Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:30:25.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘Written in Bone’: New Discoveries about the Lives and Burials of Four Roman Londoners

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2017

Rebecca C. Redfern
Affiliation:
Centre for Human Bioarchaeology, Museum of Londonrredfern@museumoflondon.org.uk
Michael Marshall
Affiliation:
Museum of London Archaeology, Londonmmarshall@mola.org.uk
Katherine Eaton
Affiliation:
McMaster University, Ontario, Canadakmeaton@gmail.compoinarh@mcmaster.ca
Hendrik N. Poinar
Affiliation:
McMaster University, Ontario, Canadakmeaton@gmail.compoinarh@mcmaster.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Museum of London selected four individuals for multidisciplinary scientific analyses in order to establish their ancestry, aspects of their personal appearance and health. We also reinterpreted their burial context in order to better understand how identity was constructed and expressed in this unique Roman settlement. Our study discovered the presence of people with Black and White European ancestry, some of whom had migrated from the southern Mediterranean. The most surprising result was that Harper Road woman's chromosomes were male. Overall, our experience of undertaking a multidisciplinary study served to further underline the need for these different techniques to be used in combination when investigating past identities. The mtDNA results were very broad and required the mobility isotopes to better understand their significance, while the aDNA evidence confirmed the osteological analysis. In terms of public engagement at the Museum of London, the ability to determine hair and eye colour had a significant impact.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2017. Published by The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies 

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Museum of London installed a temporary exhibition called ‘Written in Bone’ to share the results of recent collaborative projects with its audience and community stakeholders. Its purpose was to investigate the settlement of Londinium Footnote 1 through the lives of four Londoners by examining where they had grown up and to establish aspects of their physical appearance and health using a variety of scientific methods. As the project was funded by the Museum's donors and collaborative research partners, the isotope and aDNA analyses were focused on these questions rather than full genome sequencing as other studies have done for Romano-British populations in Britain.Footnote 2

The Museum also used this opportunity to re-examine the funerary contexts and associated material culture of two males and two females in order to obtain a more nuanced and detailed insight into these objects and the role that they may have played in identity construction and expression.Footnote 3 This article presents the details of this project and evaluates the utility of this approach for our understanding of Romano-British identities and for public engagement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

OSTEOLOGICAL ANALYSES

The four individuals selected for the exhibition were excavated from London (fig. 1) between 1979 and 2003 and are curated by the Centre for Human Bioarchaeology (Table 1). The human remains were recorded by Redfern between 2008 and 2014 using the Wellcome Osteology Research Database and the Museum of London methods.Footnote 4 The age and sex of each individual were established using the standard osteological methods for assessing the morphological features of the skull and pelvis.Footnote 5 Additionally, in order to further refine the age-estimations of the individual from Harper Road,Footnote 6 the auricular ageing method devised by Buckberry and ChamberlainFootnote 7 was applied, while the sex of the adolescent from Lant Street (LTU03 sk 385) was estimated using the methods employed by Shapland and Lewis.Footnote 8 The evidence for health and disease was recorded using the Museum of London methods,Footnote 9 supported by in-house digital and film radiography of pathological bones. Ancestry was assessed using macromorphoscopics, rather than a metric-based approach,Footnote 10 because the majority of the remains were fragmentary. This approach relies on the visual scoring of 16 cranial morphological features, the majority of which are found in the facial bones, with emphasis placed on the nasal area.Footnote 11

FIG. 1. Map showing the location of the sites in Roman London. (© Museum of London)

TABLE 1. SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR INDIVIDUALS IN THIS STUDY

ANCIENT DNA ANALYSIS

A molar tooth from each of the individuals was selected for ancient DNA analysis (aDNA), with the aim of determining the possible presence of bacterial, fungal and viral pathogens, identifying hair and eye colour, establishing sex using chromosomal markers and investigating maternal ancestry (mtDNA) based on complete mitochondrial genomes. A detailed description of the methods employed is published on the Museum's website,Footnote 12 with only a brief overview being provided here.

All the subsampling and labwork was performed at the McMaster Ancient DNA Centre.Footnote 13 The human mitrochondrial bait set chosen for this project had previously been designed using Human mitochondrial rCRS GenBank Accession number J01415.2, which suggests possible localities of the haplogroups c. 500 years ago, prior to the era of intercontinental travel. Hair and eye colour was identified using a modified version of the HIrisPlex SNP assay designed for targeted enrichment in the ancient DNA lab.Footnote 14 The sex chromosome typing baits targeted three Y chromosome-specific genes (AMELY, SRY and TSPY) and two X chromosome-specific genes (AMELX, SOXL3). Gene sequences and NCBI genbank annotations for the five sex-linked genes were downloaded from RefSeq and targeted regions were obtained from previously published loci.Footnote 15 The presence of viral (e.g. smallpox) and bacterial (e.g. plague, tuberculosis) diseases was determined using a modified version of an array-based method for the detection of pathogens in ancient remainsFootnote 16 and the methods described by Marciniak.Footnote 17

STABLE-ISOTOPE ANALYSIS OF DIET AND MOBILITY

The stable-isotope analysis was undertaken during the course of three separate studies over the past 15 years, with different isotopes used to investigate diet and mobility in these individuals.Footnote 18 As the isotope study of the Harper Road woman had been undertaken some years ago and because the Museum was reluctant to undertake further destructive analysis on her last remaining tooth, the original mobility dataFootnote 19 were re-interpreted by Montgomery.Footnote 20

Analysis of childhood residency was undertaken using oxygen (δ18O), strontium (δ 87Sr/86Sr) and lead (δ207Pb/206Pb and 208Pb/206Pb) isotopes extracted from the dental enamel, with dietary isotopes of carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) extracted from rib bone samples for the individual from Lant Street.Footnote 21 The methods used to establish the local/non-local origin of the Harper Road individual are described in Budd,Footnote 22 the London Wall and Mansell Street burials by Shaw and colleagues,Footnote 23 and the Lant Street adolescent by Redfern and colleagues.Footnote 24

RESULTS

HARPER ROAD (HR79 sk 311)

This burial is one of the earliest from Londinium, dating from a.d. 50–70. It was located in Southwark (fig. 1) and excavated in 1979 as part of student training by the Southwark and Lambeth Archaeological Excavation Committee.Footnote 25 The grave was aligned on a north-east/south-west axis and the cut was c. 2.3 m long by 1.0 m wide. The skeleton had been placed on one side, in an extended position, with the skull orientated to the south-west; nails of various sizes (including one 101 mm in length) recovered from the grave fill may indicate the presence of a coffin.Footnote 26 The burial was also accompanied by several objects usually associated with a ‘female’ gender, some deemed ‘indigenous’ and others ‘Roman’, which are discussed below.

Bioarchaeological analysis revealed that the skeleton was an adult aged c. 21–38 years old, whose skull and pelvic morphology were determined to be female.Footnote 27 Unexpectedly, aDNA analysis identified male chromosomes (XY), with the expected number of reads for a genetic male in the X-chromosome regions (AMELX and SOX3) and Y-chromosome regions (SRY, TSPY, AMELY). This result does not mean that the bioarchaeological or aDNA data are incorrect; rather it suggests that this individual likely had a sex development disorder. Today, the incidence of such disorders is 1:4,000 to 1:5,000 live births, the signs of which can either present at birth or develop during childhood and adolescence.Footnote 28 We do not enter into speculation about this person's physical appearance, as the specific disorder could not be established and it was not possible to explore this further with aDNA due to limited resources for the current project. What is clear is that this individual was identified as a woman by her community,Footnote 29 a decision that we continue here and at the Museum in her display and gallery interpretation.Footnote 30

Unfortunately, none of the long bones were complete enough to estimate stature. The assessment of ancestry suggested that she was White European, while the HirisPlex test found that she had brown eyes and dark black hair. Her maternal haplotype was determined to be H2a2a1 whose geographic distribution (c. 500 years ago) covers eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia.Footnote 31 A re-evaluation of the stable isotope evidence for mobility suggested that in all likelihood she grew up in Britain.

The evidence for disease was limited to some degeneration in the joints, commonly observed in archaeological populations: a rotator cuff injury on the lesser tubercle of the left humerus, caused by a fall or else through over-use of the shoulder-joint, and degenerative changes to one cervical and one lumbar vertebra.Footnote 32 Only nine dental positions and three teeth were observable, but only one dental position had evidence for disease — periodontitis, a common infection of the gums.Footnote 33 No aDNA evidence for bacterial or viral diseases was found.

Her burial includes an important group of grave goods which have been the subject of a careful assessment by Cotton and this is expanded upon here (fig. 2).Footnote 34 A group of Claudio-Neronian pottery reflects access to imported vessels and perhaps the adoption of continental styles of dining. As Bird, Hall and Cotton suggest, some vessels may also have been carefully selected for inclusion in the burial because they were stamped with the potter's name Vitalis, perhaps a play on the words for life and vitality, which would indicate literate mourners with a relatively sophisticated knowledge of Latin.Footnote 35 A rectangular mirror placed at her feet implies the deliberate construction of identity through grooming and, as examples from Iron Age and Roman burials tend to be associated with females, this object also has gendered connotations.Footnote 36 Grooming practices may have been very visible symbols of personal cultural preferences in this early period, as some, such as arrangement of the hair using hairpins, were new introductions to Britain from the Continent,Footnote 37 while others, such as the preparation of cosmetics in two-piece copper-alloy sets, had a strong local Iron Age pedigree.Footnote 38 But while the mirror is a Roman type, it provides no real hint as to whether Harper Street woman used it according to indigenous practices or in a more ‘Romanised’ manner.Footnote 39

FIG. 2. Superior view of the reconstructed burial from Harper Road (HR79 sk 311). (© Museum of London)

The single most distinctive object is the bronze penannular neck ring/torc (fig. 3), which was broken and placed near to the mirror. The torc was rectangular sectioned with squared terminals and decorated with a ring-and-dot pattern on the hoop and feather motifs and transverse hatched bands at the terminals.Footnote 40 Cotton has argued that it was a ‘pidgin’ object, a ‘single creative response to a particular situation at the very beginning of Roman contact’.Footnote 41 While the find remains unique, we can now better situate it through comparison with two other classes of personal ornament, with which it would seem to be closely related. The first is a contemporary group of penannular strip armlets whose form and decorative vocabulary are closely related to the torc. These are distributed in south-eastern Britain, including London, but are particularly focused around Hertfordshire and East Anglia in the territory of the Trinovantes and the Catuvellauni.Footnote 42 The second type is represented by several copper-alloy penannular torcs of slightly different form, recently excavated from Baldock (Herts.) by the Heritage Network and awaiting publication, which have similar ‘feathered’ motifs on the terminals.Footnote 43

FIG. 3. The torc from the Harper Road burial. (© Museum of London)

The Harper Road torc can, therefore, be seen to be closely associated with a regionally distinct group of objects focusing on body care and decoration, although its precise significance remains ambiguous. Similarly regionalised dress traditions were arising across Britain at this time and several include new styles of torc/neck ring, often alongside the prominent use of Celtic art, which may perhaps indicate a stress on local identities in response to the Roman conquest.Footnote 44 The South-East has largely been excluded from such discussions, but it is possible that this group of material represents a comparable phenomenon, although the relatively short-lived nature of this group and the character of the decoration which eschews the same prominent use of insular La Tène art is rather different. This may relate to the specific local social context, particularly the speed of the initial conquest in the South-East and the huge influx of ‘Roman’ material culture, well represented in the Harper Road burial, which offered alternative sources of inspiration and competing avenues for the expression of power and prestige.Footnote 45 In fact some of the decoration could be seen as continental in inspiration; indeed Crummy has made a strong case that, while the armlets are a Romano-British regional phenomenon, they may have actually been armillae worn by Roman soldiers, battle honours from early campaigns in Britain, on the basis of the distribution and decoration, which includes cross-cut bands that could be interpreted as wreath motifs perhaps with connotations of victory.Footnote 46 Interestingly, the decorative emphasis of the Harper Road find is slightly different, with the wreaths all but absent. The feather or perhaps palm motifs found on some of the bracelets are enlarged and elaborated, more closely matching the Baldock torc. Cotton has gone as far as to suggest that these represent peacock feathers, which in a Classical tradition have connotations of immortality, apposite in a funeral context, as well as connections to the goddess Juno, protector of women.Footnote 47

We are left with two related interpretative possibilities. The first is a torc that belongs to a continentally influenced local dress tradition, which may in turn have influenced the design of British armillae found in the area. The second is a torc closely related to the local Baldock finds but which also draws upon Classical imagery and the specific provincial aesthetic model of the armillae worn by the Roman soldiers and veterans who would have been frequently encountered in places like Londinium. Such imitation may be taken as an acknowledgement of the power of these individuals, but if transformed into a ‘native’ torc worn by a woman and arguably with ‘feminised’ peacock iconography could alternatively be seen as a powerful subversion of male military symbolism.Footnote 48

In light of these findings, we support Cotton's assertion that this woman's burial is a response by indigenous communities to the rapidly changing world of first-century south-east Britain.Footnote 49 The richness of the burial and the objects included within support the evidence for female power and agency in late Iron Age societies and hint at her status and role within her community. During periods of colonisation it is women, more so than men, who act as crucial intermediaries between cultures.Footnote 50

52–63 LONDON WALL (LOW88 sk 695.5)

This individual was recovered from a pit in association with other disarticulated human bones from an industrial and domestic site in the Walbrook valley, close to the Walbrook stream and dates to a.d. 125–200 (fig. 1).Footnote 51 During this time, this part of London was an important industrial area for the manufacture of glass, metal-, wood-, leather- and bone-working and a dumping area for waste. However, in the upper part of the valley (outside the settlement's walls), it was an important ritual space used as a cemetery and for the deposition of votive offerings.Footnote 52 The site was located within the Roman city walls, hence the evidence of clay-and-timber buildings and a gravel road, as well as amphorae, glassware, a wooden bowl and utensil, bone hairpins, an ivory bracelet, decorative copper-alloy mounts, many shoes (e.g. a soft one-piece moccasin), copper-alloy coins and a writing implement.Footnote 53 The cranium was recovered from an oval-shaped pit which was 3.40 by 2 m and 0.50 m deep, suggesting that it was not dug as a waste pit. It was filled with silt and contained a minimum number of ten adult male crania (no mandibles were recovered) and one adult right femoral shaft. These crania had evidence for extensive and lethal peri- and ante-mortem blunt and sharp-force injuries and have been interpreted as victims of ritualised and structural violence, either as headhunted victims of the Roman army, executed prisoners or defeated gladiators.Footnote 54

Bioarchaeological analysis determined that the cranium was of a male (this time supported by the chromosome results XY), aged 36–45 years old. Assessment of ancestry determined that he was White European, while the HirisPlex test found that he had brown eyes and dark black hair. His maternal haplotype was J1b1a1, which has a very wide distribution (c. 500 years ago) across Europe, North Africa, the Near East and the Caucasus.Footnote 55 The mobility isotope results were sadly inconclusive for this individual. He has a low lead concentration (1 ppm) that places him on the edge of the anthropogenic English lead ore field, but too close to the culturally defined parameters for Roman Britain to exclude him definitely from being British, while his strontium result falls within the London region, though these values are also found in many parts of Europe.Footnote 56

He had poor dental health, as calculus, carious lesions and periodontal disease were observed; the latter was also identified using aDNA, as Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola, Porphymonas gingivalis and Fusobacterium nucleatum were present. These dental diseases are frequently encountered in Romano-British and Roman urban populations.Footnote 57 He also experienced episodes of compromised health during childhood, as his dentition had evidence for enamel hypoplastic defects, while healed cribra orbitalia and porotic hyperostosis were present to several of his cranial bones. These diseases have multifactorial origins, including periods of ill health, anaemia, a heavy parasite load and compromised nutrition.Footnote 58 Environmental and other bioarchaeological data from Britain attest to the presence of parasites and the frequent occurrence of these diseases in both rural and urban populations.Footnote 59

The majority of observed pathology related to violent injuries, including a healed fracture to his left zygomatic bone, an injury typically produced during assaults.Footnote 60 Dental chipping is also present, which has a multifactorial origin but can be caused by blows to the face.Footnote 61 Most of the injuries to his cranium were sustained shortly before or at the time of death, with multiple blunt-force fractures observed to the facial area and right temporal bone, attesting to the individual having sustained numerous direct blows to the faceFootnote 62 (fig. 4).

FIG. 4. Anterior view of the male cranium (LOW88 sk 695.5) showing evidence for dental chipping and injuries to the facial cranial bones. (© Museum of London)

Peri-mortem injuries of this nature are not observed in the normative cemetery populations of Londinium. Although many males have healed fractures produced by inter-personal violence such as nasal bone fractures, there is not the same evidence for this degree of ‘over-kill’ in the other individuals.Footnote 63 This reinforces the atypical and unusual injury pattern and types of violence observed at London Wall. There was no taphonomic evidence from this cranium or others in the same context to suggest that the remains had been carried to the site by water-action.Footnote 64 Therefore, it is most likely that along with the partial remains of nine other men, his cranium had been collected from elsewhere in the settlement and deposited in a specially dug pit in the Walbrook valley. The inconclusive stable-isotope results mean that unfortunately we are unable to clarify the possible reason for his death (i.e. trophy head).

65–73 MANSELL STREET (MNL87 sk 37 B604)

This burial was part of the ‘Eastern’ burial ground of Londinium, located to the south of a spur-road off the main road from the settlement which leads to Colchester (fig. 1).Footnote 65 The area is divided into two plots, defined by the presence of the road and two ditches (one east–west, the other north–south) that show evidence for maintenance, being redug and cleaned on several occasions, supporting the suggestion that the burial grounds along this important road were formally managed.Footnote 66 The burial plots were in use between the second and fourth centuries, with this burial being assigned a date of a.d. 180–400.Footnote 67 The burial had been heavily truncated in later periods by the digging of a gravel pit and concrete foundations. The individual had been laid out in a supine position with the head orientated to the west; no extant grave goods were observed, though it is possible that existing goods were destroyed during these periods of disturbance.Footnote 68

The damage to the grave meant that the human remains were limited to a highly fragmentary axial skeleton (skull, thorax, spine and pelvis) (fig. 5). Analysis estimated this individual to be a male (supported by the genetic results), aged over 45 years old, who had Black ancestry, while the HirisPlex analysis found that he had brown eyes and dark black/brown hair. His maternal haplotype was V16, which is evenly distributed across Europe and North Africa (c. 500 years ago), with the stable-isotope results showing that he had spent his childhood in the London region.Footnote 69 The presence of people born in London with African ancestry is not an unusual or atypical result for Londinium, as a multidisciplinary study of a southern cemetery has found,Footnote 70 nor for other urban centres in Britain, as with the female known as the ‘Ivory bangle Lady’ from Eboracum (York).Footnote 71

FIG. 5. Skeleton of the adult male (MNL87 sk 37 B604) from Mansell Street. (© Museum of London)

The fragmentary and truncated nature of this male's skeleton meant that some health indicators such as cribra orbitalia were not observable, because the roofs of the eye sockets were not present. Examination of the extant dentition showed that he suffered from calculus, carious lesions and associated periapical abscesses but also periodontal disease, which was also attested in the aDNA results that detected the presence of Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola and porphyromonas gingivalis. As above, these are frequently observed diseases in Romano-British populations.

The male also suffered from osteoarthritic conditions of the spine, as degenerative changes were observed to the cervical, thoracic and lumbar vertebrae; also present from the 7th to 11th thoracic vertebrae (mid to lower chest area) was Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH) (fig. 5), a condition which causes ossification of the ligaments, particularly the spinal column, and is related to age.Footnote 72 Previous palaeopathological studies suggested a link between DISH and a rich diet/obesity, but these have been rejected in light of more recent research and clinical findings that have identified low serum levels of the natural osteogenesis (bone formation) inhibitor Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) in sufferers of this disease. Much of the earlier data regarding the co-existence of DISH, diabetes and obesity were derived from North American populations.Footnote 73 The fusion of multiple vertebrae would not have been particularly debilitating, but he is likely to have experienced stiffness to his back.Footnote 74

His health and mobility were further compromised by the presence of Paget's disease in the 9th to 12th thoracic vertebrae, the pelvis and right portion of the mandible (fig. 5).Footnote 75 This disease causes bone deformity, because the balance of bone remodelling is affected, whereby bone tissue is destroyed in specific areas (e.g. pelvis, spine and skull), followed by a period of abnormal bone formation, creating bone which is weaker. The sufferer may be asymptomatic, or experience bone pain, joint stiffness, have warm skin over the affected bones and skull enlargement and deformities.Footnote 76 Interestingly, clinical research by Morales and colleaguesFootnote 77 found that sufferers of Paget's were more likely than a control group to have DISH, suggesting that there may be a genetic mechanism which makes Paget's disease sufferers more susceptible to developing DISH. Regrettably, these two diseases could not be explored at a genetic level in this male.

Our research has been able to establish certain aspects of this man's physical appearance and compromised mobility as contributing to aspects of his identity and life experience. At present, he is the only individual from Londinium to present with both DISH and Paget's disease and the only male to be diagnosed with Paget's disease.Footnote 78 However, the disturbed and truncated nature of his burial context prevents us from exploring social aspects of his identity, such as status.Footnote 79 The extant information suggests that he is typical of the many hundreds of Roman burials from Londinium.

52–56 LANT STREET (LTU03 sk 385, B15)

The burial was located in a cemetery in the southern settlement of Londinium, Southwark, and was excavated by Pre-Construct Archaeology in 2003 (fig. 1). This cemetery area was first established in the late first to second centuries. Following a hiatus in the burial record, burial begins again at the site in the mid-third century and extends into the early fifth century.Footnote 80 The site developed into a large managed cemetery, with the richest burial belonging to this person;Footnote 81 the original publication assigned the burial to the fourth-century phase of activity on the site, although the dating of the grave goods may support a slightly earlier, third-century date.Footnote 82

The bioarchaeological analysis of the skeleton revealed a 14-year-old girl, a result supported by the chromosomal results XX. Her ancestry was determined to be White European, while the maternal haplotype was HV6, which (c. 500 years ago) is found in southern and eastern Europe, west Asia and north-east Africa. The HirisPlex test could only identify her eye colour with certainty, which was blue. Initially, it was suggested that she originated from North Africa,Footnote 83 but a revised interpretation of her stable-isotope results for mobility found that she had spent her younger childhood in the southern Mediterranean.Footnote 84 Dietary isotopes taken from rib bone (Table 1) indicated that she had been consuming terrestrial and marine resources local to the area. Bone turnover rates for the rib were estimated as an average of five years, meaning that she had lived in Londinium at least since the age of nine.Footnote 85

Her dentition revealed very poor dental health, as multiple dental caries were present, as well as calculus and periodontal disease — Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola and Fusobacterium nucleatum were detected using aDNA techniques. Several of the large carious lesions affected the first mandibular molars whose crowns were also severely affected by enamel hypoplastic defects. The thin and defective enamel in these teeth would have increased her risk of forming caries, because the crown would have been more vulnerable to decay.Footnote 86 The enamel hypoplastic defects were more severe than observed in other subadults from Londinium, with lines of exposed dentine observable to the naked-eye, most notably to the right maxillary first incisor, which also had a talon cusp present. This is a very rare non-metric dental trait and is characterised by a large, additional, projecting cusp on the lingual aspect of the tooth.Footnote 87 It is more frequently observed in females, with the maxillary incisors most commonly involved.Footnote 88 Other minor congenital conditions were observed in her skeleton, including an extra vertebra and partial union of some of her foot bones.Footnote 89 These conditions have a hereditary component but can also be caused by minor environmental disruptions during embryogenesis;Footnote 90 only the changes to the foot bones are likely to have impacted mobility, as this will have caused minor restriction to movement, though this may not have been detectable in everyday life.Footnote 91

Evidence for remodelling new bone was also observed to the legs, particularly the medial aspect of the tibiae (lower leg). This is a non-specific reaction to an unknown disease process, but the remodelling nature of the bone suggests that she was recovering from this health condition.Footnote 92 The radii and ulnae bones of the forearms display very mild anterior-posterior and lateral plastic bowing, while the shafts of the femora also show mild anterior-posterior bowing; no evidence for healed injuries was observed radiographically. This represents a remodelled case of mild ricketsFootnote 93 and, given that the changes are limited to the forearms and thigh bones, it is likely that she developed this metabolic disease when she was a crawling baby. Rickets was a disease recognised by Roman medical writers, who noted that toddlers in the city of Rome frequently developed the disease, but because the cause was unknown (see Rohnbogner's contribution above), they thought that it was caused by poor maternal/carer behaviour.Footnote 94 It is possible that a contributing factor was the use of swaddling for pre-mobile infants, a recommended childcare practice, as well as sun-avoidance practices, or covering of the skin by high-status females and mothers, which could then result in deficiency in the infant.Footnote 95

The girl's body was placed on a bed of chalk-like material in an extended position, with her arms by her side and her head orientated to the north-west.Footnote 96 Five grave goods were found. A glass aryballos (oil flask) was placed to the left of her head and an amphorisk flask to the right. A wooden casket with copper-alloy fittings and carved bone inlays (fig. 6), one of which depicted a female figure, was placed below the feet, and a clasp knife whose ivory handle was carved to depict a leopard holding meat or prey in its forepaws (fig. 7); the knife also had an 18-link copper-alloy chain. Nearby was a trilobate pierced handle copper-alloy key — they may have been attached but radiography was unable to determine whether this was true (fig. 6).Footnote 97

FIG. 6. Bone inlays from the wooden casket buried with LTU03 sk 385, B15. (© Pre-Construct Archaeology)

FIG. 7. Ivory leopard clasp knife buried with LTU03 sk 385, B15. (© Pre-Construct Archaeology)

The ivory leopard clasp knife handle is a rare findFootnote 98 and both the quality and the material suggest that it would have been an expensive and prized possession. Such knives were probably general purpose ‘pocket knives’ carried on the person. That it was possibly chained together with a small key, perhaps for a jewellery box or similar, may lend some support to this interpretation as a private objectFootnote 99 and it is possible that the fierce creature was also envisaged as a guardian of such a box and its contents.Footnote 100 It is not clear if this key fits the casket, as no lock was identified and the metal fittings were poorly preserved.Footnote 101 This is a box of some quality with figurative bone inlay depicting a female bust. No close parallel can be offered but figural bone veneer of similar style appears elsewhere in Britain, although depicting male rather than female figures.Footnote 102 Any contents have not survived but other small boxes from Roman female burials sometimes contain personal items such as dress accessories or toilet equipment.Footnote 103 The glass vessels too are perhaps most likely to have held perfumes or oils to do with bathing. Similar glass vessels have appeared in other burials and, in some parts of the Empire, are depicted on female tombstones.Footnote 104 They are certainly unusual, but while their stylistic affinities are with a range of vessels from across the Empire, there are no exact parallels to suggest a source.Footnote 105

Ivory objects such as the knife handle are rare finds in Roman BritainFootnote 106 and may have travelled as personal possessions instead of resulting from trade. Given that the closest source of the raw material was Africa, it is noteworthy that the Lant Street girl is likely to have originated from the southern Mediterranean; another example of an individual with African ties buried with ivory objects can be cited from York.Footnote 107 It is plausible to suggest a link between the presence of ivory objects and the background or life courses of these individuals, perhaps as childhood possessions or treasured family heirlooms; considerable stress was placed on the African connections of the Lant Street knife in the original publication.Footnote 108

However, even if the biographies of some ivory objects might be intimately tied with personal connections to Africa and thus have personal significance, it is questionable whether they would be deliberately used to express that aspect of an individual's identity. Eckardt notes the lack of explicitly ‘African subjects’ depicted in ivory and argues that ivory was not symbolically linked to Africa per se. Footnote 109 This knife handle, depicting a big cat found in Africa, is a possible exception to this rule but it should be remembered that leopard imagery is found across the Roman world and that these cats, and indeed elephants, are also found in Asia.Footnote 110 Competing symbolic connotations include the use of leopards in Bacchic imagery, noted by Ridgeway et al.,Footnote 111 and may link the find to fertility and rebirth. Venationes in the arena are another popular iconographic context for wild beastsFootnote 112 and such popular imagery links this knife to other clasp knives which regularly have sporting subjects, including those relating to hunting, chariot racing and gladiatorial combat.Footnote 113 Dangerous wild animals and the bloody events of the arena both have their place in funerary symbolism across the Empire.Footnote 114

The funerary treatment and life history of this adolescent girl raise many potential interpretations regarding her identity. Her skeleton bears many of the dental and osteological changes associated with enslavement though these are not exclusive to that status group,Footnote 115 while her grave goods suggest an individual of comparatively high status. Her childhood journey from the southern Mediterranean to Britain, and her careful burial and the choice of accompanying objects included with her, emphasise the mutability of identity in the Roman Empire, particularly in atypical ‘melting pot’ settlements where diverse ethnicities, cultures, status groups and occupations lived together and created new ‘Roman’ places; overall, she reflects Londinium, a unique settlement in Roman Britain.

CONCLUSIONS

This project was driven by the need to provide new and engaging museum content and to spark the interest of our audience groups, particularly school children. Although previous exhibitions have demonstrated that for the majority of our audiences we can achieve this using information gained from standard osteological analyses,Footnote 116 the ability to tell a visitor that a particular person in the Museum's holdings had brown eyes and black hair has proven very powerful. These personal details provided our visitors with an immediate connection to these Roman Londoners and were instrumental in achieving the extensive national and international media coverage for the Museum.Footnote 117

The timing of the exhibition, in the autumn of 2015, greatly influenced how some areas of the media responded to the ‘stories’ about these four individuals. That year was the beginning of the ‘Migrant crisis’ across Europe, with over a million migrants and people fleeing war in Syria and arriving in Europe, as well as the early stages of the Brexit campaign.Footnote 118 Consequently, the focus in the tabloid press was on their identity as migrants and the movement of people across Europe in the past, themes which were negatively expressed in some of the public online comments.Footnote 119 This trend has not abated, as new information about the potential Asian and Black ancestry of other Roman individuals in the Museum's collections published in 2016 has received similar attention in the tabloid media.Footnote 120 Such responses serve to underscore the role that heritage plays with respect to national identity and the ethical challenges that archaeology continues to face.Footnote 121

Undertaking an aDNA study also raised a number of ethical and practical issues. In particular, how to manage the relationship between the information deposited with the genetic databank and the individual human remains in our collection, and our curatorial responsibility to ensure that the personal information was shared in a way that maintained their dignity and treated them with respect. This was most pertinent for the Harper Road burial, where we took the decision to respect and maintain the identity created and reflected in their burial treatment.Footnote 122

The experience of undertaking a multidisciplinary study served to further underline the need for these different techniques to be used in combination when investigating past identities. The mtDNA results were very broad and required the mobility isotopes to better understand their significance. The aDNA evidence for disease was disappointingFootnote 123 but did confirm the osteological analyses. As stated above, however, the most successful aspect of the aDNA aspect of the project in terms of public engagement and the creation of content was the determination of hair and eye colour.

Our investigation into the lives of these four people shows that Londinium was a dynamic and diverse settlement, which despite being on the fringes of the Empire was deeply connected in terms of people and material culture because of the unique role it played in the province. Each of the four people shows how the structure and organisation of the Roman Empire enabled individuals and their ancestors to travel vast distancesFootnote 124 and how these choices and resulting hierarchies created people with diverse and complex ancestries and identities. The Lant Street and Harper Road burials further emphasise the intense heterogeneity in the burial record of the Empire, as these individuals do not conform to how other migrants and locals are treated in Britain.Footnote 125

Our research has provided the first archaeological evidence for an individual with a sex chromosome disorder and in light of recent finds we are able to provide a new interpretation of the unusual items included in their burial at Harper Road, particularly the torc which appears to reflect the importance of asserting indigenous regional identities in response to the Claudian invasion. The importance of revisiting previously published data is proven in our reconsideration of the girl from Lant Street, where we suggest that her connections to Africa are far from clear-cut. Above all, this study demonstrates the important and unique contribution that bioarchaeology can make.Footnote 126

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are most grateful to the MoL donors, Durham and McMaster Universities who provided the financial and practical support to undertake the research necessary for this exhibition. The research presented here reflects many years of work and we are grateful for the help, guidance and advice of: Nichola Arthur, David Bowsher, Nikki Braughton, John Chase, Jon Cotton, Jayne Davis, Jane Evans, Becky Gowland, Darren Gröcke, Helen Ashworth, Jenny Hall, Joseph Hefner, Heritage Network, Kristina Killgrove, Lucie Johnson, Caroline McDonald, Andrew Millard, Janet Montgomery, John Pearce, Lindsay Powell, Victoria Ridgeway, Heidi Shaw, Roy Stephenson and Angela Wardle.

Footnotes

1 Background information about this settlement can be found in Perring Reference Perring2004; Reference Perring, Fulford and Holbrook2015; Wallace Reference Wallace2015. Information about funerary practices and the cemeteries is described in Hall Reference Hall, Bird, Hassall and Sheldon1996.

3 In terms of the meeting of the social and physical bodies and how these are reflected in the funerary record, see Knudson and Stojanowski Reference Knudson and Stojanowski2008; Gowland and Knüsel Reference Gowland and Knüsel2006a; Sofaer Reference Sofaer2006.

4 WORD 2016 database. See Powers Reference Powers2012; Connell and Rauxloh Reference Connell and Rauxloh2006.

5 Buikstra and Ubelaker Reference Buikstra and Ubelaker1994; Brickley and McKinley Reference Brickley and McKinley2004.

6 This is the earliest burial from Roman London, and the Museum wished to know whether this individual would have been alive at the time of the Claudian invasion in a.d. 43.

7 Buckberry and Chamberlain Reference Buckberry and Chamberlain2002.

8 Shapland and Lewis Reference Shapland and Lewis2013; Reference Shapland and Lewis2014. This research is published by Arthur et al. Reference Arthur, Gowland and Redfern2016. The methods used to determine sex have been published by Bass Reference Bass2005; Buikstra and Ubelaker Reference Buikstra and Ubelaker1994; Genovés Reference Genovés1959; Phenice Reference Phenice1969; Rogers Reference Rogers1999; Reference Rogers2009; Schutkowski Reference Schutkowski1993; Walker Reference Walker, Saunders and Herring1995; Weaver Reference Weaver1980.

10 Such as the CRANID or FORDISC programmes which are based on measurements of the skull.

13 McMaster University, Hamilton (ON Canada) http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/adna/.

15 Butler and Li Reference Butler and Li2014.

18 During this time, stable-isotope methods have developed very rapidly. Today, researchers in this field recommend using combinations of different isotopes (i.e. oxygen, lead and strontium) to achieve the most detailed information about a person's mobility. Nevertheless, raw data can be reliably recalculated in order to give the most up-to-date interpretation, as in this study.

19 Unpublished report held by the Museum of London. The laser ablation method was used in this case.

20 Janet Montgomery, pers. comm.

22 Budd Reference Budd2003. The laser ablation method was used in this case. The 1st molar of HR79 sk 311 was analysed: δ18Odw SMOW -10.8‰, Sr 102 ppm, 87Sr/86Sr 0.710110, Pb 0.21ppm.

25 Cotton Reference Cotton2008, 151.

26 Footnote ibid., 158.

27 Observable scores (1= male, 2= p.male, 3= intermediate, 4= p.female, 5=female). In the skull (overall score 4): supra-orbitalia ridges and forehead (5), mastoid process, inion protuberance (3), zygoma root (2). Pelvis (overall score 5): greater sciatic notch and pre-auricular sulcus (5). Note that the cranium has been reconstructed and overall the skeleton has ‘moderate’ bone preservation. These scores are within the ‘female’ range for Roman London but, based on the author's experience, also for elsewhere in Roman Britain and for late Iron Age populations.

28 Warne and Raza Reference Warne and Raza2008.

29 Following Geller Reference Geller2017, 4–6, 46; see also Arnold Reference Arnold, Nelson and Rosen-Ayalon2002. To the best of our knowledge, the late Iron Age sword and mirror burial from the Isles of Scilly (Johns Reference Johns2006, see also the discussion by Jordan Reference Jordan2016) is the only example of masculine and feminine items being included in the same grave context — in this case, aDNA and osteological analysis was unable to determine the sex of the individual in this burial. Funerary analyses of Iron Age populations from east Yorkshire (Giles Reference Giles2012) and Dorset (Hamlin Reference Hamlin2007) have not found any discrepancies between the sex of the individual buried in the grave and the gendered grave goods accompanying them.

30 See Geller's Reference Geller2017, 13–15 discussion of the mediascape which we encountered during this exhibition, for example the comments on a piece featured in the Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3361146/The-Roman-Woman-MALE-DNA-Analysis-2-000-year-old-skeleton-reveals-physical-female-traits-genetically-man.html.

31 The mitochondrial aDNA evidence from Londinium is similar to work reported from elsewhere in Britain and Italy (Catalano et al. Reference Catalano, Verginelli, Coia, Destro Bisol, Nanni, Ottini, Palmirotta, Santandrea, Rea and Costantini2001; Martinano et al. 2016), whereby people have evidence for complex maternal ancestries that reflect not only population movement within the Empire but also episodes of migration in earlier periods.

33 Hillson Reference Hillson2005, 260–8.

35 Footnote ibid., 159–60; archaeological finds from the city suggest relatively widespread literacy as suggested by the number and range of inscriptions (Holder Reference Holder2007) and the large number of writing-tablets from the city (Tomlin Reference Tomlin2016).

36 For Iron Age Mirror burials Joy Reference Joy2007, 169–215; Reference Joy2010. He identifies six female or possible female associations and only one possible exception from the Late Iron Age cemetery at King Harry Lane, Verulamium, where a circular Roman disc mirror was found in a possible male cremation (Stead and Rigby Reference Stead and Rigby1989, 103, d no. 2 and 277–8, fig. 91, burial 13.6). However, further ambiguity is provided by the burial on Bryher (Johns Reference Johns2006; see also Jordan Reference Jordan2016). For Roman burials with mirrors, again female where it can be determined, see Philpott Reference Philpott1991, 277–8 and 355, tables A11 and A32. For an example from Roman London see Whytehead Reference Whytehead1986.

37 See Hall and Wardle Reference Hall and Wardle2005, 25–7, nos 1–12 for examples of hairpins from the city, some of which are self-referential objects depicting female busts with Roman hairstyles.

38 Jackson Reference Jackson2010, 148–51, nos 319–28.

39 Cotton Reference Cotton2008, 156–7, table 3.6.1 and fig. 3.6.3, no. 4. As Lloyd-Morgan Reference Lloyd-Morgan1981, 3, group A. Roman style mirrors already appear in pre-conquest Iron Age burials (Stead and Rigby Reference Stead and Rigby1989, 103) and, in this case, the mourners may well have been familiar with how the mirror was used by Harper Road Woman.

40 Cotton Reference Cotton2008, 155–9, table 3.6.1, fig. 3.6.3, no. 3 and fig. 3.6.4.

41 Footnote ibid., 155.

42 Crummy Reference Crummy2005a, 93–4, fig. 2. The closest connection between the Harper Road torc and this series of bracelets comes from their penannular construction, squared-off terminals with double bands of transverse decoration (compare Crummy Reference Crummy2005a, 95, fig. 3 generally) and the patterns of ring-and-dot motifs joined by incised lines (ibid., 95, fig. 3, nos 15 and 28).

43 Wardle Reference Wardle and Ashworthforthcoming. Both torcs were found with female/probable female individuals, Heritage Network pers. comm. We are grateful to Angela Wardle for bringing this important find to our attention and to Helen Ashworth for permitting us to mention it here in advance of publication. Full analysis of the finds is yet to take place but it can be no accident that this find falls within the core distribution of the penannular armlets, examples of which are known from the same site (Crummy Reference Crummy2005a, 100, nos 15–18; Stead and Rigby Reference Stead and Rigby1986, fig. 52, nos 163–6).

46 Crummy Reference Crummy2005a, 98–100. Crummy cites two penannular armlets from London to which at least four more can be added from modern excavations in the Middle Walbrook valley which have produced extremely large groups of contemporary militaria at 1 Poultry (Hill and Rowsome Reference Hill and Rowsome2011, 26) and Bloomberg London (Marshall and Wardle in prep.). See also Crummy Reference Crummy2016, 7–11.

47 See Cotton Reference Cotton2008, 155 and Toynbee Reference Toynbee1973, 251 for discussion of peacock iconography. In assessing the likelihood of this complexity of Classical allusion, it should be stressed that even if this is in some sense a ‘native’ or ‘Celtic’ find, it is one found in a Roman urban centre which may have been deposited as much as 25 years after the conquest providing ample opportunity for an individual of some means to develop a knowledge of aspects of Classical culture.

48 Whether or not it would be safe to try and subvert or even pastiche a symbol of Roman military achievement in the tense post-conquest years is of course questionable and for this reason this option must be considered the least likely of the two. In light of her chromosome results, it also raises questions about her physical appearance and social identity.

50 Pope and Ralston Reference Pope, Ralston, Moore and Armada2012. As proven in many anthropological and ethnohistorical studies, among others, Shoemaker Reference Shoemaker2012.

54 Redfern and Bonney Reference Redfern and Bonney2014.

60 Hwang and You Reference Hwang and You2010.

63 e.g. Harward et al. Reference Harward, Powers and Watson2015; WORD 2016.

64 Redfern and Bonney 2014.

65 Barber and Bowsher Reference Barber and Bowsher2000, 6, 14, 33.

66 Footnote ibid., 13, 33–4, 333.

67 Footnote ibid., 424.

68 Many of the burials from Roman London lack grave goods, see Hall Reference Hall, Bird, Hassall and Sheldon1996; Barber and Bowsher Reference Barber and Bowsher2000.

73 The dominance of studies from the USA has caused a bias in the clinical literature. Mays Reference Mays2006; Spencer Reference Spencer2010; Mazieres Reference Mazieres2013.

75 This was identified macroscopically and using digital radiography.

78 WORD 2016; the only other case of Paget's was observed in a 36–45-year-old female (HOO88, sk 518).

79 In our view, the compromised funerary context prevents us from asserting whether he was of free or enslaved status, or associated with the military etc.

80 Ridgeway et al. Reference Ridgeway, Leary and Sudds2013, 1, 3.

81 Footnote ibid., 16–19.

82 Shepherd (Reference Shepherd2013, 36 and 40–2) suggests a second-/third-century date for the glass vessels on stylistic grounds. Elsewhere Crummy Reference Crummy1983, 126 suggests a date from the mid-second century onwards for keys with trefoil handles. Clasp knives are used for much of the Roman period but examples carved in the round such as this are typically of second- or third-century date (von Mercklin Reference von Mercklin1940; Bartus Reference Bartus2007). Greep Reference Greep and Cool2004, 274–5 discusses the dating of bone veneer such as that found on the Lant Street box and notes that, setting aside a very distinctive early group, most examples are of third- or fourth-century date with a group that probably derives from funerary furniture in the third century and another that probably derives from boxes and other pieces of furniture that seem to belong mostly to the later third and fourth century. Taken altogether a third-century date for the burial seems most probable although a fourth-century burial incorporating old finds cannot be ruled out.

83 Ridgeway et al. Reference Ridgeway, Leary and Sudds2013, 65–70.

87 Sumer and Zengin Reference Sumer and Zengin2005.

89 She has bilateral non-fibrous coalition of calcaneus-cuboid and navicular-third cuneiform facets on the foot bones, mild lumbarisation of the 12th thoracic and the presence of an 6th lumbar vertebra which, like the 12th thoracic vertebra, also displays malformed transverse processes (Barnes Reference Barnes1994, 108–17; Kernbach Reference Kernbach2010).

90 Barnes Reference Barnes1994, 27–34.

94 Such as drunkenness or laziness, see Soranus, Gynaecology 2.44.

95 Soranus, Gynaecology 14.83; Rajakumar Reference Rajakumar2003; Baker Reference Baker, Laurence and Harlow2010.

97 Footnote ibid., 44–7.

98 The only other clasp knife of comparable type from London known to the authors is a bone example from the Thames foreshore depicting a naked or partially draped male figure reported to Ian Blair and Michael Marshall of MOLA by mudlark Pat Connolly in 2016. It was found on the north bank of the Thames near Customs House (Pat Connolly, pers. comm.). In terms of closer iconographic parallels, Major Reference Major2013, 43 cites two other examples of clasp knives with supine big cat imagery from Britain, from Roughground Farm and Wroxeter. For a wider survey of feline knife handles from across the Empire, including some pieces of similar composition, see Bartus Reference Bartus2007, 225–9.

99 A somewhat comparable association between a key and a piece of personalia comes from elsewhere in Southwark where a key and a cosmetic set were found corroded together, perhaps suggesting they had been strung or carried together in life. See Cowan et al. Reference Cowan, Seeley, Wardle, Westman and Wheeler2009, 133 and 232, fig. 99 <S 37> and Jackson Reference Jackson2010, 150, no. 323.

100 An illuminating parallel, also from London, lends strength to this idea. This is another figurative object, a copper-alloy figurine of a sphinx, attached to a chain (Bluer et al. Reference Bluer, Brigham and Nielsen2006, 155–6, fig. 107, <S54>). As sphinxes are traditionally guardians this was interpreted as a protective object perhaps originally attached to a chest or a similar object.

102 Major Reference Major2013, 47 notes three male busts, from Wroxeter, Chelmsford and Great Casterton, so the fact that a female bust appears in this female burial is of some interest. No other certain examples of such figurative bone inlay are known from London but the possibility remains that a rectangular plaque with a stylised incised figure, originally published as medieval on stylistic grounds, but actually from a late Roman context, could fall into this group (Bluer et al. Reference Bluer, Brigham and Nielsen2006, 159, fig. 113, <S39>).

103 See for example a box with jewellery, coins and gaming equipment from a burial in the Eastern Cemetery (Barber and Bowsher Reference Barber and Bowsher2000, 165, no. B291.2) or a sliding box with bone veneer which contained an antler comb from a late Roman burial at Winchester (Rees et al. Reference Rees, Crummy, Ottaway and Dunn2008, 108–11, figs 55–7).

104 Philpott Reference Philpott1991; Eckardt and Crummy Reference Eckardt and Crummy2008, 37.

105 Shepherd Reference Shepherd2013, 40–2.

106 See Eckardt Reference Eckardt2014, 96–105. A full catalogue of ivory from Britain is being prepared by Stephen Greep (pers. comm. 2016). Perhaps unsurprisingly given the cosmopolitan nature of the city and the scale of excavation, a relatively high proportion of ivory finds are from Roman London. See for example several other knife handles (Greep Reference Greep1982, 99, fig. 5; Hill and Rowsome Reference Hill and Rowsome2011, 81, fig. 74. <S221>; Marshall and Wardle in prep.); sword handle components and scabbard slides (Greep Reference Greep1983, figs 21.2 and 120.2; Bluer et al. Reference Bluer, Brigham and Nielsen2006, 157, fig. 109 <S32>; Marshall and Wardle in prep.). For other ivory finds from burials in the city see a late Roman female inhumation buried with ivory bangles (Barber and Bowsher Reference Barber and Bowsher2000, 147) and an ivory torso associated with a third- to fourth-century child's burial (ibid., 188).

107 The so-called ‘Ivory bangle Lady’; Leach et al. Reference Leach, Eckardt, Chenery, Müldner and Lewis2010.

108 Ridgeway et al. Reference Ridgeway, Leary and Sudds2013, 113–14. Stylistic similarities with a single unpublished clasp knife handle from Carthage, depicting a lioness not a leopard, are briefly noted by Major Reference Major2013, 47.

109 Eckardt Reference Eckardt2014, 104.

110 A fact well known to the Romans. See Toynbee Reference Toynbee1973, 82.

111 Ridgeway et al. Reference Ridgeway, Leary and Sudds2013, 114; see also Toynbee Reference Toynbee1973, 84–6. Several depictions of leopards from Roman London have been interpreted in this light and Toynbee notes the explicit connection between Bacchus and a leopard that can be seen in a sculpture from the Walbrook Mithraeum.

112 Toynbee Reference Toynbee1973, 82–4.

113 For summaries of gladiator knives see Bartus Reference Bartus and Borhy2010; Bartus and Grimm Reference Bartus and Grimm2010. To the list of British finds may be added a more recent find from Kent reported in Cotton et al. Reference Cotton, Betts, Henderson, Macpherson Grant, Marshall, Monteil, Morris, Pipe, Stewart and Thorp2016, 34, fig. 34, <S28>. For charioteers see Köhne et al. Reference Köhne, Ewigleben and Jackson2000, fig. 101; Bartus Reference Bartus2007, 206–8. For hunting scenes see Bartus Reference Bartus2007, 233–7.

114 For the funerary connotations of lions see Hunter Reference Hunter and Noelke2003. For a discussion of death and gladiatorial symbolism in conjunction with another burial from Southwark see Bateman Reference Bateman2008.

115 For example, the presence of rickets, enamel hypoplastic defects and young age-at-death, see Redfern Reference Redfernforthcoming.

116 For example, ‘Skeletons: London's Buried Bones’ which was a collaborative exhibition held at the Wellcome Collection in 2008.

117 The findings were included on the BBC's 6 o'clock news and other content, also in major newspapers and online content.

121 Amongst others, Díaz-Andreu and Champion Reference Díaz-Andreu and Champion2015.

122 See also Tarlow's Reference Tarlow, Scarre and Scarre2006 discussion of these themes.

123 It was hoped that we would find evidence for infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis or leprosy.

124 It is not clear whether their mobility was from choice, occupation or enslavement.

125 These two individuals do not fit the four categories proposed by Eckardt et al. Reference Eckardt, Müldner and Lewis2014, 4.

126 As defined by Martin et al. Reference Martin, Harrod and Pérez2013, 2, ‘Bioarchaeology is the study of ancient and historic human remains in a richly configured context that includes all possible reconstructions of the cultural and environmental variables relevant to the interpretations drawn from those remains … bioarchaeology illuminates human behaviour’.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andreasen, J.O., Bakland, L.K., Flores, M.T., Andreasen, F.M., and Andersson, L. 2011: Traumatic Dental Injuries: A Manual (3rd edn), OxfordGoogle Scholar
Arnold, B. 2002: ‘“Sein and werden”: gender as a process in mortuary ritual’, in Nelson, S.M. and Rosen-Ayalon, M. (eds), In Pursuit of Gender: Worldwide Archaeological Processes, Oxford, 239–56Google Scholar
Arthur, N., Gowland, R.L., and Redfern, R.C. 2016: ‘Coming of age in Roman Britain: osteological evidence for pubertal timing’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 159, 698713Google Scholar
Baker, P. 2010: ‘Children's health and science’, in Laurence, R. and Harlow, M. (eds), A Cultural History of Childhood and Family in Antiquity, Oxford, 153–70Google Scholar
Barber, B., and Bowsher, D. (eds) 2000: The Eastern Cemetery of Roman London. Excavations 1983–1990, MoLAS Monograph 4, LondonGoogle Scholar
Barnes, E. 1994: Developmental Defects of the Axial Skeleton in Paleopathology, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
Bartus, D. 2007: A római kori csontfaragás és a kisművészetek összefüggései (Roman bone carving and the minor arts), unpub. PhD thesis, Eötvös Loránd University of Sciences, BudapestGoogle Scholar
Bartus, D. 2010: ‘Les manches de couteau à représentation de gladiateur de l’époque romaine’, in Borhy, L. (ed.), Studia Celtica Classica et Romana Nicolae Szabó septuagesimo dedicate, Budapest, 2749Google Scholar
Bartus, D., and Grimm, J. 2010: ‘A knife-handle from Caerwent (Venta Silurum) depicting gladiators’, Britannia 41, 321–4Google Scholar
Bass, W.M. 2005: Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual, ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
Bateman, N. 2008: ‘Death, women and the afterlife: some thoughts on a burial in Southwark’, in Clark et al. 2008, 162–6Google Scholar
Bluer, R., Brigham, T., and Nielsen, R. 2006: Roman and Later Development East of the Forum and Cornhill: Excavations at Lloyd's Register, 71 Fenchurch Street, City of London, MoLAS Monograph 30, LondonGoogle Scholar
Bonsall, L. 2014: ‘A comparison of female and male oral health in skeletal populations from late Roman Britain: implications for diet’, Archives of Oral Biology 59.12, 1279–300Google Scholar
Brickley, M., and Ives, R. 2008: The Bioarchaeology of Metabolic Bone Disease, LondonGoogle Scholar
Brickley, M., and McKinley, J. (eds) 2004: Guidance to the Standards for Recording Human Skeletal Remains, Institute of Field Archaeologists, British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology, ReadingGoogle Scholar
Brickley, M., Mays, S., and Ives, R. 2010: ‘Evaluation and interpretation of residual rickets deformities in adults’, International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 20, 5466Google Scholar
Brink, O. 2009: ‘When violence strikes the head, neck and face’, Journal of Trauma 67.1, 147–51Google Scholar
Buckberry, J., and Chamberlain, A.T. 2002: ‘Age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium: a revised method’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 113, 231–9Google Scholar
Budd, P. 2003: ‘Combined O-, Sr- and Pb-isotope analysis of dental tissues from a Neolithic individual from Shepperton and an Iron Age individual from Southwark, London’, unpub. report, Archaeotrace LtdGoogle Scholar
Buikstra, J.E., and Ubelaker, D.H. (eds) 1994: Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains, Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series 44, ArkansasGoogle Scholar
Butler, E., and Li, R. 2014: ‘Genetic markers for sex identification in forensic DNA analysis’, Journal of Forensic Investigation 2.3, 1019Google Scholar
Butler, J., and Ridgeway, V. (eds) 2009: Secrets of the Gardens: Archaeologists Unearth the Lives of Roman Londoners at Drapers’ Gardens, Pre-Construct Archaeology, BrockleyGoogle Scholar
Catalano, P., Verginelli, F., Coia, V., Destro Bisol, G., Nanni, A., Ottini, L., Palmirotta, R., Santandrea, E., Rea, R., and Costantini, R.M. 2001: ‘L'Ipogeo di Trebio Giusto. Un'indagine antropologica dallo scavo alla ricerca paleogenetica’, Bullettino dell'Istituto Archeologico Germanico Sezione Romana 108, 366–72Google Scholar
Clark, J., Cotton, J., Hall, J., Sherris, R., and Swain, H. (eds) 2008: Londinium and Beyond: Essays on Roman London and its Hinterland for Harvey Sheldon, CBA Research Report 156, YorkGoogle Scholar
Connell, B., and Rauxloh, P. 2006: A Rapid Method for Recording Human Skeletal Data, Museum of London, LondonGoogle Scholar
Cotton, J. 2008: ‘Harper Road, Southwark: an early Roman burial revisited’, in Clark et al. 2008, 151–61Google Scholar
Cotton, J., with Betts, I., Henderson, M., Macpherson Grant, N., Marshall, M., Monteil, G., Morris, J., Pipe, A., Stewart, K., and Thorp, A. 2016: A Prehistoric and Roman Settlement at Tothill Street, Minster in Thanet, Kent Archaeological Reports, http://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/10/042.pdfGoogle Scholar
Cowan, C., Seeley, F., Wardle, A., Westman, A., and Wheeler, L. 2009: Roman Southwark Settlement and Economy, MOLA Monograph 42, LondonGoogle Scholar
Crummy, N. 1983: The Roman Small Finds from Excavations in Colchester 1971–9, Colchester Archaeological Report 2, ColchesterGoogle Scholar
Crummy, N. 2005a: ‘From bracelets to battle-honours: military armillae from the Roman conquest of Britain’, in Crummy 2005b, 93–105Google Scholar
Crummy, N. (ed.) 2005b: Image, Craft and the Classical World. Essays in Honour of Donald Bailey and Catherine Johns, Monographies Instrumentum 29, MontagnacGoogle Scholar
Crummy, N. 2016: ‘A hoard of military awards, jewellery and coins from Colchester’, Britannia 47, 128Google Scholar
Devault, A., Jaing, A., Gardner, C., Porter, S., Enk, T.M., Thissen, J., Allen, J., Borucki, M., DeWitte, S., Dhody, A., McLoughlin, K., and Poinar, H.N. 2014: ‘Ancient pathogen DNA in archaeological samples detected with a microbial detection array’, Nature Scientific Reports 4, 4245, doi: 10.1038/srep04245Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., and Champion, T. (eds) 2015: Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe, LondonGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, H. 2014: Objects and Identities in Roman Britain and the North-Western Provinces, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, H., and Crummy, N. 2008: Styling the Body in Late Iron Age and Roman Britain: A Contextual Approach to Toilet Instruments, Monographies Instrumentum 36, MontagnacGoogle Scholar
Eckardt, H., Müldner, G., and Lewis, M. 2014: ‘People on the move in Roman Britain’, World Archaeology 46.4, 117Google Scholar
Fejerskov, O., Guldager Bilde, P., Bizzarro, M., Connelly, J.N., Skovhus Thomsen, J., and Nyvad, B. 2012: ‘Dental caries in Rome, 50–100 AD’, Caries Research 46.5, 467–73Google Scholar
Geller, P.L. 2017: The Bioarchaeology of Socio-Sexual Lives. Queering Common Sense about Sex, Gender, and Sexuality, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Genovés, S. 1959: ‘L'estimation des iliac ences sexuelles dans l'os coxal; differences métriques et iliac ences morphlogiques’, Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris 10, 395Google Scholar
Giles, M. 2012: A Forged Glamour: Landscape, Identity and Material Culture in the Iron Age, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Gowland, R.L., and Knüsel, C.J. 2006a: ‘Introduction’, in Gowland and Knüsel 2006b, ix–xivGoogle Scholar
Gowland, R.L., and Knüsel, C.J. (eds) 2006b: Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Greep, S.J. 1982: ‘Two early Roman handles from the Walbrook, London’, Archaeological Journal 139, 91100Google Scholar
Greep, S.J. 1983: Objects of Animal Bone, Antler, Ivory and Teeth from Roman Britain, unpub. PhD thesis, University of CardiffGoogle Scholar
Greep, S.J. 2004: ‘Bone and antler veneer’, in Cool, H.E.M. (ed.), The Roman Cemetery at Brougham, Cumbria: Excavations 1966–67, Britannia Monograph 21, London, 273–82Google Scholar
Hall, J. 1996: ‘The cemeteries of Roman London’, in Bird, J., Hassall, M. and Sheldon, H. (eds), Interpreting Roman London. Papers in Memory of Hugh Chapman, Oxbow Monograph 58, Oxford, 5784Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Wardle, A. 2005: ‘Dedicated followers of fashion? Decorative bone hairpins from Roman London’, in Crummy 2005b, 173–8Google Scholar
Hamlin, C. 2007: The Material Expression of Social Change: The Mortuary Correlates of Gender and Age in Late Pre-Roman Iron Age and Roman Dorset, unpub. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin, MilwaukeeGoogle Scholar
Harward, C., Powers, S., and Watson, S. (eds) 2015: The Upper Walbrook Valley Cemetery of Roman London: Excavations at Finsbury Circus, City of London, 1987–2007, Museum of London Archaeology Monograph Series 69, LondonGoogle Scholar
Hefner, J.T., and Ousley, S.T. 2014: ‘Statistical classification methods for estimating ancestry using morphoscopic traits’, Journal of Forensic Science 59.4, 883–90Google Scholar
Hefner, J.T., Ousley, S.D., and Dirkmaat, D.C. 2012: ‘Morphoscopic traits and the assessment of ancestry’, in Dirkmaat, D.C. (ed.), A Companion to Forensic Anthropology, Chichester, 287310Google Scholar
Hill, J., and Rowsome, P. 2011: Roman London and the Walbrook Stream Crossing: Excavations at 1 Poultry and Vicinity, City of London, Museum of London Archaeology Monograph Series 37, LondonGoogle Scholar
Hillson, S. 2005: Dental Anthropology (2nd edn), CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Holder, N. 2007: ‘Mapping the Roman inscriptions of London’, Britannia 38, 1334Google Scholar
Hunter, F. 2003: ‘Funerary lions in Roman provincial art’, in Noelke, P. (ed.), Romanisation und Resistenz in Plastik, Architektur und Inschriften der Provinzen des Imperium Romanum: Neue Funde und Forschungen, 5967Google Scholar
Hunter, F. 2008: ‘Celtic art in Roman Britain’, in Garrow, D., Gosden, C. and Hill, J.D. (eds), Rethinking Celtic Art, Oxford, 129–45Google Scholar
Hunter, F. 2010: ‘Changing objects in changing worlds: dragonesque brooches and beaded torcs’, in Worrell, S., Egan, G., Naylor, J., Leahy, K. and Lewis, M. (eds), A Decade of Discovery: Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference 2007, BAR British Series 520, Oxford, 91107Google Scholar
Hwang, K., and You, S.H. 2010: ‘Analysis of facial bone fractures: an 11-year study of 2,094 patients’, Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery 43.1, 42–8Google Scholar
Jackson, R. 2010: Cosmetic Sets of Late Iron Age and Roman Britain, LondonGoogle Scholar
Johns, C. 2006: ‘Iron Age sword and mirror cist burial from Bryher, Isles of Scilly’, Cornish Archaeology 41.2, 180Google Scholar
Jordan, A. 2016: ‘Her mirror, his sword: unbinding binary gender and sex assumptions in Iron Age British mortuary traditions’, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 23.3, 870–99Google Scholar
Joy, J. 2007: Reflections on the Iron Age: Biographies of Mirrors, unpub. PhD thesis, University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Joy, J. 2010: Iron Age Mirrors a Biographical Approach, BAR British Series 518, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Kernbach, K.J. 2010: ‘Tarsal coalitions: etiology, diagnosis, imaging, and stigmata’, Clinics in Podiatric Medicine and Surgery 27.1, 105–17Google Scholar
Knudson, K., and Stojanowski, C.M. 2008: ‘New directions in bioarchaeology’, Journal of Archaeological Research 16.4, 397432Google Scholar
Köhne, E., Ewigleben, C., and Jackson, R. 2000: Gladiators and Caesars: The Power of Spectacle in Ancient Rome, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
Kotowicz, M.A. 2004: ‘Paget disease of bone. Diagnosis and indications for treatment’, Australian Family Physician 33.3, 127–31Google Scholar
Leach, S., Lewis, M., Chenery, C., Müldner, G., and Eckardt, H. 2009: ‘Migration and diversity in Roman Britain: a multidisciplinary approach to immigrants in Roman York, England’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 140, 546–61Google Scholar
Leach, S., Eckardt, H., Chenery, C., Müldner, G., and Lewis, M. 2010: ‘A “lady” of York: migration, ethnicity and identity in Roman York’, Antiquity 84, 131–45Google Scholar
Lees, D., Woodger, A., and Orton, C. 1989: ‘Excavations in the Walbrook Valley’, London Archaeologist 6.5, 115–19Google Scholar
Lloyd-Morgan, G. 1981: Description of the Collections in the Rijksmuseum G.M. Kamm at Nijmegen 9: The Mirrors, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
Major, H. 2013: ‘Metal and bone objects’, in Ridgeway et al. 2013, 43–8Google Scholar
Maloney, C., and de Moulins, D. (eds) 1990: The Archaeology of Roman London Volume 1: The Upper Walbrook in the Roman Period, CBA Research Report 69, LondonGoogle Scholar
Marciniak, S., Prowse, T.L., Herring, D.A., Klunk, J., Kuch, M., Duggan, A.T., Bondioli, L., Holmes, E.C., and Poinar, H.N. 2016: ‘Plasmodium falciparum malaria in 1st–2nd century CE southern Italy’, Current Biology 26.23, R12201222Google Scholar
Marshall, M., and Wardle, A. in prep.: The Roman Small Finds, Coins, Glass Vessels and Textiles from Bloomberg, London, MOLA Monograph SeriesGoogle Scholar
Martin, D.L., Harrod, R.P., and Pérez, V.R. 2013: Bioarchaeology. An Integrated Approach to Working with Human Remains, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Martiniano, R., Caffell, A., Holst, M., Hunter-Mann, K., Montgomery, J., Müldner, G., McLaughlin, R.L., Teasdale, M.D., van Rheenen, W., Veldink, J.H., van der Berg, L.H., Hardiman, O., Carroll, M., Roskams, S., Oxley, J., Morgan, C., Thomas, M.G., Barnes, I., McDonnell, C., Collins, M.J., and Bradley, D.G. 2016: ‘Genomic signals of migration and continuity in Britain before the Anglo-Saxons’, Nature Communications 7.10326, 18Google Scholar
Mays, S. 2006: ‘The osteology of monasticism in medieval England’, in Gowland and Knüsel 2006b, 179–89Google Scholar
Mazieres, B. 2013: ‘Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (Forestier-Rotes-Querol disease): what's new?’, Joint Bone Spine 80.5, 466–70Google Scholar
McIlvaine, B.K. 2015: ‘Implications of reappraising the iron-deficiency anemia hypothesis’, International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 25, 9971000Google Scholar
Mitchell, P.D. 2016: ‘Human parasites in the Roman world: health consequences of conquering an empire’, Parasitology 8, 111Google Scholar
Morales, A.A., Valdazo, P., Corres, J., Talbot, J.R., Perez, F., and Baylink, D.J. 1993: ‘Coexistence of Paget's bone disease and diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in males’, Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 11.4, 361–5Google Scholar
Nowakowski, J., Gwilt, A., Megaw, V., and La Niece, S. 2009: ‘A Late Iron Age neck-ring from Pentire, Newquay, Cornwall, with a note on the find from Boverton, Vale of Glamorgan’, Antiquaries Journal 89, 3552Google Scholar
Perring, D. 2004: Roman London, LondonGoogle Scholar
Perring, D. 2015: ‘Recent advances in the understanding of Roman London’, in Fulford, M., and Holbrook, N. (eds), The Towns of Roman Britain: The Contribution of Commercial Archaeology Since 1990, Britannia Monograph 27, London, 2043Google Scholar
Phenice, T. 1969: ‘A newly developed visual method of sexing the os pubis’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 30, 297301Google Scholar
Philpott, R. 1991: Burial Practices in Roman Britain, BAR British Series 219, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Pope, R., and Ralston, I. 2012: ‘Approaching sex and status in Iron Age Britain with reference to the nearer Continent’, in Moore, T. and Armada, X.-T. (eds), Western Europe in the First Millennium BC, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Powell, L.A. 2015: Childhood Health and Diet in Roman London: The Palaeodemographic, Palaeopathological and Isotopic Evidence, unpub. PhD thesis, University of DurhamGoogle Scholar
Powell, L.A., Redfern, R.C., and Millard, A.R. 2014: ‘Infant feeding practices in Roman London: the isotopic evidence’, in Carroll, P.M. and Graham, E.-J. (eds), Infant Health and Death in Roman Italy and Beyond, Journal of Roman Archaeology Supplementary Series 96, Portsmouth, RI, 89110Google Scholar
Rajakumar, K. 2003: ‘Vitamin D, cod-liver oil, sunlight and rickets: a historical perspective’, Pediatrics 112.2, e132Google Scholar
Redfern, R.C. forthcoming: ‘Blind to chains? The potential of bioarchaeology for identifying the enslaved of Roman Britain’, BritanniaGoogle Scholar
Redfern, R.C., and Bonney, H. 2014: ‘Headhunting and amphitheatre combat in Roman London, England: new evidence from the Walbrook Valley’, Journal of Archaeological Science 43, 214–26Google Scholar
Redfern, R.C., and DeWitte, S. 2011: ‘A new approach to the study of Romanization in Britain: a regional perspective of cultural change in late Iron Age and Roman Dorset using the Siler and Gompertz-Makeham models of mortality’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 144, 269–85Google Scholar
Redfern, R.C., DeWitte, S.N., Pearce, J., Hamlin, C., and Egging Dinwiddy, K. 2015: ‘Urban-rural differences in Roman Dorset, England: a bioarchaeological perspective on Roman settlements’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 157, 107–20Google Scholar
Redfern, R.C., Gröcke, D.R., Millard, A.R., Ridgeway, V., Johnson, L., and Hefner, J.T. 2016: ‘Going south of the river: a multidisciplinary analysis of ancestry, mobility and diet in a population from Roman Southwark, London’, Journal of Archaeological Science 74, 1122Google Scholar
Rees, H., Crummy, N., Ottaway, P.J., and Dunn, G. 2008: Artefacts and Society in Roman and Medieval Winchester. Small Finds from the Suburbs and Defences, 1971–1986, WinchesterGoogle Scholar
Reitsema, L.J., and McIlvaine, B.K. 2014: ‘Reconciling “stress” and “health” in physical anthropology: what can bioarchaeologists learn from the other subdisciplines?’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 155, 181–5Google Scholar
Ridgeway, V., Leary, K., and Sudds, B. (eds) 2013: Roman Burials in Southwark. Excavations at 52–56 Lant Street and 56 Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1, PCA Monograph 17, LondonGoogle Scholar
Roberts, A., Peters, T.J., and Robson Brown, K.L. 2007: ‘New light on old shoulders: palaeopathological patterns of arthropathy and enthesopathy in the shoulder complex’, Journal of Anatomy 211.4, 485–92Google Scholar
Rogers, T.L. 1999: ‘A visual method of determining the sex of skeletal remains using the distal humerus’, Journal of Forensic Science 44, 5760Google Scholar
Rogers, T.L. 2009: ‘Sex determination of adolescent skeletons using the distal humerus’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 140, 143–8Google Scholar
Rouvreau, P., Pouliquen, J.C., Langlais, J., Glorion, C., and de Cerqueira Daltro, G. 1994: ‘Synostosis and tarsal coalitions in children. A study of 68 cases in 47 patients’, Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Réparatrice de L'Appareil Moteur 80.3, 252–60Google Scholar
Schutkowski, H. 1993: ‘Sex determination of infant and juvenile skeletons. I. Morphological features’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 90, 199205Google Scholar
Seow, W.K. 2014: ‘Developmental defects of enamel and dentine: challenges for basic science research and clinical management’, Australian Dental Journal 59.1, 143–54Google Scholar
Shapland, F., and Lewis, M.E. 2013: ‘Brief communication: a proposed osteological method for the estimation of pubertal stage in human skeletal remains’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 151, 302–10Google Scholar
Shapland, F., and Lewis, M.E. 2014: ‘Brief communication: a proposed method for the assessment of pubertal stage in human skeletal remains using cervical vertebrae maturation’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 153, 144–53Google Scholar
Shaw, H., Montgomery, J., Redfern, R., Gowland, R., and Evans, J. 2016: ‘Identifying migrants in Roman London using lead and strontium stable isotopes’, Journal of Archaeological Science 66, 5768Google Scholar
Shepherd, J. 2013: ‘Glass’, in Ridgeway et al. 2013, 36–43Google Scholar
Shoemaker, N. (ed.) 2012: Negotiators of Change. Historical Perspectives on Native American Women, LondonGoogle Scholar
Sofaer, J.R. 2006: The Body as Material Culture. A Theoretical Osteoarchaeology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Soranus, : Soranus’ Gynecology (trans. Temkin, O., 1991), BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
Spencer, R. 2010: Testing Hypotheses about Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH) Using Stable Isotopes and Other Methods, unpub. PhD thesis, University of DurhamGoogle Scholar
Stead, I.M., and Rigby, V. 1986: Baldock: The Excavation of a Roman and Pre-Roman Settlement 1968–1972, Britannia Monograph 7, LondonGoogle Scholar
Stead, I.M., and Rigby, V. 1989: Verulamium: The King Harry Lane Site, LondonGoogle Scholar
Sumer, A.P., and Zengin, A.Z. 2005: ‘An unusual presentation of talon cusp’, British Dental Journal 199.7, 429–30Google Scholar
Targino, A.G., Rosenblatt, A., Oliveira, A.F., Chaves, A.M., and Santos, V.E. 2011: ‘The relationship of enamel defects and caries: a cohort study’, Oral Diseases 17.4, 420–6Google Scholar
Tarlow, S. 2006: ‘Archaeological ethics and the people of the past’, in Scarre, C. and Scarre, G. (eds), The Ethics of Archaeology: Philosophical Perspectives on Archaeological Practice, Cambridge, 199218Google Scholar
Terizi, R. 2014: ‘Extraskeletal symptoms and comorbidities of diffuse skeletal hyperostosis’, World Journal of Clinical Cases 2.9, 422–5Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. 2016: Roman London's First Voices: Writing Tablets from the Bloomberg Excavations, 2010–14, MOLA Monograph 72, LondonGoogle Scholar
Toynbee, J.M.C. 1973: Animals in Roman Life and Art, LondonGoogle Scholar
van der Merwe, A.E., Maat, G.J., and Watt, I. 2012: ‘Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis: diagnosis in a palaeopathological context’, Homo 63.3, 202–15Google Scholar
von Mercklin, E. 1940: ‘Römische Klappmessergriffe’, in Festchrift Victor Hoffiller (Serta Hoffilleriana) Zagreb, 339–52Google Scholar
Walker, P.L. 1995: ‘Problems of preservation and sexism in sexing: some lessons from historical collections for palaeodemographers’, in Saunders, S. and Herring, A. (eds), Grave Reflections. Portraying the Past through Cemetery Studies, Toronto, 3147Google Scholar
Walker, P.L., Bathurst, R.R., Richman, R., Gjerdrum, T., and Andrushko, V.A. 2009: ‘The causes of porotic hyperostosis and cribra orbitalia: a reappraisal of the iron-deficiency-a hypothesis’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 139, 109–25Google Scholar
Wallace, L. 2015: The Origin of Roman London, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Walsh, S., Liu, F., Wollstein, A., Kovatsi, L., Ralf, A., Kosiniak-Kamysz, A., Branicki, W., and Kayser, M. 2013: ‘The HIrisPlex system for simultaneous prediction of hair and eye colour from DNA’, Forensic Science International. Genetics 7.1, 98115Google Scholar
Wardle, A. forthcoming, in Ashworth, H. (ed.), A Late Iron Age and Romano-British Cemetery at California, Baldock, HertsGoogle Scholar
Warne, G.L., and Raza, J. 2008: ‘Disorders of sex development (DSDs), their presentation and management in different cultures’, Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders 9, 227–36Google Scholar
Weaver, D.S. 1980: ‘Sex differences in the ilia of known sex and age sample of fetal and infant skeletons’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 6, 199208Google Scholar
Weston, D. 2008: ‘Investigating the specificity of periosteal reactions in pathology museum specimens’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 137, 4859Google Scholar
Weston, D. 2012: ‘Non-specific infection in palaeopathology: interpreting periosteal reactions’, in Grauer, A.L. (ed.), Companion to Paleopathology, New York, 492512Google Scholar
Whytehead, R. 1986: ‘The excavation of an area within a Roman cemetery at West Tenter Street, London E1’, Transactions London and Middlesex Archaeological Society 37, 2368Google Scholar
WORD 2016: Roman Data, Museum of LondonGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

FIG. 1. Map showing the location of the sites in Roman London. (© Museum of London)

Figure 1

TABLE 1. SUMMARY INFORMATION FOR INDIVIDUALS IN THIS STUDY

Figure 2

FIG. 2. Superior view of the reconstructed burial from Harper Road (HR79 sk 311). (© Museum of London)

Figure 3

FIG. 3. The torc from the Harper Road burial. (© Museum of London)

Figure 4

FIG. 4. Anterior view of the male cranium (LOW88 sk 695.5) showing evidence for dental chipping and injuries to the facial cranial bones. (© Museum of London)

Figure 5

FIG. 5. Skeleton of the adult male (MNL87 sk 37 B604) from Mansell Street. (© Museum of London)

Figure 6

FIG. 6. Bone inlays from the wooden casket buried with LTU03 sk 385, B15. (© Pre-Construct Archaeology)

Figure 7

FIG. 7. Ivory leopard clasp knife buried with LTU03 sk 385, B15. (© Pre-Construct Archaeology)