ABSTRACT
Estimating the age of skeletal remains introduces several theoretical and practical problems: subadult versus adult age estimation; chronological versus physiological age; statistical analysis of age-related changes in the skeleton; and combining information from multiple age indicators. Subadult age estimation is inextricably linked to the study of growth; thus research on the subject can be found in both the anthropological and clinical literature. In 1977 Buikstra coined the term bioarchaeology, introducing a holistic approach to the study of past populations. Three themes linked to the comprehensive approach of bioarchaeology began to emerge in the literature of age estimation: testing/triangulating data; phase versus component analysis of age criteria; and population variation. Although age estimates are ultimately put to different purposes in paleodemography than in forensic anthropology, and the level of analysis that is, population versus individual often differs, it is necessary to share the goals of increased accuracy, reliability, and reduced bias in skeletal age assessment.
