↓ Skip to main content

Surprising origin of two carved bones donated to the Buchenwald Memorial Museum

Overview of attention for article published in Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Surprising origin of two carved bones donated to the Buchenwald Memorial Museum
Published in
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s12024-018-9968-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

René Gapert

Abstract

Unidentified bones were donated to the Buchenwald Memorial Museum in Weimar, Germany. The donor thought the bones may have belonged to internees of the concentration camp and had been decoratively carved by camp personnel. Non-destructive forensic anthropological examination was carried out on the bones to identify their possible origin. Comparative human and non-human bones samples were used to determine the provenance of the bones and the anatomical region they may have come from. Literature and internet searches were conducted to trace the origin of the carved motifs on the bones. The bones were determined to belong to the lower limb region of bovids. The carvings were found to correspond with those of existing bone examples found in some museums in the UK. They were traced to German prisoners of war dating to the First World War. An in-depth examination of the donated bones revealed their non-human provenance. It further showed that no link existed between the bones, internees of the concentration camp, and the time of the camp's existence. It was discovered that they belonged to the period 1914-1918 and form an important part of German prisoner of war history in the UK.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 40%
Lecturer 1 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 2 40%
Social Sciences 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2018.
All research outputs
#19,702,729
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#582
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#260,385
of 333,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#30
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.