Home > Education and Outreach > Reports, Publications, and Presentations > Online Reports, Papers, and Presentations > Bioanthropological Investigations of Historic Cemeteries: What Can We Learn From Biological, Cultural, and Mortuary Remains?

Bioanthropological Investigations of Historic Cemeteries:
What Can We Learn From Biological, Cultural, and Mortuary Remains?

Alexandra Bybee

Paper presented at the 5th Annual Council for West Virginia Archeology Spring Workshop

Warning: Images may be disturbing to some viewers

Fueled primarily by urban development, the recent past has seen an increasing demand for the relocation of historic and modern cemeteries. These cemeteries hold clues to the past lives of America's earliest populations, the free and enslaved, the wealthy and poor, and the healthy and diseased. Bioanthropological investigations of historic cemeteries have the potential to provide a variety of information on the biological, cultural, and mortuary aspects of these populations. On a personal level, bioanthropology allows for an interpretation of lifetime events and, on a larger scale, provides a demographic and sociological history of a past population. This paper will discuss the types of information that can be determined through studies of historic cemeteries and provide a synopsis of methodological approaches for the recovery of data during the excavation and analysis of human remains and associated material culture. As Clark Spencer Larsen states, bioarchaeology centers on the lives and lifestyles of past people, with skeletal remains providing insights into health and well being, dietary history, activity, violence and trauma, ancestry, and demography (2002:abstract). In addition to these facets of the lives of past people, study of associated mortuary and cultural material provide a glimpse into past funerary ideologies and allows for interpretations regarding socioeconomic factors and personal relationships.

Although not necessarily comprehensive, presented here are three main types of data that can be derived from the excavation and analysis of historic cemetery populations. (slide 2) First, biological consists of age, sex, stature, pathology, trauma, and racial affinity. In other words, any information that can be derived specifically from recovered human materials, including skeletal remains, dental elements, hair, or soft tissue. (slide 3) Cultural includes information pertaining to the ideologies of the population interring their dead, which can be specific to the period in which individuals were buried, the geographical location of the population, racial affinity, and age and sex of the deceased. This could include clothing, jewelry or other adornment related items, grave orientation, grave inclusions, and placement of the body within the coffin. (slide 4) Finally, mortuary includes anything associated with the actual grave, such as head- and footstones, grave shaft construction, use of a vault, coffin shape and construction, coffin hardware and wood, and other coffin embellishments. Mortuary aspects can also be viewed in light of the cultural factors at work in the populations.

Methods appropriate for the investigation of historic cemeteries will likely vary due to a number of factors, including cemetery location, vegetation, soil compactness, and presence of hazardous materials. The following is a proposed cemetery excavation protocol (slide 5). The procedures suggested here are by no means intended to be all-inclusive; rather, they define several strategies for the recovery of data. (slide 6) An archaeological investigation of an historic cemetery begins with its identification and most often ends with the reinterment of all graves in a modern cemetery. Various steps may be included along this continuum. The identification of cemeteries can be accomplished through a variety of means, including archival research and oral history, surface survey, and geophysical survey (Owsley et al. 1997). Although it is not always the case, archival records sometimes mention the location of an unmarked cemetery on a parcel of land and historic maps may depict a cemetery's location. Oral or written family history may also divulge information on location. Even when no archival or family record for a cemetery is found, and it is suspected that a cemetery is present in an area, a surface survey may result in identification. Surface evidence of a cemetery may include rough fieldstone slabs set vertically in the ground, broken or whole grave markers scattered on the surface or stacked against a tree, a series of depressions resulting from the subsidence of graves, introduced ornamental vegetation, remnants of an old fence or fence posts, and an island of trees or bushes set in the middle of a cultivated field. Geophysical survey, including magnetic, electrical resistivity, and ground penetrating radar, can be used to identify cemeteries, and may also help delineate their areal extents. Geophysical survey can be impeded by dense vegetation, and metal objects located at the surface or within the topsoil can also skew results. Soil probing and coring can also be used to help identify a possible cemetery, or to define grave shafts when the cemetery has already been identified. Depending on the soils and age and depths of graves, it is often possible to use a metal tile probe to identify grave shafts, as the soils are occasionally much looser than the undisturbed matrix. Use of an Oakfield probe or bucket auger can also help identify graves, as the grave shaft fill is usually mottled and distinct. A final means of identifying graves includes removal of the topsoil, either by hand or mechanically.

Prior to excavation of historic graves, it is imperative to conduct soil sampling to identify potentially hazardous materials (slide 7). Soil sample analysis should be conducted minimally for arsenic, mercury, and lead. Arsenic and mercury were used as embalming agents during the last half of the 19th and into the 20th century. These elements do not biodegrade and either stay with the remains or seep into the surrounding soils. Lead was often applied during plating of decorative hardware and was also used widely in paint after around 1884, thus may be present in a grave if the coffin was painted or decorative hardware was used. Although the ideal would be to extract samples from each grave to be excavated, this is not always possible due to the fact that additional graves are often identified during fieldwork.

Much like today, 19th and early 20th century graves were often adorned on the surface with various decorations or commemorative items (slide 8). Although it was common in upland south folk cemeteries for family and friends to set aside a day for the upkeep of the graves, which often included the scraping or clearing off and mounding of the grave (Crissman 1994; Jeane 1989), there is a chance that materials left as "grave offerings" could still be present. This is especially important when dealing with a demographically unknown population, as certain items could be suggestive of racial affinity. For example, it was a somewhat common practice for historic African-American graves to be adorned on the surface with items such as marine shells and broken ceramic vessels. It is suggested here that test units be excavated over at least a sample of graves to identify such items.

Excavation of the grave shaft can be done either entirely by hand or with heavy equipment (slide 9). Use of a backhoe with a smooth bucket is recommended, as hand excavation of grave shafts can be very time-consuming. If use of heavy equipment is chosen, care should be taken that graves are not excavated too deeply. You should shoot for just above the coffin or sub-pit, which can be defined either by the presence of coffin hardware, staining associated with decomposing coffin wood, or with a tile probe. A metal detector may also be useful in this situation. Grave shaft fill is considered a disturbed deposit and will not likely contain quantities of culturally significant material. For most situations, screening the fill is not recommended until it is certain you are close to the top of the coffin. It is possible, however, that you may encounter a grave shaft that could hold important information. For example, at 15Mm137 in Montgomery County, Kentucky, a historic grave shaft was originally excavated right through a portion of a Middle Woodland feature containing a copper celt and other materials. The grave shaft fill contained prehistoric artifacts that were probably originally from the feature, including lithic materials and flecks of mica (Bybee and Richmond 2003).

Excavation of graves should involve the careful use of shovels and trowels in the upper portion of the coffin, followed by trowels, bamboo tools, dental picks, and brushes in the lower portion (slide 10). Adult or older children's graves should be excavated in five zones, while small children's and infant's graves should be excavated in two zones. An attempt should be made to keep skeletal remains, coffin hardware, and personal items in place during excavation for a final photo. If this is impractical, materials should be depicted on a schematic plan map prior to removal. Osteological measurements should be made on fragmentary or delicate skeletal remains, as valuable biological data could be lost once the remains are moved. Flotation samples can be taken from within and below the abdominal region to collect seeds or other floral remains that could be suggestive of diet or medicinal use of plants. Pollen could also be collected to identify season of death for unmarked graves. An historic grave excavation form should be used to record all data (slide 11). The form should prompt the excavator as to what information needs to be recorded.

Depending on preservation and other factors, materials recovered from historic interments may include biological, cultural, and mortuary remains. When viewed together, the data collected from these materials can provide insights into the lives of past populations. (slide 12, slide 13, slide 14, slide 15) A variety of biological information can be obtained through the analysis of recovered skeletal remains, dental elements, hair, and human soft tissue. First, skeletal remains should be analyzed according to recommended procedures in Buikstra and Ubelaker's 1994 publication "Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains" This publication provides guidelines for the collection of osteological information from skeletal measurements to identification of gross pathological conditions. Minimally, age, sex, stature, racial affinity, and general health should be recorded. If present, skeletal disorders such as infections, degenerative diseases, trauma, and dental pathologies, should be identified. Analyses can be conducted on human hair to identify racial affinity and, if the root is present, mtDNA can be extracted and the sex of the individual may be determined (this is also true for well preserved dental material). If there are suspected relatives, mtDNA could also be used to make definite identifications.

Cultural material interred with the deceased could range anywhere from clothing items to prosthetic limbs to coins and ceramic dishes. The analysis of cultural materials recovered from graves allows for an assessment of the ideologies of the population in question and may aid in the identification of the period in which individuals were buried, their racial affinity, and age and sex. (slide 16) Early historic interments generally lack clothing related items, as the cultural norm in early U.S. history was for burial in shrouds or other simple garments. Near the middle of the 19th century, when the beautification of death movement was taking hold, interment clothing became more elaborate, with individuals being interred in everyday clothing. This was exacerbated during the last few decades of the 19th century and into the 20th, with individuals being interred in their "Sunday's best". Men were often buried wearing full suits, women were interred in dresses with intricate hairstyles, deceased children wore fancy outfits, and infants were buried in Christening gowns. The mid to late 20th century saw more lenient interment "dress codes"-people were occasionally buried without pants or shoes. It was not uncommon during the mid-20th century for people to be buried wearing attire they found most comfortable in life, such as pajamas and slippers.

(slide 17) Personal items included in a grave could consist of pieces of jewelry, other decorative items, or prosthetics and dental appliances. As was the case for clothing, the interment of personal items with the deceased was generally not common until the mid 19th century. Specific types of personal items found in a grave can help in the identification of the period of interment and sex of the individual, and also provide clues to socioeconomic factors and health characteristics. To begin, popular use of decorative hair combs lasted from the early to mid 19th century until around 1920. The earliest combs were composed of tortoiseshell, horn, and metal, which were generally replaced by hard or vulcanized rubber forms in the 1850s. Hard rubber combs were apparently popular until around 1900, when other synthetic materials, such as celluloid and bakelite, were produced. Thus, the presence of a decorative comb suggests an interment pre-dating 1920, while the material used for the comb can further identify the period of interment. In addition, decorative combs were generally a feminine accessory and will most likely indicate a female grave. The presence of jewelry in a grave can also aid in the identification of sex. The type of jewelry and, more specifically, the inferred or known cost of an item, can be suggestive of socioeconomic factors. Neither the ring nor the necklace shown here (slide 17) were of expensive manufacture. The ring was brass or copper and plated in gold, while the necklace consisted of clear glass beads. It should be noted, however, that the family of the deceased would often retain more expensive items, such as jewelry made of precious metals or decorated with precious stones, after death as heirlooms to be passed on. Prosthetic limbs and eyes and dental appliances can provide information on the general health of a population and also provide information on access to formal health care. The presence of prosthetics in graves show that at least some of the individuals interred in a cemetery had access to specialists who could fit them with such items. Prosthetics were no doubt costly, which may give an indication of economic factors. Dental appliances, particularly full dentures, are suggestive of poor dental hygiene, while prosthetic noses are suggestive of debilitating diseases, such as leprosy and syphilis. The presence of prosthetic limbs and eyes could be attributed to trauma.

(slide 18) Grave inclusions consist of any item placed with the deceased by family or friends. These could consist of decorative flowers placed in the grave, items used by the deceased in everyday life, such as a favorite smoking pipe or toy, or materials used in his or her profession, such as combs or brushes for barbers. It was also not uncommon during the first half of the 20th century for photos to be placed in the coffin with the deceased. Grave inclusions could also consist of ceramic dishes. Placement of plates and saucers in Appalachian interments can be attributed to the folk belief that placing a dish of salt on the stomach of the deceased would pull fluids from the body, delaying the imminent bloating of the corpse associated with decomposition (Crissman 1994). It was also believed that this act would drive evil spirits away (Parler 1962, cited in Rose 1985). Another tradition is that the last dish used in life by the deceased should be included in the interment to keep him or her from returning (Parsons 1923, cited in Rose 1985). Coins are another item often included in historic interments. Coins found in the head region, often in the orbits of the skull, were likely placed on the deceased's eyes to keep them from opening (Puckett 1926, cited in Rose 1985).

(slide 19) Rural southern cemeteries were generally arranged spatially to reflect the Christian burial tradition. Individuals were aligned with their heads to the west and feet to the east, enabling them to rise up and meet Jesus during the Second Coming as he arrived from the east (Jordan 1982). Those committing unforgivable sins, such as suicide, were often aligned north to south as punishment. Wives were placed to the left of their husbands following the Christian account of Creation (Eve created from the left rib of Adam) (Jordan 1982). Placement of the body within the coffin was typically supine (on the back) with the legs extended and arms at the sides or on the torso. Other orientations, such as prone (or lying face down), are suggestive of cultural factors, and may be attributed to a "negatively viewed" person.

Information on the mortuary aspect of graves can be obtained from grave markers, grave shaft construction, vaults, coffin shape, coffin hardware and wood, and other coffin embellishments. In general, these aspects can provide information on the date of interment, sex and age of the individual, socioeconomic factors of the populations interring their dead, and the role of consumerism. (slide 20) Grave markers may be, by far, the most telling aspect in a cemetery on the socioeconomic status of the interred population. Purchase of formal headstones and footstones would have increased overall funerary expenditure dramatically, particularly during the 19th century. Use of readily available rough fieldstones over purchase of formally crafted and inscribed gravemarkers may have been mandated by the economic status of the family. It was not until the 20th century that formal stones became more affordable and easier to access for rural populations, although economic factors were still an issue.

(slide 21) Historically, upland south grave shafts were usually excavated in two steps. This approach consisted of the excavation of a lower burial pit within the grave shaft, just large enough to accommodate the coffin (Atkinson 1987). After the coffin was lowered, it would sometimes be covered with wood planks, or "grave arches". The boards were situated over the coffin and across the dirt ledge at the base of the shaft to prevent collapse of the coffin. Vaults were first used in graves around the turn of the 20th century in a two-fold attempt to deter grave robbery and preserve the casket and its contents. They were most often made of metal, but concrete liners were also used. When a coffin was purchased, rather than made locally, it would typically be shipped in an outer box, which could also be placed in the grave, with the coffin situated within. (slide 22)

Although the terms "coffin" and "casket" are often used interchangeably, they denote two different types of burial receptacles. Coffins are generally hexagonal in shape, with the main function being encasement of the dead, while caskets are typically rectangular, and are meant primarily for presentation of the dead (Lang 1984). Caskets were first introduced in 1849 and are thought to represent the change in attitude toward a concern for the appearance and display of the deceased. The use of coffins was nearly universal among Americans by the 1790s (Larkin 1988) and, during the early part of the 19th century few pre-made coffins were available, particularly in rural areas. Instead, when an individual died, local cabinetmakers, carpenters, or family members were sought out for the duty of building the coffin (Habenstein and Lamers 1955). In mainstream America, hexagonal was the predominant shape until the late 1850s and, although use was not common during the early 20th century, hexagonal coffins did not become obsolete until the late 1920s. Hexagonal coffins most often lack exterior decoration. Rectangular coffins have been used since at least 1830, although they did not become popular until the last half of the 19th century. Caskets could be purchased pre-made and were stylistically more elaborate than the earlier hexagonal forms. The elaboration seen in rectangular coffins is generally synchronic with the "beautification of death" movement of the Victorian Period.

Mortuary hardware consists of any items attached to the coffin for construction or decoration. Two types of coffin hardware are generally recognized and include utilitarian and decorative. (slide 23) Utilitarian items, such as nails, woodscrews, hinges, and plain tacks, were common and easily accessible to rural 19th and 20th century populations. Utilitarian hardware is probably found to some extent on all wooden coffins, regardless of whether mass-produced materials are present. Unlike utilitarian hardware, which was available locally, decorative mass-produced hardware had to be special ordered. (slide 24) These items were typically ornamental and elaborately crafted, with their date of manufacture beginning in the middle of the 19th century. The earliest mass-produced hardware appeared to consist of fairly plain handles, hinges, and decorative slotted screws. Later materials, dating from the 1870s until well into the 20th century, were much more elaborate, depicting various natural themes (such as animals, leaves, and flowers). Coffin handles and other items dating from the 1910s or so were often styled in Art Deco forms, with geometric designs prevalent.

Types of mass-produced coffin hardware include handles (swing bail, short bar, and extension bar forms), thumbscrews, escutcheons, slotted screws and tacks, caplifters, viewing glass windows, and plaques. (slide 25) These items have established usage periods that can aid in the determination of period of interment for unmarked graves or to document the sequence of interments in a cemetery. The presence of mass-produced hardware in 19th century interments could be suggestive of the relative wealth of the population interring their dead. This changes, however, with the early 20th century, as industrial innovations allow for more inexpensive production of such items, and better transportation routes allow materials to reach previously inaccessible areas.

Analysis of biological, cultural, and mortuary remains from historic cemeteries can provide a variety of information regarding aspects of the lives of historic populations that would likely never be known. When viewed together, these characteristics allow for an interpretation of lifetime events and provide a demographic and sociological history of a past population.

References cited in text and slides

Bibliography of selected historic cemetery excavation publications

Atkinson, James R.
1987 The Blackburn Cemetery: An Abandoned Burial Site on the Old Natchez Trace in Maury County, Tennessee. Part 1, The Blackburn Cemetery Excavations. Southeast Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee, Florida.

Bachman, David C. and Wade P. Catts
1990 Final Archaeological Investigations of the Lafferty Lane Cemetery 7K-D-11, State Route 1 Relief Corridor, Dover, Kent County, Delaware. Delaware Department of Transportation Archaeology Series No. 80. Dover, Delaware.

Bellantoni, N. F., P. S. Sledzik, and D. A. Poirier
1993 Rescue, Research and Reburial: Walton Family Cemetery, Griswold, Connecticut. Manuscript on file at Alexandria Archaeology, Alexandria, Virginia.

Blakely, Robert L. and Lane A. Beck
1982 Bioarchaeology in the Urban Context. In Archaeology of Urban America: The Search for Pattern and Process, edited by R. S. Dickens, Jr. pp. 175-208. Academic Press, New York.

Brock J. and S. J. Schwartz
1991 A Little Slice of Heaven: Investigations at Rincon Cemetery, Prado Basin, California. Historical Archaeology 25:78-90.

Bromberg, Francine. W., Steven J. Shepard, Barbara H. Magid, Pamela J. Cressey, Timothy Dennee, and Bernard K. Means
2000 "To Find Rest From All Trouble" The Archaeology of the Quaker Burying Ground Alexandria, Virginia. Alexandria Archaeology, Office of Historic Alexandria, City of Alexandria, Virginia.

Buikstra, Jane E., Jodie A. O'Gorman, and Cynthia Sutton (editors)
2000 Never Anything So Solemn: An Archaeological, Biological, and Historical Investigation of the Nineteenth-Century Grafton Cemetery. Kampsville Studies in Archeology and History No. 3. Center for American Archeology, Kampsville, Illinois.

Burnston, Sharon A.
1997 The Invisible People: The Cemetery at Catoctin Furnace. In In Remembrance: Archaeology and Death, edited by D. A. Poirier and N. F. Bellantoni, pp. 93-103. Bergin & Garvey, Westport, Connecticut.

Bybee, Alexandra D.
2003a Bioanthropological Investigations of the Burning Spring Branch Cemetery (46Ka142) in Kanawha County, West Virginia. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series.

2003b Bioanthropological Investigations of a Nineteenth Century Cemetery (15Cp61) in Campbell County, Kentucky (Item No. 6-046.00). Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 02-257.

2003c Bioarchaeological Investigations of Unmarked Graves at the Samuel Robinson and Upper Prater Cemeteries (15Pi190 and 15Pi191), Pike County, Kentucky (Item No. 12-263.00). Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 03-113.

2003d Bioanthropological Investigations of an Unmarked Cemetery at 15Mm137, Montgomery County, Kentucky. Current Research In Kentucky Archaeology. In press.

2002 Bioanthropological Investigations of the Reynolds Cemetery (46Ka349) in Kanawha County, West Virginia. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series WV01-111.

2001 Bioanthropological Investigations of the Burning Spring Branch and Reynolds Cemeteries, Kanawha County, West Virginia. West Virginia Archeologist. In press.

Bybee, Alexandra D. and Michael D. Richmond
2003 Data Recovery at a nineteenth Century Cemetery (15Mm137) in Montgomery County, Kentucky (Item No. 7-320.00). Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 02-256.

Calvert, H. C. and S. M. F. Chapman
1946 A History of the Chapman and Alexander Families. Dietz Printing Co., Richmond.

Creveling, D. K.
1987 Archaeological Investigations at Christ Church, Alexandria, Virginia. Alexandria History VII:30-37.

Crist, T. A., R. H. Pitts, A. Washburn, J. P. McCarthy, and D. G. Roberts
1997 "A Distinct Church of the Lord Jesus": the History, Archaeology and Physical Anthropology of the Tenth Street First African Baptist Church Cemetery, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. John Milner Associates, Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania.

DiBlasi, Phillip J.
1995 Search and Recovery of All Burials from the Historic Davis Cemetery (15HE750) in Henderson County, Kentucky. Manuscript on file with the Office of State Archaeology.

1993 The Archaeological Examination of a Rural Cemetery Discovered in Southern Jefferson County, Kentucky. Program for Archaeology, University of Louisville, Kentucky.

Dockall, Helen Danzeiser, Joseph F. Powell, and D. Gentry Steele
1996 Home Hereafter: An Archaeological and Bioarchaeological Analysis of an Historic African-American Cemetery (41GV125). Reports of Investigations No. 5. Center for Environmental Archaeology, Texas A & M University.

Elia, Ricardo J. and Al B. Wesolowsky (editors)
1991 Archaeological Excavations at the Uxbridge Almshouse Burial Ground in Uxbridge Massachusetts. BAR International Series 564. Archaeological and Historical Associates, Oxford, England.

Farver, Sam S.
1957 The Excavation of an Unmarked Cemetery Traditionally Linked to the Pioneer Jewish Settlement at Schaefferstown, Lebanon County, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 27(3-4):141-144.

Garrow, Patrick H., Steven A. Symes, and H. W. Case
1985 Physical Anthropology and Archaeological Investigations of the Nancy Creek Primitive Baptist Church Cemetery, Chamblee, Georgia. Garrow & Associates, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia.

Hulse, Charles A.
1990 Archaeological Investigations at the Charles Town Cemetery Site Jefferson County, West Virginia. Shepherd College Cultural Resource Management Series #9, Shepherdstown, West Virginia.

Joseph, J. W., M. B. Reed, and C. E. Cantley
1991 Agrarian Life, Romantic Death: Archeological and Historical Testing and Data Recovery for the I-85 Northern Alternative, Spartanburg County, South Carolina. 2 volumes. Technical Report No. 39. Report on file. South Carolina Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Columbia, South Carolina.

Killoran, Peter, David Pollack, and Amy Howard
2003 A Preliminary Report on the Archaeological Investigation of the Old Frankfort Cemetery. Paper presented at the Twentieth Annual Kentucky Heritage Council Archaeological Conference, March 1, 2003. Louisville, Kentucky.

Lebo, Susan A.
1988 An Archaeological and Bioarchaeological Perspective: The Tucker (41DT104) and Sinclair (41DT105) Cemeteries of Delta County, Texas. Institute of Applied Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas. Submitted to the U. S. Department of the Army, Fort Worth District, Corps of Engineers.

LeeDecker, Charles, Jonathan Bloom, Ingrid Wuebber, Marie-Lorraine Pipes, and Karen R. Rosenberg
1995 Final Archaeological Excavations at a Late eighteenth-Century Family Cemetery for the U. S. Route 113 Dualization, Milford to Georgetown, Sussex County, Delaware. Delaware Department of Transportation Archaeology Series No. 134. Louis Berger and Associates, Inc., East Orange, New Jersey.

Linebaugh, Donald W.
2003 Burying the Dead in Lincoln County: An Analysis of The Holmes-Vardeman-Stephenson Cemetery Mortuary Artifacts. Paper presented at the Twentieth Annual Kentucky Heritage Council Archaeological Conference, March 1, 2003. Louisville, Kentucky and the Fifth Annual Council for West Virginia Archeology Spring Workshop, Charleston, West Virginia.

Linebaugh, Donald W. and Shawn Phillips
2001 Exploring a Silent City: Excavation and Analysis of the Holmes-Vardeman-Stephenson Cemetery, Lincoln County, Kentucky. Paper presented at the Eighteenth Annual Kentucky Heritage Council Archaeological Conference, March 4, 2001.

Little, Barbara J., Kim M. Lanphear, and Douglas W. Owsley
1992 Mortuary Display and Status in a Nineteenth-Century Anglo-American Cemetery in Manassas, Virginia. American Antiquity 57(3):397-418.

Matternes, Hugh B.
1998 Who Are the People in Cool Branch Cemetery (40HK9)? A Bioanthropological Case Study. Tennessee Anthropologist 23(1-2):73-85.

Meer, R. M.
1990 Report of Investigation of Skeletal Remains Recovered from the Stoltz Site (B0Z0048/198807), Ozaukee County, Wisconsin. State Historical Society of Wisconsin, Burial Site Preservation Program.

Nawrocki, Stephen P., Kristen Baumann, Carrie Weiler, John Schultz, Matthew Williamson, Christopher Schmidt, Lilith Judd, and Heather Thew
1998 Analysis of Human Skeletal Remains from the Historic EuroAmerican Rhoads Cemetery (12-Ma-777), Indianapolis, Marion County, Indiana. University of Indianapolis Archeology & Forensics Laboratory Special Report No. 2.

Nawrocki, Stephen P., Christopher W. Schmidt, and Matthew A. Williamson
1996 Collection and Excavation of Human Remains from a Disturbed Historic Cemetery near Princeton, Gibson County, Indiana (96-0034 / UI-18-96). University of Indianapolis Archeology & Forensics Laboratory Report of Investigations No. 46.

Parrington, Michael
1987 Cemetery Archaeology in the Urban Environment: A Case Study from Philadelphia. In Living Cities: Current Research in Urban Archaeology, edited by E. Staski, pp. 56-64. Society for Historical Archaeology Special Publications Series 5.

Raemsch, Carol A. and J. W. Bouchard
2000 The Henry Lehman Family Cemetery: A Unique Contribution to Nineteenth-Century Domestic Archaeology. In Nineteenth- and Early Twentieth Century Domestic Site Archaeology in New York State, pp. 95-124. Edited by John P. Hart and Charles L. Fisher. New York State Museum Bulletin 495.

Rose, Jerome C. (editor)
1985 Gone to a Better Land: A Biohistory of a Rural Black Cemetery in the Post-Reconstruction South. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series Number 25. Fayetteville.

Ross-Stallings, Nancy
1995 Bioanthropological Analysis of the Historic Interments in 15MC24, Metcalfe County, Kentucky. In A National Register Evaluation of Twelve Sites in Adair, Cumberland and Metcalfe Counties, Kentucky, edited by M. A. Hughes. Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Contract Publication Series 95-69, Lexington, Kentucky.

Shogren, Michael, Kenneth Turner, Jodie C. Perroni (editors)
1989 Elko Switch Cemetery: An Archaeological Perspective, pp. 191-228. Alabama Museum of Natural History, Division of Archaeology Report on Investigations No. 58, Birmingham.

Slaughter, Bernard W.
2001 Old Bones Beneath the Earth Do Lie: Archeological Excavations at the Facility Cemetery (18CR239), near Sykesville, Carroll County, Maryland. Maryland Archeology 37(1):18-34.

Swauger, James L.
1959 An American Burial Technique of the Early nineteenth Century. Pennsylvania Archaeologist 29(1):38-39.

Taylor, Anna J., Anne A. Fox, and I. Waynne Cox
1986 Archaeological Investigations at Morgan Chapel Cemetery in Bastrop, Texas. Archaeological Survey Report 146. Center for Archaeological Research, The University of Texas at San Antonio.

Thomas, Ronald A., Betty C. Zebooker, Christopher M. Hazel, and David L. Weinberg
2000 Archaeological Investigations at the Mother UAME Church Cemetery (7NC-E-132), Wilmington, Delaware. MAAR Associates, Inc., Newark, Delaware.

Trinkley, Michael and Debi Hacker-Norton
1984 Analysis of Coffin Hardware from 38CH778, Charleston County, South Carolina. Research Series No. 3. Chicora Foundation, Columbia, South Carolina.

Winchell, Frank, Jerome C. Rose, and Randall W. Moir
1992 Bioanthropological Investigation of Nineteenth Century Burials at Site 41DT105. Archaeology Research Program, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.

Woodall, J. Ned, Joan K. Pitts, and David S. Weaver
1983 Excavation and Analysis of the Vawter-Swaim Cemetery, 31FY714, Forsyth County, North Carolina. Wake Forest University. Submitted to Stonewood Corporation.

Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc.: Consulting Services for the Study of Earth and Man

Bioanthropological Investigations of Historic Cemeteries: What Can We Learn From Biological, Cultural, and Mortuary Remains?

References cited in text and slides

Bibliography of selected historic cemetery excavation publications

Bioanthropological Investigations of Historic Cemeteries:
What Can We Learn From Biological, Cultural, and Mortuary Remains?