps

1977;

Stewart

1979.

Additional

primary

source

material could

be

added,

of

course,

to increase the

depth

and breadth of

coverage

within

the course.

In

addition,

challenging

experiments

can

be

ad-

ded.

For

instance,

the instructor could

bury

a human

skeleton and artifacts such as

buttons, shoes,

and

bullets or

other

weapons.

The

uncovered

remains could

be

analyzed

by

the students.

Many

forensic

anthropology

laboratories

have

donated

forensic

cases,

one or more of which could

be

presented

to

students

for an

identification.

In

summary,

forensic

anthropology

has

been a

recently

recognized discipline

of

anthropology.

The

practitioners

of

the field are

mostly

university-

or

museum-based

anthropol-

ogists.

The

subject

is

challenging

since there is

no

room

for

error in

determining

individual

characteristics.

It

is

a

science

of

precision

and

responsibility.

It

is

expected

that

employment opportunities

for

forensic

anthropologists

will

increase

in

time

once

techniques

are

perfected

for determin-

ing

the

characteristics

of

individual

biology,

once

anthropol-

ogists

are

able

to

provide

more accurate

information to the

legal

authorities.

REFERENCES CITED

Bass,

William

M.

1971 Human

Osteology:

A

Laboratory

and Field Manual of the

Human Skeleton.

Columbia,

Missouri:

Missouri

Archaeological Society.

Brothwell,

Don

R.

1972

Digging Up

Bones. London: British Museum.

Brues,

A.

M.

1958 Identification

of

Skeletal Remains.

Journal

of Criminal

Law

48:551-563.

Eckert,

William

G.

(ed.)

1980 Introduction to Forensic Sciences. St.

Louis: C.

V.

Mosby.

Giles,

Eugene

1970

Discriminant

Function

Sexing

of

the Human Skeleton.

In

Personal

Identi-

fication

in

Mass Disasters. T.

D.

Stewart,

ed.

Pp.

99-109,

Washington,

D.C.:

Na

tional

Museum

of

Natural

History,

Smithsonian Institution.

Hester,

T.

R.,

R. F.

Heizer, andJ.

A. Graham

1975

A

Guide

to Field Methods in

Archaeology.

Palo Alto:

Mayfield.

Howells,

William W.

1970 Multivariate

Analysis

for the Identification of Race from Crania. In Persona

Identification

in

Mass

Disasters.

T.

D.

Stewart,

ed.

Pp.

111-118,

Washington,

D.C.: National Museum

of

Natural

History,


Iscan,

M.

Yapar

1980 Review

of

Essentials of Forensic

Anthropology:

Especially

as

Developed

in the

United

States,

by

T. Dale Stewart.

Journal

of Forensic Sciences

25:935-938.

Kerley,

Ellis

R.

1970 Estimation

of Skeletal

Age:

After About

Age

30.

In Personal Identification

in

Mass Disasters. T. D.

Stewart,

ed.

Pp.

57-70,

Washington,

D.C.:

National

Museum of Natural

History,


1978

Recent

Developments

in

Forensic

Anthropology.

Yearbook of

Physica

Anthropology

21:160-173.

Krogman,

Wilton M.

1939

A

Guide

to the Identification

of

Human Skeletal Material.

FBI Law En

forcement Bulletin

8(8):3-31.

1962

The

Human

Skeleton in Forensic Medicine.

Springfield,

Ill.: Charles C

Thomas.

McKern,

Thomas W.

1970 Estimation

of

Skeletal

Age:

From

Puberty

to About

30 Years

of

Age.

In

Personal Identification in Mass Disasters. T. D. Stewart, ed. Pp. 41-56,

Washington,

D.C.: National

Museum of

Natural

History,

Smithsonian

Institution.

McKern,

Thomas

W.,

and T. Dale Stewart

1957 Skeletal

Age Changes

in

Young

American

Males,

Analyzed

from

the Stand-

point

of

Age

Identification. Technical

Report

EP-45,

Environmental

Protection

Research Division.

Natick,

Mass.:

Quartermaster

Research

and

Development

Center,

U.S.

Army.

Morse,

D.,

D.

Crusoe,

and

H.

G.

Smith

1976

Forensic

Archaeology.

Journal

of Forensic Sciences 21:323-332.

Myers,

R.

0.,

and R. Brittain

1968

The

History

of

Legal

Medicine.

In

Gradwohl's

Legal

Medicine.

F.

E

Camps,

ed.

Pp.

1-14. Bristol:

John Wright.

Philipps,

K. A.

1977

The

Nuts

and Bolts of

Testifying

as

a Forensic Scientist.

Journal

o

Forensic Sciences 26:457-463.

Steele,

D.

Gentry

1970 Estimation

of

Stature

from

Fragments

of

Long

Limb

Bones.

In Persona

Identification in

Mass

Disasters. T. D.

Stewart,

ed.

Pp.

85-97,

Washington,

D.C.:

National Museum of Natural

History,


Steinbock, R. Ted

1976

Paleopathological

Diagnosis

and

Interpretation:

Bone Diseases

in Ancient

Human

Populations. Springfield,

Ill.: Charles C Thomas.

Stewart,

T.

Dale

1968

Identification

by

the Skeletal

Structures.

In

Gradwohl's

Legal

Medicine.

F.

E.

Camps,

ed.

Pp.

123-154,

Bristol:

John Wright.

1979 Essentials

of

Forensic

Anthropology: Especially

as

Developed

in th

United

States.

Springfield,

Ill.:

Charles

C

Thomas.

Stewart,

T.

Dale,

and Mildred

Trotter

(eds.)

1954

Basic

Readings

on the

Identification of Human Remains:

Estimation o

Age.

New

York:

Wenner-Gren Foundation for

Anthropological

Research.

Trotter,

Mildred

1970

Estimation

of

Stature

from Intact

Long

Limb Bones.

In

Personal

Identifi-

cation

in Mass Disasters.

T. D.

Stewart,

ed.

Pp.

71-83,

Washington,

D.C.:

Na

tional Museum

of

Natural

History,

Smithsonian

Institution.

12

1 Concepts in Teaching Forensic Anthropology

Documents

Transcript of 1 Concepts in Teaching Forensic Anthropology