How can you tell the ethnicity of a skeleton by its bones?

Question

I mean how can you tell the bones between some one in Iran and someone else In canada. How would you know they're from these countries or from certain parts of the world anyway?

Answer 1

You can't with any surity.

There are some traits that go along with various races, but
since races aren't pure, you won't know anything for sure.

You can reasonably reliably tell sex unless the size of
the gap left between the hips is in a "gray area" - and there
are certain bones that generally form or change configuration
at approximately the same time as people mature so you
can sometimes tell age - but people don't mature at the same
rate, and dietary deficiencies may throw that off.

Racial typing is nowhere near as accurate as your average
CSI or Bones episode would have you believe.

Things get easier if you cut open one of your bones and
maybe find some DNA, but until then you are measuring
bones against general ranges.

Let me give you an example: How many 6'7" tall women do
you know? If you were faced with a 6'7" skeleton with a
very small gap between the hips and a broad flat brow
you might assume that it was a from a African male.

And you might be wrong, since the case I'm thinking of
is Nordic and female (well, OK, she's also still alive, but
that's another issue!)

So - its done by ranges and probabilities (statistics).
It is, to say the least, an inexact science.

Answer 2

It isn't totally accurate, but there are both long bone and skull measurements to differentiate between different "racial" groups and the sexes. As long as you have the pelvic bones, its easy to tell if it is a male or female. In terms of race, there are some characteristic skull differences, such as, if you consider a caucasian skull the midpoint, then an asian skull has a flatter nose bridge whereas one of african origin has more of a protruding jaw (prognathism). You would likely not be able to tell and Iranian from an Indian for example, and while a Canadian and Iranian skeleton would be very similar (both are caucasians, after all), peoples of Asia, India, somewhat in the Middle East are smaller than their western counterparts. Thats why male partial skeletons from those areas have been mistaken for females before. What is really important in any skeleton is its context, meaning where it was found, the objects it was found with, etc. Anthropologists rely heavily on those things to aid in identification, as do forensic scientists.

Answer 3

Mostly, if not entirely, from the cranium and mandible. As was mentioned, those of Asian descent have distinguishing teeth features. The underside of the incisors are "shovel-shaped." I have a bio anth lab book that has the skulls of various ethnic groups placed side-by-side, and at first they all pretty much look the same. But then you begin to notice the size of the nasal cavaties, the overal robusticity or gracility (is that a word?) of the zygomatic arches and brow ridges. You'll very rarely hear that this skeleton IS of African descent or this one IS Native American. Because once the skin is gone, well it's kinda hard to tell with any degree of certainty.

Answer 4

There is height and build, which are statistical indicators, but the largest indicator is the skull. It may actually be easier in some cases to distinguish between certain subraces than between macroraces.

As was mentioned by other respondents, asians have a unique shape of incisor teeth, but that is just one indicator. Whole skull dimensions (height, width, and depth) is a useful indicator. Asians and australoids typically have skulls that have greater width and lower depth. There is also nasal aperture width, in which those of negroids and australoids are wider. There is also the nose bridge, in which some middle easterners and some europeans have a very defined nose bridge, whereas many asians and some amerindians have a very diminished nose bridge. Those are many of the traits that distinguish between the macroraces. There are many other traits that distinguish between subraces.

Answer 5

Well, since there were no long distance travel at that time in which you are refering to, the location of the bone would probably reveal its identity. Also, scientists also determine by ize of the bone as in if the human is a tall one or not, the shape as in if the bone has acquired any special adaptation due to its ethnicity, and any other artifacts around the bone.

Answer 6

By where they're buried usually. But you can usually tell if the person was right-handed or not by the length of the arms, the race (Mongol, African, Caucasion) from general nose width and cheek bone hight, male or female by pelvis width, if female, did she give birth, cause of death, general age by the binding of skullplates, and more from a full skeleton. And sometimes the skeletons, if buried by a culture, are wearing clothes, which tell so much about where and when and what general social class the person was.

Answer 7

A forensics expert would go by the location of where the skeleton was found and if it was found in dirt,then the composition of that dirt would be checked to see where that type of ground can be located. Also,a composite artist will be able to work with another expert to place clay on the skull to see what this person actually looked like. It's a lot of work,but not impossible.

Answer 8

I'm no scienctist or achaeologist but they can tell if a skeleton is of Asian origin because they have this real distinguished feature
about their teeth. Thats one way they know the American Indians are decendents of Asian People and crossed the great peninsula 10,000-20,000 years ago. There are distinguishing features between black and white people to. I don't know them but blacks tend to have more skeletal mass. I don't know about Iranian people, I guess they can always do a DNA test.

Answer 9

The shape and degree of flare in the coxa bones

Answer 10

Go to forensic science school.