Completeness score ranges and means by time period are tabulated (Table 10). P-values for statistical tests of completeness scores are listed by time period in Table 11 (See Appendix A, Tables 137-141 for bone counts and percentages by sex). When samples were compared by time period, the Early Woodland sample had the lowest mean; all of the Monongahela groups and the Post-Contact sample had significantly higher scores. The Monongahela samples also scored significantly higher than the Post-Contact sample. There was no significant difference between the Early, Middle, and Late Monongahela groups.
Table 10: Completeness score ranges and means by time period
Time Period Score Range Mean
Early Woodland 0.17 – 51.73 4.11
Early Monongahela 0.30 – 83.04 33.67
Middle Monongahela 0.23 – 83.08 37.14
Late Monongahela 0.51 – 81.27 35.82
Table 11: P-values from Bonferroni post-hoc analysis of One-Way ANOVA, completeness scores by time period*
Comparison of Time Periods by One Way ANOVA P-value
Early Woodland vs. Early Monongahela .000
Early Woodland vs. Middle Monongahela .000
Early Woodland vs. Late Monongahela .000
Early Woodland vs. Post-Contact .028
Early Monongahela vs. Middle Monongahela 1.000
Early Monongahela vs. Late Monongahela 1.000
Early Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .000
Middle Monongahela vs. Late Monongahela 1.000
Middle Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .000
Late Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .000
*significant p-values bolded (p≤.05)
6.2.2 Preservation
Mean preservation scores and p-values for each anatomical region are presented in Tables 12-13. Mean asymmetry scores are listed in Table 14 by time period. Preservation scores were averaged per region (cranium, right and left upper limb, axial skeleton, right and left lower limb). When compared by time period and region, the Early Woodland had the highest scores for surface preservation (greatest surface erosion) with the Monongahela samples scoring the lowest (little surface erosion). The Early Woodland mean preservation scores were significantly higher than the Monongahela and Post-Contact groups. The Post-Contact group also scored significantly higher than the Monongahela samples for multiple regions. Asymmetry scores were calculated for the upper and lower limb (left – right = score). There was no significant difference in mean asymmetry score between samples.
Table 12: Mean preservation score by skeletal region and time period
Time Period Cranium Upper Limb Axial Lower Limb
L R L R Early Woodland 2.56 3.02 2.93 3.00 3.14 3.24 Early Monongahela 1.90 2.00 2.05 2.19 2.18 2.12 Middle Monongahela 2.04 1.89 1.89 2.02 1.91 1.95 Late Monongahela 2.16 2.13 2.02 2.28 2.05 2.00 Post-Contact 2.04 2.44 2.64 2.33 2.94 2.92
Table 13: P-values of Kruskall Wallis post-hoc analysis - preservation by skeletal region and time period*
Time Period Cranium Upper Limb Axial Lower Limb
L R L R
Early Woodland vs. Early Monongahela .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 Early Woodland vs. Middle
Monongahela .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Early Woodland vs. Late Monongahela .018 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
Early Woodland vs. Post-Contact .001 .002 .176 .000 .322 .092
Early Monongahela vs. Middle
Monongahela .305 .467 .935 .238 .073 .241
Early Monongahela vs. Late
Monongahela .194 .395 .980 .534 .448 .482
Early Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .440 .008 .001 .293 .000 .000 Middle Monongahela vs. Late
Monongahela .630 .097 .360 .070 .359 .716
Middle Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .839 .000 .001 .019 .000 .000
Late Monongahela vs. Post-Contact .534 .076 .001 .698 .000 .000
*significant p-values bolded (p≤.05)
Table 14: Mean symmetry scores for the upper and lower limbs by time period*
Time Period Upper Limb Lower Limb
Early Woodland .0667 -.1333
Early Monongahela -.0877 .0000
Middle Monongahela -.0182 -.0182
Late Monongahela .0938 .0625
Post-Contact -.1379 .1379
* negative scores indicate higher (poor) preservation score of the left limb, positive scores indicate higher score for the right limb
6.2.3 Discussion: Completeness and Preservation
Completeness scores show a preservation bias for several samples in this study. The Early Woodland sample had an average completeness score of only 4.11; skeletons ranged in completeness from comparatively complete (>50% complete) to only a few fragments. Completeness scores were expected to be low and preservation was expected to be poor for these burial mounds in comparison with later periods due to site antiquity and the fragmentary nature of the remains. Burials from this sample varied by type and location. Twenty-seven were secondary burials and the relatively poor preservation of the skeletons from these contexts supports this conclusion from the original excavation reports (Dragoo 1963). Secondary bundle burials are common in Adena contexts (Milner 2004). At the Cresap site, there were multiple secondary inhumations, including those from Feature 29 consisting of 6 crania arranged in a circle around a central cache of bone fragments and lithic points (Andrews and Bello 2006, Dragoo
1963). These 6 crania were poorly preserved (score of 4-5 on the Brickley and McKinley scale) and consisted only of several fragments and teeth. Primary inhumations from the Early Woodland sample generally had higher completeness and lower preservation scores, such as the primary log tomb burial from the Cresap site (Dragoo 1963). Asymmetry in surface preservation is also indicated for this sample by mean scores for the upper and lower limb; the right upper limb was generally more poorly preserved than the left, though the opposite pattern was observed for the lower limb. This likely has little to do with the position of the body for this sample as burial types were highly varied (Dragoo 1963).
The Monongahela samples were the most complete in this study, with no significant difference in completeness and preservation scores for Early, Middle, and Late periods. Mean asymmetry scores for limb preservation indicated asymmetry for these samples. The Early Monongahela score (-.0877) indicates that the upper left limb had more cortical damage than the right. Burial patterns for this sample reflect this observation for adults in flexed burials, a greater number were buried lying on the left side (n=14). This pattern is replicated for the Middle Monongahela sample, which has an asymmetry score of -.0182 for both the upper and lower limbs, with 8 right- sided burials and 7 left sided burials. However, the Late Monongahela sample shows the opposite pattern for positive asymmetry scores for the upper limb (.0938) and lower limb (.0625). Of the burials with recorded data on body position, the majority were flexed burials on the right side (n=7, left sided n=3). These patterns suggest that burial position affected cortical surface erosion, with flexed burials having higher preservation scores on the side the body was placed on during burial.
The Post-Contact sample was not as complete or well-preserved as the Monongahela samples, with a mean completeness score of 13.43, though there was a wide range of completeness. Preservation did not vary by burial type or body treatment, as these represented extended inhumations from the mid-18th century. The use of coffins
was indicated by the presence of nails in each burial, plus archaeological documentation that the Delaware may have adopted European style mortuary treatments (Ferris 2009; McConnell 1992; Zakucia 1960). Preservation may also have been greatly affected by the post-excavation treatment of the remains, since these burials were stored in a garage facility for some time before being curated at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History (Verna Cowin, pers. comm).