Early palaeopathological studies tended to focus solely on the diagnosis of cases of particular conditions as a means to extend the natural histories of them - to establish their temporal and geographic origins and spread. Often these diagnoses were made based on clinical knowledge (often by medically qualified individuals) but without a thorough description of the lesions or their full patterning in the skeleton. These diagnoses, then, tended to rest on the authority of the researcher. Today, especially given the varied backgrounds and experience of those undertaking skeletal analysis, a more descriptive approach is recommended, and accurate description And recording of lesion type and distribution is fundamental to publication. Case studies - publications based on a single or small group of individuals - are still of value, especially for rare or very well-preserved examples.
In the last 30 years or so, researchers have adopted a population approach in order to compare human groups through time and across geographic space. This interest has been given increased attention through genotyping of disease pathogens permitted by modern genetic studies - mainly of infectious diseases such as plague (Yersinia pestis), human and bovine tuberculosis (Mycobacterium tuberculosis and M. bovis, respectively), and leprosy (M. leprae). These studies permit researchers to identify mutations and to draw phylogenetic trees (ancestor-descendant relationships) based on the genetic endowment of modern pathogens, especially among the Mycobacteria, which preserve extremely well in archaeological human remains. Information derived from archaeological remains is useful in genetic studies of modern disease pathogens in order to corroborate suspected mutation events and their timing in the past.
World History
