“Brothers in arms”: Activity‐related skeletal changes observed on the humerus of individuals buried with and without weapons from the 10th‐century CE Carpathian Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Investigation of warfare‐related lifestyle based on the activity‐induced skeletal changes is of great interest for bioarchaeologists. Numerous studies have described various skeletal traces connected to the regular practice of different types of weapons. However, methodological problems, such as the multifactorial aetiology of these presumed activity‐related skeletal changes, make it difficult to evaluate which changes are reliable in the identification and characterisation of a given class of individuals in a population. This paper aims to find significant morphological and metric differences on the humerus between individuals buried with and without weapons. We focused on the Hungarian Conquest period (10th‐century CE) collection of Sárrétudvari‐Hízóföld, characterised by a high number of burials associated with weapons and, especially, archery‐related equipment. Only adult males were selected for this study to decrease the influence of nonmechanical factors, such as age and sex. We analysed the bones for the presence of entheseal changes, joint changes, morphological variants, and traumas. The selection of these markers relied on anatomical and sport traumatological data. We also calculated indices of robusticity and shape based on the external measurements of the humerus. The values were compared according to the presence (armed group) or absence (unarmed group) of weapon deposits in the graves. An independent group of nonwarriors from the documented Luís Lopes Skeletal Collection (Lisbon) was also used for comparison. In general, the armed group exhibited higher rates of changes, and statistical tests revealed significant intergroup differences concerning certain entheseal changes and indices of robusticity and shape. Although the multifactorial aetiology of skeletal changes highly limits the possible interpretations, our results suggest that a set of morphological and metric features on the humerus is indicative of the practice of activities including archery and other fighting techniques. We assess that the further analysis of activity‐related changes of the upper limb bones will contribute to the recognition of the presence of warriors at a populational level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".