A foot deformity from a Romano‐British cemetery at Gloucester, England, and the current evidence for talipes in palaeopathology

Abstract

A male skeleton from the Romano-British site at Kingsholm, Gloucester, is described with abnormalities in the humerus, femur, tibia, fibula and foot. Computed tomography of the femora to enable cross-sectional analysis suggested altered normal gait to compensate for the deformity. Differential diagnoses are considered and a diagnosis of clubfoot deformity is suggested. Palaeopathological evidence for clubfoot is rare in the literature but the cases reported to date are reviewed.

The changing shape of palaeopathology: The contribution of skeletal shape analyses to investigations of pathological conditions

“…Roberts et al (2004) used CT scans to calculate cross‐sectional areas and second moments of area in the femora of a Romano‐British individual with a type of clubfoot deformity (also re‐investigated and re‐interpreted by Castells‐Navaro et al (2017), referencing, but without the direct inclusion of shape metrics). Regardless of the specific pathological diagnosis, what is interesting in this case are the functional interpretations drawn by Roberts et al (2004) based on the geometric properties of the femora and their asymmetries, and various morphological observations made of the joints and other long bones (e.g., bowing); namely, they suggested that it was most likely that “…the clubfoot initiated the changes in the rest of the left side bones of this individual due to changes in force transmission through the limbs” (Roberts et al, 2004, p. 401). While the majority of their argument is focused on the skeletal description and the reconstruction of the individual's activity, this conclusion provided insight into the order of events affecting the individual.…”

“…On top of illustrating the growth of interest in shape analyses in palaeopathology, our meta‐analysis also revealed key trends that summarize how shape analyses have so far been used in palaeopathology. Overall, we identified four such themes: Describe pathological conditions and support/refute diagnoses (e.g., Berezina & Buzhilova, 2021; Berner et al, 2021; Colombo et al, 2018; Darton et al, 2015; DeSilva & Papakyrikos, 2011; Gunz et al, 2004; Hershkovitz et al, 1997; Milella et al, 2015; Rmoutilová et al, 2020; Slon et al, 2013; Thompson, 2014; Trinkaus, 2018; Vairamuthu & Pfeiffer, 2018; Viciano et al, 2017; Zhao et al, 2020) Understand how specific traits and shape characteristics predispose individuals to pathological conditions (e.g., Bédécarrats et al, 2021; Calce et al, 2018; Mansukoski & Sparacello, 2018; Mays, 2006; Plomp et al, 2012; Plomp et al, 2019; Plomp et al, 2020; Plomp, Viðarsdóttir, Weston, et al, 2015; Shepstone, 2001; Shepstone et al, 1999; Ward et al, 2010; Weiss, 2005) Identify and interpret adaptations and alterations in functional anatomy in response to pathological conditions (e.g., Berner et al, 2021; Churchill & Formicola, 1997; Gilmour et al, 2019; Lazenby & Pfeiffer, 1993; Licata et al, 2019; Micarelli et al, 2018; Roberts et al, 2004; Sparacello et al, 2016; Thompson, 2014; Trinkaus, 2018; Viciano et al, 2017; Viva et al, 2021; Zhao et al, 2020) Provide insight into aspects of physical and social experience, care practices, therapeutic interventions, and social organization (e.g., Bédécarrats et al, 2021; Chevalier, 2019; Cowgill et al, 2015; Formicola & Buzhilova, 2004; Gilmour et al, …”

“…In these types of studies, authors typically used skeletal geometries to reflect bone loss and shape changes resulting from unloading, continued or resumed loading, and/or overloading associated with trauma and infectious disease. Within this theme, these studies may be roughly divided into three broad groups: those who found impaired function (Nystrom & Buikstra, 2005; Schlecht et al, 2012), those who identified altered or compensatory loading environments (Chevalier, 2019; Holt et al, 2002; Roberts et al, 2004), and those who found no shape differences linked with the pathological condition (Calce et al, 2018; Gilmour et al, 2019). A fourth, and quite different group, is characterized by studies that examine the functional implications of cultural modification (Zhao et al, 2020).…”

“…Understand how specific traits and shape characteristics predispose individuals to pathological conditions (e.g., Bédécarrats et al, 2021;Calce et al, 2018;Mansukoski & Sparacello, 2018;Mays, 2006;Plomp et al, 2012;Plomp et al, 2019;Plomp et al, 2020;Plomp, Viðarsd ottir, Weston, et al, 2015;Shepstone, 2001;Shepstone et al, 1999;Ward et al, 2010;Weiss, 2005) 3. Identify and interpret adaptations and alterations in functional anatomy in response to pathological conditions (e.g., Berner et al, 2021;Churchill & Formicola, 1997;Gilmour et al, 2019;Lazenby & Pfeiffer, 1993;Licata et al, 2019;Micarelli et al, 2018;Roberts et al, 2004;Sparacello et al, 2016;Thompson, 2014;Trinkaus, 2018;Viciano et al, 2017;Viva et al, 2021;Zhao et al, 2020) 4. Provide insight into aspects of physical and social experience, care practices, therapeutic interventions, and social organization (e.g., Bédécarrats et al, 2021;Chevalier, 2019;Cowgill et al, 2015;Formicola & Buzhilova, 2004;Gilmour et al, 2019;Lazenby & Pfeiffer, 1993;Licata et al, 2019;Mansukoski & Sparacello, 2018;Martin et al, 1987;Micarelli et al, 2018;Trinkaus et al, 2001;Vairamuthu & Pfeiffer, 2018;…”

Klippel‐Feil syndrome in an Early Hungarian Period juvenile skeleton from Austria

“…Documenting rarely described osteopathologies observed in single cases can provide helpful information for population-based studies (Roberts et al, 2004). This paper presents the various pathological alterations found in a single juvenile skeleton from Gnadendorf, Lower Austria.…”