Sharp force trauma to bone: The effect of soil on cut marks made using replica archaeological swords

Analysis of cut marks made by archaeological weaponry is currently very limited, due to the focus of

study being on forensic applications with modern sharp force implements, especially when it comes to analysis of any changes that can be made to the cut marks by the burial environment. The current study aims to bridge the gap between forensic and archaeological cut mark analysis and produce

criteria to not only distinguish between cut marks made by archaeological swords, but also to determine what changes can occur to the cut marks during the burial period. A handheld Dino-Lite digital microscope was employed to examine cut marks made on defleshed porcine bone. A total of 252 cut marks were made by three replica archaeological swords: a long sword (n= 91), gladius Pompeii (n= 89) and seax (n= 86). The cut marks were further broken down into their bone type: femur (n= 140) and tibia (n= 126) and location of the cut mark on the bone: proximal (n= 35), proximal shaft (n= 35), distal shaft (n= 33) and distal (n= 25). The distinction between bone type and cut mark location was provided so that the effect of bone morphology on the cut marks could also be analysed. Half of the cut mark sample were then buried for a period of 16 months, so that comparisons could be made between the same cut marks, both before and after the burial period (post burial cutmarks n= 129).

The results suggested that current criteria for distinguishing sword cut marks is not entirely applicable to cut marks that have been exposed to a burial environment. Cut mark features were seen to alter or be removed after burial, which is significant for current forensic and archaeological applications, as these changes can alter the ease of identification of the weapon which caused the cut mark. This finding indicates that further research into the effects of the burial environment upon a cut mark is still needed, to explore the numerous variables involved. Additionally, it was found that the specific location on the bone where the cut mark was made can produce varying features. If the same weapon can cause differing cut mark morphology on the same bone element, then this is important for refining the criteria for sword cut mark identification.

It is suggested from the results that, where cross profiles and cut marks are clear from damage, post excavation processes (i.e., ink and glue) and obscured views, the DinoLite microscope is an effective, accurate and low-cost alternative tool for cutmark analysis.