Forensic Science International 151 (2005) 105–108
www.elsevier.com/locate/forsciint

Letter to the Editor

Identification of a bronze weapon based on an embedded
fragment in a 3000-year-old skull
Identification of the weapon used is one of the difficult
problems that forensic pathologists often face on the occasion of a murder case by stabbing. Bauer and Patzelt recently
identified a steel weapon by using digital superimposition on
CT scans for a case with intracranial stab injury [1]. Compared to this kind of present-day case, ancient cases aremuch more difficult. Here we report identification of abronze weapon based on an embedded fragment in an
ancient human skull.
Yin, located at Anyang, China, was a capital of the late
Shang Dynasty (3400–3200 BP), one of the oldest civilizations in the world. The Shang Dynasty is famous for its

sophisticated bronze tools, jewelry, and letters written on
turtle shell. For ancient DNA analysis, we examinedhuman bone samples from the Yin ruins as an extensionof our previous studies [2,3]. We found a bronze fragment
at the top of a skull in the process of the sampling(Fig. 1A). Estimating age-at-death based on the degreeof suture closures (ectocranial, endocranial, and hardpalate) [4–6] and the Suchey–Brooks method [7] indicatedthat the skull was that of a young adult (20–34 years). The
amelogenin gene locus for sex identification [8] could not
be detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Basedon morphological analysis, however, we could be fairly
certain that it was a male’s skull. This man was buried ina vermilion-lacquered wooden coffin with articles such asa jade cup. According to archaeological findings, theFig. 1. A fragment of a bronze weapon found in the skull of an ancient male: (A) general view, (B) upper view, and (C) internal view. The area
between the two arrows indicates the circle-shaped detachment of the inner table of the skull.
0379-0738/$ – see front matter # 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.09.130

106

Letter to the Editor / Forensic Science International 151 (2005) 105–108

remains belong to the late Shang (Tang et al., unpublished).
What kind of bronze weapon was this fragment from?
This question is difficult to answer because only anapical fragment of the weapon remains and such an object
is not used in the present day. In order to identify theancient weapon, it was necessary to observe the shape ofthe fragment minutely, to obtain information regarding
weapons of that era, and to carry out appropriate image
analysis.
The bronze fragment embedded in that particular skull islocated on the top of the frontal bone and projects 21 mmabove the skull surface. Orientation of the stuck fragment isfrom the left front towards the right back. Its length andwidth measure 23 and 5 mm, respectively. The cross-section(wound shape) exhibits a slender and asymmetrical rhom-bus-like shape (Fig. 1B). The wound is accompanied bysurrounding coloration with verdigris and a fissured fracture
on an anterior extension line. The metal breaks through theskull with circle-shaped detachment of the inner table(Fig. 1C). As a result, the point of the weapon fragment
is crushed flat.
Weapons of the Shang Dynasty were classified into fivegroups: arrowheads, axes, battle-axes, spears, and daggeraxes (Fig. 2A) [9–11]. The first three weapons do not conform to the projected thickness of the blade and the shape ofthe shoulder part of the bronze weapon fragment embeddedin the skull, so the fragment was either from a spear or adagger-axe. The spear is generally pointed and has a spindle
shape, whereas the edge of a dagger-axe is slightly round,thin, and flat [10]. The circle-shaped detachment of the innertable of the skull indicates that the wound did not result fromFig. 2. (A) Schematic view of the bronze weapons used during the Shang Dynasty. I, arrowhead; II, axe; III, battle-axe; IV, spear; V, dagger-axe.
Size of these weapons displayed is not proportional. (B) Reconstruction of the dagger-axe from the fragment embedded in the skull.

Letter to the Editor / Forensic Science International 151 (2005) 105–108

107

Fig. 3. A radiograph of the skull, right oblique view, reveals the shape of a hidden portion of the bronze fragment.

a sharply pointed weapon. This suggests that a dagger-axe isthe likeliest candidate. The structural information on theembedded fragment will be crucial to make a definitive
conclusion. Although it is desirable to remove the fragmentfrom the skull in order to thoroughly observe the actual
object, this cannot be done without destroying precious
archeological remains. We thus took plain X-ray photos,
scanograms, and CT photos of the specimen (Fig. 3). These
photos reveal that the angle of the embedded part of thebronze fragment was not acute at all. Its breadth is rather
wide and looks like a water drop rather than a spindle. The
horizontal view shows typical characteristics of a daggeraxe: a thin and flat edge. We also reconstructed a threedimensional image of the fragment. The data clearly showthat the bronze fragment constitutes part of a rather dulledged weapon. We concluded that the bronze fragment
found in the human skull is the tip of a dagger-axe.
The dagger-axe is considered by archaeologists as a war
instrument exclusively, and is supposed to have been
attached to a wooden shaft [10]. The cross-section of theembedded fragment shows an asymmetric rhombus-likeshape, whose right back half (triangle) is slightly taller
and acute than the left front half. Given that the shape ofthe right back part corresponds to the characteristics of thelower blade of a dagger-axe, it is most likely that the weapon
was swung downward onto the head of the deceased(Fig. 2B), probably from the right rear. He had four additional incisura on the skull and one on his left humerus,
probably also caused by a bronze weapon. These wounds
showed no periosteal healing. Findings suggest that he diedwithin 3–4 weeks at most after receiving these wounds. We
cannot conclude whether the blow to the skull was lethal, due
to the lack of information on damage to organs and vessels.
However, because the tip of the embedded weapon did not
arrive at a deep part of the intracranial cavity, it can besupposed that the brain damage was not severe. On the other
hand, one of the above-mentioned wounds was found in themiddle and front part of his left humerus. This fact suggeststhat main vessels such as the brachial artery were probablydamaged. If this inference is accurate, the upper-arm injury,
rather than the blow to the skull, appears to have been thelethal wound.

108

Letter to the Editor / Forensic Science International 151 (2005) 105–108

Kunihiko Kurosakia,b,
Li Wangc
Jigen Tangd
Wei Wangd
Naruya Saitoue
Takahiko Endob
Shintaroh Uedaf

To our knowledge, this is the oldest killing case inwhich the weapon was identified from a small fragment
based on the viewpoint of forensic sciences. We should also
add that a bone embedded with a fragment of a bronze
weapon is the first case in the archeological history ofChina.

aDepartment of Legal Medicine
School of Medicine
Toho University, 5-21-16 Ohmori-nishi
Ohta-ku, Tokyo 143-8540, Japan

References[1] M. Bauer, D. Patzelt, Intracranial stab injuries: case report andcase study, Forensic Sci. Int. 129 (2002) 122–127.
[2] H. Oota, N. Saitou, T. Matsushita, S. Ueda, Molecular genetic
analysis of remains of a 2000-year-old human population in
China and its relevance for the origin of the modern Japanese
population, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 64 (1999) 250–258.
[3] L. Wang, H. Oota, N. Saitou, F. Jin, T. Matsushita, S. Ueda,
Genetic structure of a 2500-year-old human population in
China and its spatiotemporal changes, Mol. Biol. E 17(2000) 1396–1400.
[4] R.S. Meindl, C.O. Lovejoy, Ectocranial suture closure: arevised method for the determination of skeletal age at deathbased on the lateral-anterior sutures, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.
68 (1985) 57–66.
[5] R.W. Mann, S.A. Symes, W.M. Bass, Maxillary suture obliteration: aging the human skeleton based on intact or fragmentary maxilla, J. Forensic Sci. 32 (1987) 148–157.
[6] W.M. Krogman, M.Y. Iscan, The Human Skeleton in
Forensic Medicine, 2nd ed. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield,IL, 1986.
[7] S. Brooks, J. Suchey, Skeletal age determination base on the Os
Pubis: a comparison of the Acsádi–Nemeskéri and Suchey–Brooks methods, Hum. Evol. 5 (1990) 227–238.
[8] A. Mannucci, M. Sullivian, P.L. Ivanov, P. Gill, Forensic
application of a rapid and quantitative DNA sex test byamplification of the X–Y homologous gene amelogenin, Int.
J. Legal Med. 106 (1994) 190–193.
[9] National Museum of Chinese History, A Journey into China’s
Antiquity, vol. 1, Morning Glory Publishers, Beijing, 1997.
[10] D. Cheng, S. Zhong, Ancient Chinese Weapon – A Collectionof Pictures, The Chinese People’s Liberation Army Publishing
House, Beijing, 1990 (in Chinese).
[11] H. Ch’in, Illustrated Catalogue of Ancient Bronze Weaponry in
the National Palace Museum, National Palace Museum,Taipei, Taiwan, 1995.

b

Department of Forensic Medicine
Tokyo Medical University
6-1-1 Shinjuku, Shinjuku-ku
Tokyo 160-8402, Japanc

Department of Animal and Human Genetics
Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology
Chinese Academy of Sciences917 Bld. Datun Road, Beijing 100101, Chinad
Institute of Archaeology
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
27 Wangfujing Dajie, Beijing 100710, Chinae
Division of Population Genetics
National Institute of Genetics, 1111 YadaMishima 411-8540, Japanf
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Tokyo, Graduate School of Science
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Corresponding author
Tel.: +81 3 3762 4151; fax: +81 3 5493 5459
E-mail address: kurosaki@med.toho-u.ac.jp

7 August 2003
Available online 10 December 2004