HUMAN SKELETAL REMAINS OF THE ANCIENT MAYA IN THE ...

28responsible. A precise methodology was developed through an analysis of one of thesmaller cave deposits. Two estimates of the minimum number of individuals (MNI)were conducted for this particular cave. These MNI estimates were calculated accordingto the basic levels of investigation and documentation utilized in each cave. Before Idiscuss the specific details of my methods, it would be beneficial to explore the generalconcept behind the estimation of the minimum number of individuals.Methods – NISPs and MNIsThe identified specimen, i.e. a tooth, bone fragment, etc., represents the basiccounting unit used in the quantification of the relative abundance of skeletal elements inan assemblage, faunal or human (Grayson 1984:17). In terms of faunal remains, thenumber of identified specimens (NISP) of a particular assemblage corresponds to therelative abundance of a particular species present. For example, 50 right and 25 left deerfemora may represent a maximum estimate of 75 animals. This technique of quantifyingthe abundance of a particular skeletal assemblage has undergone scrupulous criticismover the years (see Casteel 1977, Klein and Cruz-Uribe 1984, Plug and Plug 1990).Despite the inherent problems of this method, the information that can be gleaned fromthe estimation of NISPs is imperative in the calculation and interpretation of relativeskeletal element frequencies and minimum number of individuals (MNI).The minimum number of individuals, or MNI, is an estimate of the smallestnumber of individuals that could account for a given skeletal sample. For example, fourleft humeri and two right humeri would render an MNI of four individuals, whereas anestimate based on the number of identified specimens would render a figure of six. One