See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/21326921

Can Paleopathology Provide Evidence for “Compassion”?

Article in American Journal of Physical Anthropology · April 1991

DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.1330840402 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS
169 1,575

1 author:

Katherine A. Dettwyler
University of Delaware
30 PUBLICATIONS 864 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Katherine A. Dettwyler on 31 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 84:375-384 (1991)

Can Paleopathology Provide Evidence for “Compassion”?

K.A. DETTWYLER
Department of Anthropology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
77843-4352

KEY WORDS Shanidar I, Romito 2, Windover Boy, Handicap,

Archeological inference

ABSTRACT Paleopathological analyses of skeletal remains have provided

significant information about diet and health in prehistoric populations. A
number of individuals have been recovered whose remains show evidence of
impairments that would have precluded “normal” functioning, resulting in a
disability. The most famous example is Shanidar I; more recent discoveries
include the Romito 2 dwarf from Italy and a boy with spina bifida from the
Windover site in Florida. These finds have been interpreted by some writers as
evidence for compassion and “moral decency”among the other members of the
community, who would have had to support these nonproductive individuals.
However, these interpretations are based on a number of implicit assump-
tions: about the number of nonproductive members normally present in any
population, about the abilities of disabled individuals to contribute to society,
about the treatment of disabled individuals by other members of the group,
and about the “moral rightness” of facilitating the survival of a disabled
individual under all circumstances. These assumptions are not justified by the
evidence from the archeological record or by reference to ethnographic anal-
ogy. A tendency to focus on physical traits as the sole measure of productive
ability, images of Rousseau’s “noble savage” transported to the past, and
unexamined beliefs about the disabled in modern societies have influenced
these archeological interpretations. We are not justified in drawing conclu-
sions either about the quality of life for disabled individuals in the past or
about the motives or attitudes of the rest of the community from skeletal
evidence of physical impairment.

Archeological reconstructions necessarily tions, in turn, stimulate heated debates and alter-
native scenarios-ften as narrow as those being
involve making assumptions and interpreta- attacked.
tions of the material data. From the archeo-
logical record, which includes artifacts, fea- Accepting the necessity of using one’s
tures, plant and animal remains, and human imagination in reconstructing prehistoric
skeletaUfossi1 remains, archeologists at- behavior, anthropologists have, neverthe-
tempt to reconstruct the behavior of the less, generally refrained from speculating
people responsible for the remains. Ethno- about the motives that might have prompted
graphic analogy plays a major role in this such behavior, beyond the obvious ones of
effort by helping the archeologist under- human requirements for food, shelter, and
stand the function of particular artifacts and safety. They seldom attem t to recreate
the types of activities that leave particular
patterns of remains. However, as Nelson and
K
what past populations thoug t or felt about
what they were doing, and even less often do
Jurmain (1988:460)point out: they offer value judgments about the appro-
In point of fact, behavior does not fossilize. Accord-
ingly, researchers must rely considerably upon Received March 8,1990; revision accepted September 27,1990.
their imaginations in creating scenarios of early This paper was originally presented at the 58th Annual Meet-
hominid behavioral evolution. In such an atmo- ing of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists,
sphere, biases often emerge; these biased rendi- 1989.

0 1991 WILEY-LISS,INC.
376 K.A. DETTWYLER

riateness or moral rightness of past be- Tappen and Gargett’s questioning of

Eavior. claims for Neanderthal “humanity” repre-
However, in certain situations, the nor- sent specific exam les of a much broader
mally self-imposed constraints on archeolog- f:
phenomenon. whic is not limited to the
ical interpretation have been disregarded, debate over Neanderthal’s place in human
and otherwise careful scholars have over- prehistory. In a number of cases, the recov-
stepped the boundaries of reasonable infer- ery from archeological sites of the skeletal
ence. Unfortunately, these interpretations remains of individuals with physical impair-
are often accepted uncritically by others and ments has prom ted archeolo ists to claim
are widely disseminated because they find
their way into introductory textbooks, popu-
f
that the surviva of these in8viduals pro-
vides evidence for compassion and moral
lar scientific writings, and even “prehistori- among prehistoric peoples, who
cal” novels. These views gain the status of
“accepted wisdom”within the discipline and
decencX-
would ave had to provide food, medical care
(however rudimentary), and perhaps trans-
are per etuated until someone steps in and portation for these “handica ped’ indivi-
P
critical y questions their validity.
For example, Gargett questions the gener-
duals.3 The best known examp e is Shanidar
I (a Neanderthal) from Iraq. However, more
f
ally accepted belief that Middle Paleolithic recent discoveries include Romito 2 from the
hominids (Neanderthals) intentionally bur- late Upper Paleolithic in Italy and a boy with
ied their dead (Gargett, 1989, and replies). spina bifida from the Early Archaic Win-
Using geoarcheologcal and taphonomic evi- dover site in Florida. In each of these cases,
dence, Gargett presents a serious challenge popular writers, taking the lead from schol-
to archeologists to prove that hominid activ- arly publications, have elaborated upon this
ity, rather than natural forces, led to the theme of “com assion.” For example,
internment of Neanderthal remains. Stephen Jay Gouli’s March, 1988, column in
Whether or not one agrees with Gargett’s Natural History focuses on David Frayer’s
reanalysis, he has clearly reopened an area discovery of the “Romito dwarf” and the
of inquiry that many thought was closed. implications of this discovery for the evolu-
Gargett’s analysis is part of a larger debate tionary timing of the a pearance of moral
about the nature of the transition from Mid-
dle to Upper Paleolithic hominids in the Old
decency as a distinctive uman trait.K
Why should the discovery of individuals
World. Much of the controversy stems from with “severe” physical impairments, as re-
different theoretical perspectives about the flected in skeletal and fossil evidence, invite
capabilities of Neanderthals, with different speculation about the thought patterns of
sides tryin to portray Neanderthals either
1
as essentia ly human or as little more than
“technicallyskilled chimpanzees” (Diamond,
prehistoric PO ulations
f
about the mora rightness of andpast be avior?
In this pa er, I argue that these interp-eta-
Judanents
1989:344).Gargett attempts, through metic-
ulous attention to the geoarcheology of sup-
1
tions are ased in part on notions of noble
(prehistoric) savages,” which are often ex-
posed Neanderthal burial sites, to remove plicitly advanced to counter the “older ste-
intentional burial from the repertoire of Ne- reotypes often found in the popular image of
anderthal behavior.’ In a similar vein, Tap- early prehistoric populations” (Dickel and
pen (19851, responding to claims that the Doran, 1989:332),whether in the context of
“Old Man” of La Chapelle-Aux-Saints had to championing Neanderthal humanity or not.
have his food premasticated by another I will also argue, however, that these inter-
member of the group,’ reexamined the osteo- pretations have equally strong roots in mod-
logical evidence and concluded that the “Old ern (albeit unconscious) prejudice against
Man” was perfectly capable of chewing his the disabled, by assumin that disabled indi-
own food up to the time of his death. %
viduals could not contri Ute to society and

3The World Health Organization distinguishes among impair-

‘Rowlett and Schneider i1974)provide a particularly ridiculous ment, disability, and handicap. “The World Health Organization
example of the overinterpretation of the archeological record. defines impairment as a n abnormality or loss ofany physiological
From the presence of grave goods in Neanderthal subadult or anatomical structure or function. Disability refers t o the
burials, they conclude that Neanderthal parents “loved and consequences of a n impairment, that is, any restriction or lack of
cherished their children” (1974:52). ability to perform an activity in the manner or within the range
‘Similarly, Rowlett and Schneider i1974:50) refer to La considered appropriate for nonimpaired persons. A handicap, on
Chapelle-Aux-Saints man as a “stooped, arthritic, virtually tooth- the other hand, is the social disadvantage that results from a n
less old-timer. . .(whose) ailments and age so crippled him that impairment or a disability.” (Scheer and Groce, 1988:23-24). The
he obviously had to be maintained until his death.” WHO definitions (Wood, 1980) are used throughout this article.
 COMPASSION IN THE ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD 377

that they survived only because of the “com- was “partially incapacitated by (his) inju-
passion” of nondisabled members of the pop- ries” (1983:399).
ulation. At the least, these scenarios go far In discussing how Shanidar I was treated
beyond reasonable interpretations of the ar- by the fellowmembers of the population,
cheological evidence or valid ethnographic Solecki (1971:195,196) says: “. . . although
analogy concerning the treatment of dis- he was born into a savage and brutal envi-
abled individuals in modern societies. ronment, Shanidar I man provides proof that
his people were not lacking in compas-
CASE STUDIES sion.. . , We must assume that he was ac-
I begin by exploring as case studies the cepted and supported by his people up to the
three exam les cited earlier. In each case, I day he died.” He concludes: “the very fact
fl
examine w at the discoverers and others
have said about the individuals, using their
that their lame and wounded (Shanidar Ne-
anderthals I and 11)had been cared for in the
own words whenever ossible, including the cave is excellent testimony for communal
i
physical evidence an diagnosis of the dis-
ability, the evaluation of the individual’s
living and cooperation”(Solecki, 1971:258).
Shanidar I is famous throughout the an-
productivity, and the evaluation of how thropological literature. A cursory check of
these individuals were treated. I will then introductory textbooks shows that the sur-
examine a number of implicit assumptions vival of Shanidar I is cited in the context of
that underlie these interpretations, and the “Neanderthal compassion” by Haviland
implications of these assumptions for under- (1989), Nelson and Jurmain (19881, and
standing what the lives of disabled people Relethford (1990). Shanidar I was further
may have been like in the past. immortalized by Jean Auel in her book The
Clan of the Cave Bear (1980) where he ap-
pears as the character Creb, an elder who,
Shanidar I despite his physical impairments, is highly
Shanidar I, discovered by Ral h Solecki, is valued and res ected as the repository of
commonly cited as offering the ipirst evidence esoteric knowle! ( ge and religious lore.
for compassion in the human evolutionary
record. Dating to the Middle Paleolithic, Romito 2
Shanidar I was an adult male Neanderthal The second example comes from the work
(Homo sapiens neanderthalensis), who died of David Frayer and his colleagues at the late
at an age between 30 and 45 years. Initially Upper Paleolithic cave site of Riparo del
studied by T. Dale Stewart, the Shanidar Romito in Calabria, southern Italy. Two
material was recently reevaluated by Erik skeletons were recovered from the site, an
Trinkaus. According to Trinkaus (1983:401), old female (Romito 1)and a late-adolescent
Shanidar I “suffered multiple fractures in- male (Romito 2). The physical evidence, ac-
volving the cranium, right humerus, and cording to Frayer et al. (1987:61),shows that
right fifth metatarsal; and the right knee, Romito 2 displayed “disproportionately
ankle, and first tarsometatarsal joint show short stature, extreme shortening and bow-
degenerative joint disease that was probably ing of the radius and ulna with restricted
trauma related.” elbow extension, a large rounded cranium
What did these injuries mean in terms of with marked frontal and parietal bossing, a
functional capacity? According to Solecki constricted cranial band and a depressed
(1971:192),“Shanidar I was crippled, with a nasal root.”
useless right arm.” According to Trinkaus From the combination of specific skeletal
(1983:404,409),these injuries meant “paral- abnormalities, Romito 2 has been diagnosed
ysis (of the right arm) with hypotrophyl as having acromesomelic dysplasia, a condi-
atro hy . . ,” and “probably. . . blindness in tion caused by homozygosity for an autoso-
P
the eft eye.”
Solecki (1971:196) concludes that Shani-
ma1recessive allele. This condition is charac-
terized by severe growth deficiency,
dar I “was at a distinct disadvantage in an resulting in dwarfism and marked bowing of
environment where even men in the best of the forearm bones, with consequent re-
condition had a hard time. He could barely stricted extension of the elbow. Romito 2’s
a
fora e and fend for himself. . . .”Accordingto
Trin aus (1983:401),Shanidar I was “one of
the most severely traumatized Pleistocene
stature is estimated to have been only be-
tween 1.0 and 1.3 m (Frayer et al., 1987:61).
In addition t o being short, “the individual
hominids for whom we have evidence”and he could not have extended his elbow fully, but
378 K.A. DETTWYLER

rather was capable of only a 130”extension” ance of the dwarf lasted only so long as she
(Frayer et al., 1987:61). According to Frayer lived.” The author of the National Geo-
et al. (1987:60), “ ersons with acromeso- graphic article, John Putnam (1988:452) re-
melic dys lasia dsiayly have normal intelli- flects that “I sat in silence a moment, a vision
ence anIp are free of serious medical prob- forming in my mind of Romito’s terrifying
kms.9’
In evaluating Romito 2’s level of productiv-
ity, Frayer et al. (1987:61) conclude: “this
daK’
lastStep en Jay Gould’s comments on the dis-
covery of the Romito dwarf go far beyond the
problem must have been a serious handicap interpretations of Frayer et al. In his March,
in the Palaeolithic, given the demands of 1988, column, Gould (1988:16) writes: “we
subsistence in a rigorous environment and of yearn t o know how and when those distinc-
a nomadic life. . . the reduced stature and tively human traits of cognitive ability and
lack of complete forearm extension would moral decency entered our history.” Gould
have greatly limited this individual’s ability quotes Alexander Marshack: “Art and sym-
to participate effectively in hunting. . . and bol form the only bod of materials in which
even impinged on the ability of the individ-
ual t o keep up with the group’s periodic
i
the full range of hig er cortical function is
evident.” Gould claims, “to art and symbol,
movements . . . yet, despite these handicaps, however, we should add a third category, for
the dwarf survived to about 17 years of age.” our usual definition of human worthiness
Drawing conclusions (from the physical evi- includes kindness as well as cognition.
dence for Romito 2’s impairments) about his What, then, can we learn of compassion from
treatment by other members of his society, a study of bones and artifacts?” After a brief
Frayer et al. (1987:60-61) state: “. . . this description of the Romito 2 find, Gould
skeleton provides evidence of tolerance and (1988:18) comments: “other Paleolithic skel-
care for a severly deformed individual in the etons show evidence of disability after injury
Palaeolithic . . . unlike other patholo ‘cal or of decrepitude in old age. But the Romito
f
conditions found in fossil hominids, w ere
initially healthy individuals suffered dis-
dwarf offers our oldest evidence for the nur-
turing and protection-presumably at some
eases resulting from trauma or aging, expense to the group-of a handicapped in-
Romito 2 was profoundly different through- dividual who was profoundly different from
out his life. Sometime after birth, but cer- his eers and physically disadvantaged from
tainly by late childhood,the individual must birtp1. . . If we consider care of the handi-
have been recognized as being of signifi- capped ( articularly at some cost to caretak-
cantly different stature from his peers. De- K
ers) as a ey attribute of humanity, then the
Romito people surely practiced compassion
spite this, he must have been supported by
members of his social group.” at this level.”
Romito 2 was buried in circumstances sug- Windover
gesting that he was a high-status individual.
The authors conclude: “Romito 2 received The third example comes from the Early
such treatment which may also attest to his Archaic site of Windover in Florida, exca-
acce tance by the group despite his severe vated by D.N. Dickel, G.H. Doran, and col-
hanlicaps and limited ability to contribute leagues from Florida State University. From
to subsistence and other economic activities” a cemeter dating to approximately 7,500
(Frayer et al., 1987:62). 5;
BP, they ave recovered the remains of a
This initial evaluation of the attitude of teena e bo with numerous skeletal lesions.
the group towards Romito 2 was tem ered Dickey a n 8 Doran (1989:325) describe the
somewhat in later comments by 8avid physical evidence as follows: “multiple pa-
Frayer. In a National Geo raphic article, thologies related to spina bifida aperta of the
B
Frayer says that the surviva of the Romito 2 neural arch at the L3-S2 level of the
spine . . . in addition to spina bifida, the lum-
dwarf “shows that Palaeolithic people toler-
ated individuals of abnormal size and pro- bar region is scoliotic from malformation of
portion, He was much shorter than his peers, zygapoph ses. The defect is accompanied by
could not have been a good hunter. He must
have been sup orted by the group from the
P
severe in ection of the right tibia and fibula,
and disuse atrophy of the long bones.”
time of his girth.” (Putnam, 1988:452) Most of this individual’s lesions are attrib-
S eaking of his burial with Romito 1, the uted either directly or indirectly to spina
P
o der female, Frayer suggests that she is the
dwarf‘s mother, and says “perhaps the toler-
bifida. Spina bifida is a congenital condition
in which the neural arches of the spine fail to
 COMPASSION IN THE ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD 379
form properly or to fuse, allowing the spinal years ago”(“TheInfinite Voyage: The Search
cord to protrude beyond the bony protection for Ancient Americans,” 1988, WQED Pitts-
of the vertebra. Spina bifida can vary from burgh and the National Academy of Sci-
being undetectable (that is, symptomless) to ences).
cases in which the spinal cord is exposed to In a phone interview, Doran was careful
the outside and suffers serious injury during not to make any claims about what the other
and after birth, resulting in complete paral- people of Windover thought or felt about the
ysis below the level of the exposure. Accord- boy with spina bifida. However, the fact that
ing to Dickel and Doran (1989) in the case of he was “maintained at some expense to the
the Windover boy, sensory deprivation community implies to Doran that the com-
caused by the spina bifida led to lesions and munity could afford to provide food for an
infections in the right tibia and fibula, esti- unproductive member of the group. Doran
mated t o have been of at least 2 year’s dura- believes that the boy’s survival su ports an
tion at the time of death.
Dickel and Doran (1989:325) describe the
Y
interpretation that the population ived in a
relatively rich environment. The narrator of
boy as “severely handicapped” and conclude the documentary, however, has concluded
that “an infectious lesion of this magnitude from the Windover find that it constitutes
surely limited or ended independent locomo- evidence for “compassion”among prehistoric
tion” (Dickel and Doran, 1989:331). Al- peoples.
though the authors do not directly claim that
the boy could not have contributed to his own ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING INFERENCES
support, they strongly imply it in their con- OF “COMPASSION
clusions about how the boy was treated. For These three cases reveal a variety of inter-
example, they state: pretations and inferences from skeletal evi-
dence of disease or injury, on the one hand, to
The study of paleopathology can indicate a society’s the feelings, thoughts, and motivations of
ability to support economically non-contributing
members, thus aiding an understanding of adaptive the other members of the group, on the other.
success. The chronic nature of the neural tube de- In each case, the statements of anthropolo-
fect and infectious processes helps provide insight gists have been used to justify claims in the
on the high level of extended care and attention
provided a severely handicapped individual 7,500 popular media that the survival of disabled
years ago. Mobility impairment would be especially individuals in the past provides evidence for

tion, and the need for intensive care must have

been compounded by the increasingly severe
r
difficult to support with an adaptation based on the existence of “com assion” and “moral
seasonal rounds and dispersed subsistence exploita- decency”in these popu ations.
I maintain that, far from being reasonable
chronic infection. Despite older stereotypes often interpretations of the skeletaYfossi1 record,
found in the popular image of early prehistoric pop- these conclusions clearly overstep the limits
ulations, under some conditions life 7,500 years ago of inference from skeletal athology and con-
included an ability and willingness to help and sus- tribute to further misun%erstandings about
tain the chronically ill and handicapped (Dickel
and Doran, 1989:332). the cultural nature of “handicaps.”I examine
now some of the implicit assumptions that
A documentary, “The Search for Ancient underlie these (and similar) interpreta-
Americans,” released before Dickel and tions-assumptions that I argue are unwar-
Doran’s publication on the Windover boy ranted and can be refuted by ethnographic
cited above, includes the following state- analogy.
ments about the Windover boy: “Glen Doran Assumption 1: The vast majority of a pop-
and David Dickel read the remarkable story ulation’s members are productive and self-
of a young teenager. This child was totally sufficient most of the time (i.e., nonproduc-
impaired-unable to contribute to the com- tive members are rare in most populations
munity. Yet, from the skeletal evidence, it is and, therefore, represent a major strain on
clear that his people were determined to the population). In reality, every population
keep him alive. He suffered from an o ening has members who are, for varying lengths of
\
in the spine, a defect known as spina ifida. time, nonproductive and nonself-supporting.
The condition would lead to a terrible loss of Infants and children are the most obvious
bone in one leg. Through daily care his peo- group. Children do grow up; their depen-
ple would arrest further deterioration for at dence on others-their “handicap,” so to
least two years before the child would finally speak-is only temporary, and they may
die. Archeologists have found remarkable start providing some of their own food at 4 or
evidence of compassion in a society 7,000 5 years of age. However, it is reasonable to
380 K.A. DETTWYLER

assume from ethnographic analogy that (i.e., physical traits serve as the sole mea-
older members of the population provide the sure of productive ability). As Groce
majority of food, shelter, protection, and (1985:108)has pointed out, “we know rela-
other amenities for infants and children for a tively little about the disabled in our society
number of years. and virtually nothing about them in non-
In addition t o infants and children, other Western societies. Anthropologists and soci-
members of a population will be nonproduc- ologists have usually dismissed the disabled
tive to varyin degrees for varying lengths of individuals they have encountered as limi-
time during tYleir lives. In most populations nal figures, temporary anomalies in a non-
today, as well as in the past, women in the handicapped population.”
final stages of pregnancy and in the immedi- However, what we do know suggests that,
ate postpartum period are unlikely to be able as with children, disabled people in most
to provide all of their own food. Even if their societies participate as much as they can in
activities are restricted for only a few days, those activities that they are capable of per-
some mechanisms must exist for food shar- forming. Every society, regardless of its sub-
in and protection. Illness and injuries prob- sistence base, has necessary jobs that can be
7
ab y incapacitate most members of a PO ula-
tion occasionally, if temporarily, an$ for
done by people with disabilities. For exam-
ple, studies of the !Kung San of the Kalahari
those who survive t o old age, arthritis and (Lee and DeVore, 1976) and other foragers
tooth loss suggest at least a diminution of show us that, even in these groups, not ev-
self-sufficiency. eryone forages or hunts every day for their
The age at which children become net own food. Food is gathered by adult women
producers rather than net consumers varies for themselves, their spouses, and their chil-
from society to society and from child to dren. Food is hunted by adult men and
child. Incidence of illness and injuries like-
wise varies among populations. Neverthe-
less, because of the helpless state of human
a
shared amon all the members of the group.
Activities suc as the collection of firewood,
the hauling of water, and the gathering of
newborns and the extended period of human plant foods, food processing (husking nuts,
infant dependence, and because humans are grinding nuts and grains, and cooking), and
subject to a variety of illnesses and injuries, many as ects of child care can be carried out
all successful human groups have extensive
experience in taking care of nonproductive
P
by disab ed people with limited mobility (or
those who cannot extend their elbows com-
members. pletely, or who are deaf, etc.).
Assumption 2: Individuals who do not In Mali (where I conduct research on the
show skeletallfossil evidence of impairments growth and development of children), polio,
were not disabled (i.e., all the disabled indi- leprosy, river blindness, and untreated inju-
viduals who survived in the ast suffered
P
from impairments detectable rom the skel-
etal or fossil evidence). Evidence for the sur-
a
ries, as well as old a e, leave many people
physically disabled. I new one woman who
was at least 80 years old and could no longer
vival of disabled individuals is sparse in the walk or even stand up by herself, yet she sat
fossil record, which is one reason why discov- and spun cotton into thread all day, every
eries such as the Romito dwarf and the Win- day, from dawn until dusk. The sale of the
dover spina bifida boy attract such attention. cotton thread brought in substantial income
However, such individuals may have been to her extended family. In addition, she
less rare than the skeletal evidence suggests, cared for the youngest infants of the com-
since many impairments do not have skele- pound (her andchildren and great-grand-
tal manifestations (Scheer and Groce, 1988). children) wrile their mothers did other
Many cases of deafness, blindness (or even work. Likewise, in Mali, blind children are
mere nearsightedness), mental retardation, employed in the cloth section of the central
and mental illness have no physical manifes- market, usin thread to tie tiny knots in
tations, or only soft-tissue manifestations
(for example, river blindness). We have no
i
white cloth w ich is then tie-dyed and sold.
One of the most famous and sought after
basis for concluding that disabled individu- traditional healers in Mali is an elderly
als or disabling conditions were either more woman who has lost all of her fingers to
frequent or less frequent in the past than leprosy.
they are today. Disabled members of a society may con-
Assumption 3: A person with a physical tribute to it differently from nondisabled
impairment is, necessarily, nonproductive members, but they do contribute. Whether or
 COMPASSION IN THE ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD 381

not their disability becomes a “handicap” because of the fact that he was a dwarf, or he
depends on the reaction of other members of might have achieved high status in spite of
the group, not on the disability itself. It is the fact that he was a dwarf. A third alterna-
presumptuous of anthropologists to assume tive, however, is that Romito 2’s dwarfism
that they can accurately assess how produc- had no bearing on his social position in his
tive disabled individuals might have been in society.
the past, whether or not these individuals A large part of the handicaps that disabled
could have obtained all of their own food, and people face in U.S. society comes not from
whether they were able to contribute to the their disability per se but from the attitudes
community in other ways besides self-provi- and prejudices of nondisabled people. In a
sion in g. brilliant and insightful study of hereditary
It has been suggested that both Shanidar I deafness on Martha’s Vineyard, Groce (1985)
and the Romito 2 dwarf, although nonpro- shows that there can be contexts in which
ductive, were valued for their intelligence total, congenital deafness is neither a hand-
and/or suspected abilities t o communicate icap nor a stigma. Hereditary deafness was
with supernatural powers. Gould (1988:18) common on the island in the eighteenth and
says of Romito 2: “perhaps his social stand- nineteenth centuries, and most members of
ing engendered his acceptance; but then we
might also conjecture, in direct contrast, that
he achieved his high status because his dif-
the island population spoke sign lan
Deaf individuals were not considered andi-auage
cap ed, and indeed, because of the attitudes
.

ferences were valued or because his deeds or

intelligence won respect des ite his physical
K
o f t eir society, they were not handicapped.
Groce (1985:108) points out: “the Martha’s
P
handicaps.” This is certain y possible, but,
again, we have no evidence to argue for or
Vineyard experience suggests strongly that
the concept of a handicap is an arbitrary
against this speculation. social category.” For all we know, the other
The ethnographic record tells us that soci- people of Shanidar, Riparo del Romito, and
eties sometimes take extreme positions with Windover, while recognizin the disability,
respect to people who are different, including did not consider these indgividuals to be
twins or triplets, albinos, people with cleft lip handicapped.
or palate or polydactyly, or people who are One source of information about the pro-
mentally ill. In some groups, individuals ductive abilities of individuals with disabili-
with abnormalities are feared or hated, and ties consists of people who “suffer”from that
they may even be killed a t birth. One or both particular impairment. For example, how do
of a set of twins may be killed in some people with acromesomelic dwarfism func-
societies, for example. In other groups, such tion in modern society? In a study of five
individuals are revered. In Mali, twins are sisters with acromesomelic dwarfism,
considered to be specially favored by the Beighton (1974:366) remarks: “the Cape
gods, and to have ‘new” souls (rather than Town kindred are all of normal intelligence
souls inherited from deceased relatives), and their condition has caused no significant
whereas children with birth defects are often disability.” Similarly, in a study of 28 cases of
considered to be the result of adulterous acromesomelic dysplasia, Langer and Gar-
liaisons, whose very existence reflects poorly rett (1980:351) report: “intelligence is nor-
on the mother. mal. No serious medical complications have
In a discussion of Mary Douglas’ work on been reported. . . Four of the affected women
pollution, Buckley and Gottlieb (1988:27) had two, two, four, and six children, respec-
note that “anomalies are simply ‘power- tively.” In an earlier study, Langer
ful’ . . . their power being granted a negative (1967:654)described an individual with ac-
or positive valence to be determined through romesomelic dysplasia as follows: “the pa-
specific cultural analysis rather than being tient was employed as a draftsman and
attributed cross-culturally. An entity seemed of high normal intelligence. He de-
deemed polluting in one culture might, for nied any disability due to the bony deformi-
example, be deemed holy in another.” The ties. . . Motor development was normal, ex-
archeological record does not allow us to cept for failure t o walk until the age of three
distinguish between these two alternative years.” In his summary, Langer (1967:659)
possibilities. The “high-status” burial of claims that “no significant mental or physi-
Romito 2 suggests that he was highly re- cal disability has been demonstrated in any
garded by the other members of the popula- affected individual.”
tion. His high status may have been ascribed Not all individuals with this condition
382 K.A. DETTWYLER

would agree with these statements. In an- Unfortunately, the ethnographic record, in-
other case, a boy with acromesomelic dwarf- cluding that of our own society, supports the
ism is described as “a happy bright child, but more dismal view of human nature more
his height is only 109 cm. His small hands often than it supports a view of society as
and fingers with joint restriction at his compassionate. The archeolo ‘cal record,
wrists and elbows make manipulative tasks
difficult: he has difficulty in dressing and
f
however, cannot tell us whet er disabled
individuals were treated with compassion,
attending to his toilet. His parents are al- or with tolerance, or with cruelty.
ready concerned as to his future employment Assum tion 5: Providing for, caring for,
prospects.” (Hall et al., 1980:999).
Assumption 4: ‘Surviva1”ofdisabled indi-
P
and faci itating the survival of a disabled
individual is always the “Compassionate”
viduals is indicative of “compassion” (i.e., it thing to do. The interpretations of Solecki
implies that nondisabled members of the (1971) and Gould (1988) clearly imply that
group were “nice”to the disabled individual). keeping disabled individuals alive (‘ at some
This is a major and critical assumption of cost to the community”) is evidence of com-
those who would claim that the very exist- passion. For Frayer et al. (19871, it is evi-
ence of Shanidar I, Romito 2, and the Win- dence of “tolerance,” at least. For Doran
dover boy in the archeological record pro- ersonal communication), it implies that
vides evidence for “moral decency” and
compassion. There is a wide gap between
‘K
t e group could “afford nonproductive mem-
bers. If keeping disabled individuals alive is
“survival” and being treated nicely. For all evidence of compassion, kindness, and moral
we know, these individuals were ridiculed, decency, then the alternative, that is, not
teased, taunted, beaten, treated as slaves, puttin forth any effort to keep disabled
physically and emotionally abused, con-
stantly reminded of their differences and
f
indivi uals alive, is, by default, the noncom-
Bassionate choice, and evinces a lack of
shortcomings, and threatened with bodily moral decency.” I suggest that this dichot-
harm or abandonment. If the were viewed omy between survivalkompassion and
as a “burden” to the group, t ey may have
been reminded of this daily. They may have
E nonsurvivalhoncompassion is not at all
clear-cut.
had to sit by while others debated whether or The question of which is the compassion-
not to keep them alive. ate choice-to expend effort to keep nonnor-
During my field research in Mali, among ma1 individuals alive or to kill them (or, the
the disabled people in the study community, genteel version, “allow them to d i e ” t i s far
two were routinely stoned, beaten, and from being answered, even in the United
jeered at in the marketplace, to amuse the States in 1990. In many societies, infants
crowds. They were survivin -they were
both adults, whose families ad rovided
food and shelter all their lives--gut they
a who are obviously impaired or deformed at
birth may either be killed outright or “al-
lowed to die” through the deliberate with-
were hardly treated with com a ~ s i o nWe .~ holding of food, water, medical care, or all
can observe how disabled peop e are treated
today, cross-culturally, and we can stud
P three or through the more subtle form of
selective neglect. In a study of the Tarahu-
whether cultural attitudes result in a han -
icap, but we cannot know with any certainty
B mara of northern Mexico, Dorothy Mull and
Dennis Mull (1987) report several cases of
how disabled individuals were treated from infanticide involving disabled infants or tod-
archeological remains. As with compassion, dlers. Although this may seem cruel to some
cruelty and indifference leave few traces in people, the arents explained that life was
the archeologicalrecord.
I am not suggesting that we ought to take a
P
ver difficu t even for ‘normal” individuals
andr would be unbearably difficult for dis-
pessimistic view of earlier human societies abled children. For them, the “compas-
or that we know with any certainty that sionate” choice for their children was death.
disabled individuals were treated poorly. Even in the United States, some arents
P
make similar choices for their disab ed chil-
dren, for example, in aborting fetuses with
40ne of these individuals was mentally ill; the other probably abnormal karyotypes, or in the recent “Baby
had cerebral palsy and was considered “mentally retarded be-
cause he could not talk clearly. Individuals who were only physi- Doe7’case in Indiana, which focussed na-
cally handicapped were not abused in this manner, but neither
were they given any “breaks”because of their handicap. Children
tional attention on a couple’s decision to
crippled by polio crawled to school; adult women crawled on withhold food and water from their newborn
hands and knees with children tied to their backs. child who had Down Syndrome.
 COMPASSION IN THE ARCHEOLOGICAL RECORD 383
To claim that facilitating the survival of a very well. Perhaps his mother was killed
disabled person necessarily indicates com- when he died, rather than the opposite. In
passion and moral decency is t o imply that the present state of our knowledge, specula-
tion of this sort seems ointless.
the Tarahumara, and the parents of “Baby
Does,” are not “morally decent,” that they
are, perhaps, less than human, because they
B
Likewise, the Win over boy may have
been able to move around somewhat inde-
choose death for their disabled children. It pendently. In Mali, people severely crippled
suggests a certainty about the moral issues by leprosy and polio, who cannot even crawl,
in these situations, which, as “objective”sci- drag themselves around by their arms. It
entists, we are not justified in claiming. takes them longer to get anywhere, but they
These complex questions of medical ethics manage. Perhaps the Windover boy had
and quality of life have not been answered in some sort of crutch or cane, or the grou
U S . societ . Speculation about the moral devised a carrying device to pull him arounf
P
qualities o people who lived thousands of
years ago, based on paleopathological analy-
like a travois. Perhaps he stayed in a semi-
permanent cam with a few peo le-the
ses of archeological remains, is particularly
inappropriate.
R cf
young, the old, t e sick, the newly elivered
mothers. Perhaps he was the youngest child
in a large family, and his numerous older
siblings helped care for him, or erha s his
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
H P
mother resented him every day o his li e and
I return now briefly to a consideration of no one talked to him or played with him.
the three cases described above. In the case Perhaps he was the son of a respected leader,
of Shanidar I, his lack of a right arm and who made other members of the population
blindness in one eye may have meant that he care for him against their will. Perhaps they
could not be an effective hunter. He never- were glad when he died. Again, we cannot
theless might have gotten along quite well by evaluate these possibilities, because the ar-
collecting plants, processing food, cooking, cheological record does not provide answers
and performing other mundane, secular to the questions of how individuals were
functions. It is not necessary to postulate a treated or what other people thought of
shamanistic role for him (Scheer and Groce, them.
1988, also raise this point). If his “useless Why have anthropologists and popular
right arm” was congenital, he would never writers (Auel, Gould, Putnam, and the writ-
have known anything different, and, if his ers of “The Search for Ancient Americans”)
blindness occurred after adulthood, it might been so quick to accept this particular er-
also have been relatively easy for him to
adapt.
spective on paleopathological and archeo og-P
ical data and to treat it with so little critical
For Romito 2, his shortness may have been thought? Is it because they think that most
an advantage in some way we cannot per- people still operate under what Dickel and
ceive. Frayer et al.’s (1987:61)inter retation Doran (1989) call “older stereoty es often
is based partly on a 1941 study of! r warfs by
Morch, who reports that many “individuals
f
found in the popular image of ear y prehis-
toric populations,” which consider prehis-
of limited stature tire after walking even toric life to have been nasty, brutish, and
short distances.”This may be true. However, short? Are they merely trying to project a
from studies of the !Kung, we know that new image of a “noble(prehistoric) savage”to
when women walk long distances in order to counteract the older image? That may be
gather food they carry children only until their intent. Or, perhaps unconsciously,they
they are 4 years old. After that time, children have adopted another stereotype, one com-
are expected to accompany their mothers mon in modern Western society, which as-
without having to be carried. Undoubtedly, sumes that disabled people cannot contrib-
they get tired, but 5-6-year-old !Kung chil- ute to society and survive only because of the
dren are short, and they do manage to keep compassion of nondisabled members of the
up (Lee and DeVore, 1976). population. This view of disabled people,
It is also possible that the rest of the group which is pervasive in the United States,
went off and left Romito 2 behind every time often represents a significant social handi-
they moved, and he had to follow along by cap that individuals must struggle to over-
himself, hoping that he could find the grou come.
again that night. Or, perhaps he was considp- Were disabled individuals rare in prehis-
ered a sign from the gods and was treated toric populations? Were they able to contrib-
384 K.A. DETTWYLER

Ute to their own subsistence or to the grou ’s Dickel DN, and Doran GH (1989) Severe Neural Tube
survival? Were they treated nicely? By he p-
ing them to survive, did other members of
F Defect Syndrome From the Early Archaic of Florida.
Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 80:325-334.
Frayer DW, Horton WA, Macchiarelli R, and Mussi M
the PO ulation act “compassionately”?I sug-
K
gest t at these questions cannot be an-
swered in archeological contexts, certainly
(1987) Dwarfism in an adolescent from the Italian late
Upper Paleolithic. Nature 330:60-62.
Gargett RH (1989) Grave shortcomings: The evidence for
not in the absence of ethnographic informa- Neanderthal burial. Curr. Anthropol. 30(2):157-177.
tion about these same questions in modern (Comments from pp. 177-190).
Gould S J (1988) Honorable men and women. Natural
contexts. Those who interpret the fossil and Hist. 3:16-20.
archeological record, in their attempts to Groce NE (1985) Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language:
reconstruct past behavior, need to think Hereditary Deafness on Martha’s Vineyard. Cam-
about the assumptions underlying their in- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
terpretations and the implications of their Hall CM, Stoker DJ, Robinson DC, and Wilkinson DJ
(1980) Case reports: Acromesomelic dwarfism. Br. J.
statements. I urge them to be more cautious Radiol. 53:999-1003.
in their recreations of what life was like for Haviland W (1989)Anthropology. New York: Holt, Rine-
disabled individuals in the past-how they hart and Winston, Inc.
were treated, how other eo le felt about Infinite Voyage: The Search for Ancient Americans
Rl
them, and particularly w et er their sur-
viva1 tells us anything about the moral stan-
(1988) WQED Pittsburgh and the National Academy
of Sciences (videotape).
Langer LO (1967) Mesomelic dwarfism of the hypoplas-
dards of the population. tic ulna, fibula, mandible type. Radiology 89:654-660.
The paleopathological analysis of skeletal Langer LO, and Garrett RT (1980) Acromesomelic dys-
remains can tell us about physical impair- plasia. Radiology 137:349-355.
ment, from which we may be able to infer the Lee RB, and DeVore I (1976) Kalahari Hunter-Gath-
extent of an individual’s disability. Whether erers: Studies of the !Kung San and Their Neighbors.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
or not an individual was “handicapped by Mull DS, and Mull J D (1987) Infanticide Among the
his disability cannot be determined from Tarahumara of the Mexican Sierra Madre. In N
archeological evidence alone. To Gould’s Scheper-Hughes (ed.): Child Survival: Anthropologi-
(1988:18) question, “what, then, can we cal Perspectives on the Treatment and Maltreatment
of Children, pp. 113-132. Boston, MA: D. Reidel Pub-
learn of com assion from a study of bones
g,
and artifacts. The answer must be, “practi- lishing Company.
Nelson H, and Jurmain R (1988)Introduction to Physical
cally nothing.” Anthropology. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Com-
pany.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Putnam JJ (1988) The Search for Modern Humans. Nat.
Geogr. 174:438477.
Discussions with Dr. D. Bruce Dickson Relethford J (1990) The Human Species: Introduc-
and Dr. Nora Groce were very helpful in the tion to Biological Anthropology. Mountain View, CA:
Mayfield Publishing Company.
preparation of the manuscript. I also thank Rowlett RM, and Schneider MJ (1974) The material
Dr. Matt Cartmill and the anonymous re- ex ression ofNeanderthal child care. InM Richardson
viewers for their comments on earlier drafts (1e .): The Human Mirror. Baton Rouge: Louisiana
State University Press, pp. 41-58.
of this paper.
Scheer J, and Groce N (1988) Impairment as a human
constant: Cross-cultural and historical perspectives
LITERATURE CITED on variation. J . Social Issues 44:23-37.
Auel J (1980) Clan of the Cave Bear. New York: Crown Solecki RS (1971) Shanidar: The First Flower People.
Publishers, Inc. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Beighton P (1974) Autosomal recessive inheritance in Ta en NC (1985) The Dentition of the “Old Man” of La
the mesomelic dwarfism of Campailla and Martinelli. Elapelie-aux-Saints and Inferences Concerning Ne-
Clin. Genet. 5:363-367. anderthal Behavior. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 67:4%50.
Buckley T, and Gottlieb A (1988)A Critical Appraisal of Trinkaus E (1983) The Shanidar Neanderthals. New
Theories of Menstrual Symbolism. In T Buckley and A York: Academic Press.
Gottlieb (eds.):Blood Magic: TheAnthropologyofMen- Wood PHN (1980) International Classification of Im-
struation. Berkeley: University of California Press, pairments, Disabilities and Handicaps: A Manual of
pp. 3-50. Classification Relating to the Consequences of Dis-
Diamond JM (1989) Were Neanderthals the first hu- ease. Geneva: World Health organization (Cited in
mans to bury their dead? Nature 340:344. Groce, 1985, and Scheer and Groce, 1988.)

View publication stats