Cited by 113Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesPaleopathology and ancient diseasesAncient Egypt and Archaeology

Stature estimation in Ancient Egyptians: a new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature

Raxter, Michelle H., Ruff, Christopher B., Azab, Ayman, Erfan, Moushira, Soliman, Muhammad, El‐Sawaf, Aly·2008·American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Abstract

Trotter and Gleser's (Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 10 (1952) 469-514; Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 16 (1958) 79-123) long bone formulae for US Blacks or derivations thereof (Robins and Shute: Hum Evol 1 (1986) 313-324) have been previously used to estimate the stature of ancient Egyptians. However, limb length to stature proportions differ between human populations; consequently, the most accurate mathematical stature estimates will be obtained when the population being examined is as similar as possible in proportions to the population used to create the equations. The purpose of this study was to create new stature regression formulae based on direct reconstructions of stature in ancient Egyptians and assess their accuracy in comparison to other stature estimation methods. We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites. Living stature estimates were derived using a revised Fully anatomical method (Raxter et al.: Am J Phys Anthropol 130 (2006) 374-384). Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical. The newly generated Egyptian-based stature regression formulae have standard errors of estimate of 1.9-4.2 cm. All mean directional differences are less than 0.4% compared to anatomically estimated stature, while results using previous formulae are more variable, with mean directional biases varying between 0.2% and 1.1%, tibial and radial estimates being the most biased. There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formulae may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ajpa.20790

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Raxter, M. H., Ruff, C. B., Azab, A., Erfan, M., Soliman, M., & El‐Sawaf, A.
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • National Research Centre (EG)
Corresponding author
Raxter, Michelle H.
Venue
American Journal of Physical Anthropology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-02-06
Volume
136
Issue
2
Pages
147-155
ISSN
  • 0002-9483 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-8644
OpenAlex
W2054452828
Cited by
113
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
55.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Physical Anthropology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Paleopathology and ancient diseases
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
Keywords
stature estimation, Ancient Egyptian
MeSH terms
Anthropology, Physical, Anthropometry, Body Height, Bone and Bones, Egypt, Female, Humans, Male, Museums, Regression Analysis, Skeleton, Black People, White People, Body Size

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review