ABSTRACT
Since the 1970s the discipline of forensic archaeology has received recognition for its contribution to crime scene and death investigations (Morse et al., 1976). During the 1980s there was a growing emphasis on the use of proper archaeological eld methods when recovering and excavating human remains from forensic contexts (e.g., Berryman and Lahren, 1984; Morse et al., 1983; Sigler-Eisenberg, 1985; Skinner and Lazenby, 1983; Wolf, 1986). ese early proponents of forensic archaeology recognized the legal importance of both the utilization of proper collection techniques for human remains and precise documentation of associated contextual information from crime scenes. roughout the 1990s, there was an emphasis on the use of a multidisciplinary approach to detection of graves and collection of evidence, as well as continued improvement in eld methods for the recovery of remains within a forensic context (e.g., Dirkmaat and Adovasio, 1997; France et al., 1992; France et al., 1997; Hunter et al., 1994; Hunter et al., 1996; Scott and Connor, 1997). Forensic archaeology is now recognized as its own discipline within academic programs, by professional and international organizations, and by the law enforcement community (Hanson, 2008; Schultz and Dupras, 2008). However, many personnel involved with the practical aspects of recovering human remains still have not been trained in or do not universally practice proper archaeological methods to successfully conduct searches, document recovery scenes, excavate burials, and collect and transport evidence.
