Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Waldron, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Waldron, H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology 2001;30:104-108
© International Epidemiological Association 2001

Theory and Methods

Are plague pits of particular use to palaeoepidemiologists?

HA Waldron

St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, and Institute of Archaeology, University College London, Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PY, UK.

Abstract

Background The demography and pattern of disease of skeletal assemblages may not accurately reflect those of the living population of which they were once a part. The hypothesis tested here was that skeletons from a mass disaster would more closely approximate to a living population than those from a conventional cemetery.

Method Six hundred skeletons recovered from a Black Death plague pit in London were compared with 236 skeletons recovered from an overlying medieval cemetery. Age and sex were determined by standard anthropological means by a single observer and adjustments were made to correct for those skeletons for which either or both could not be established. An estimate of age structure of the living medieval population of London was made, using model life tables.

Results The age and sex distribution and the pattern of disease in the Black Death skeletons did not differ substantially from those in the control group of skeletons. Both assemblages tended to overestimate the numbers in the younger age groups of the model population and underestimate the numbers in the oldest age group.

Conclusions On the evidence from this single site, a skeletal assemblage from a mass disaster does not provide a better representation of the living population from which it was derived than that from a conventional cemetery.

Keywords Black Death, plague, palaeoepidemiology, palaeopathology

Accepted 15 February 2000


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
S. N. DeWitte and J. W. Wood
Selectivity of Black Death mortality with respect to preexisting health
PNAS, February 5, 2008; 105(5): 1436 - 1441.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 MicrobiologyHome page
M. T. P. Gilbert, J. Cuccui, W. White, N. Lynnerup, R. W. Titball, A. Cooper, and M. B. Prentice
Absence of Yersinia pestis-specific DNA in human teeth from five European excavations of putative plague victims
Microbiology, February 1, 2004; 150(2): 341 - 354.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
C. A Roberts and A. Grauer
Commentary: Bones, bodies and representivity in the archaeological record
Int. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2001; 30(1): 109 - 110.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.