International journal of paleopathology · 2025
Disability in medieval Poulton (Cheshire): A case of hand amputation.
Историческая статьяСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Valoriani Satu, King Megan, Cootes Kevin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Amputations are rarely identified in the British archaeological record from the Middle Ages, with survival following hand removal particularly uncommon. This study presents a case of a healed left-hand amputation from the medieval cemetery at Poulton (Cheshire).
MATERIALS: The study focuses on Skeleton 861, recovered from the Poulton Chapel burial ground, part of a broader assemblage of over 800 individuals dated to the 13th-16th centuries CE.
METHODS: Standard osteological techniques were used to establish the biological profile, while radiographic imaging and macroscopic analysis assessed healing and pathological conditions. Directional asymmetry was also calculated.
RESULTS: The left hand was absent, with the distal radius and ulna showing remodelling, marginal osteophyte growth, and a healed amputation surface. No cut marks or skeletal atrophy were observed. Directional asymmetry and robust entheses suggest continued use of the limb post-amputation. Differential diagnoses were excluded on morphological and contextual grounds.
CONCLUSIONS: Skeleton 861 demonstrates long-term survival and functional adaptation following amputation. The evidence supports loss of the hand and recovery within a rural medieval community.
SIGNIFICANCE: This case contributes to the small body of evidence for medieval amputations in Britain, providing an example of survival and long-term adaptation to severe trauma and the loss of an upper limb within a premodern agrarian community.
LIMITATIONS: The cause of amputation could not be determined, and absence of prosthetic evidence limits interpretation of post-amputation adaptations.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future work could compare similar cases across Britain to evaluate regional variation in care practices and examine potential use of prostheses or occupational adaptations.
MATERIALS: The study focuses on Skeleton 861, recovered from the Poulton Chapel burial ground, part of a broader assemblage of over 800 individuals dated to the 13th-16th centuries CE.
METHODS: Standard osteological techniques were used to establish the biological profile, while radiographic imaging and macroscopic analysis assessed healing and pathological conditions. Directional asymmetry was also calculated.
RESULTS: The left hand was absent, with the distal radius and ulna showing remodelling, marginal osteophyte growth, and a healed amputation surface. No cut marks or skeletal atrophy were observed. Directional asymmetry and robust entheses suggest continued use of the limb post-amputation. Differential diagnoses were excluded on morphological and contextual grounds.
CONCLUSIONS: Skeleton 861 demonstrates long-term survival and functional adaptation following amputation. The evidence supports loss of the hand and recovery within a rural medieval community.
SIGNIFICANCE: This case contributes to the small body of evidence for medieval amputations in Britain, providing an example of survival and long-term adaptation to severe trauma and the loss of an upper limb within a premodern agrarian community.
LIMITATIONS: The cause of amputation could not be determined, and absence of prosthetic evidence limits interpretation of post-amputation adaptations.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Future work could compare similar cases across Britain to evaluate regional variation in care practices and examine potential use of prostheses or occupational adaptations.