The Archaeology of Cannibalism: a Review of the Taphonomic Traits Associated with Survival and Ritualistic Cannibalism

IF 3.2 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Silvia M. Bello
{"title":"The Archaeology of Cannibalism: a Review of the Taphonomic Traits Associated with Survival and Ritualistic Cannibalism","authors":"Silvia M. Bello","doi":"10.1007/s10816-024-09676-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Taphonomic studies of osteoarchaeological human assemblages have mainly focused on establishing recognisable markers that allow us to discriminate between humanly induced modifications from natural causes, or how to differentiate cannibalism from secondary burial. Less attention has been dedicated to recognise specific taphonomic patterns associated with the different motivations for cannibalism. In this paper, I present a review of archaeological human assemblages whose induced modifications have been interpreted either as survival or ritualistic cannibalism, based on their association with historic and ethnographic evidence. The broad range of different butchery and modification patterns observed for these assemblages suggests that the osteological evidence and the frequency of taphonomic traits alone cannot be used to unequivocally identify different forms of cannibalism. However, the environmental, historical and archaeological contexts can offer indications on the type of cannibalism practiced. In particular, the strongest arguments for cannibalism as a survival event are found within the environmental context and the opportunistic behaviour associated with the cannibalistic act. On the other hand, evidence for ritualistic cannibalism comes from its recurrent appearance within a historical context, as a widespread activity over time and as an established customary behaviour for the group involved.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09676-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Taphonomic studies of osteoarchaeological human assemblages have mainly focused on establishing recognisable markers that allow us to discriminate between humanly induced modifications from natural causes, or how to differentiate cannibalism from secondary burial. Less attention has been dedicated to recognise specific taphonomic patterns associated with the different motivations for cannibalism. In this paper, I present a review of archaeological human assemblages whose induced modifications have been interpreted either as survival or ritualistic cannibalism, based on their association with historic and ethnographic evidence. The broad range of different butchery and modification patterns observed for these assemblages suggests that the osteological evidence and the frequency of taphonomic traits alone cannot be used to unequivocally identify different forms of cannibalism. However, the environmental, historical and archaeological contexts can offer indications on the type of cannibalism practiced. In particular, the strongest arguments for cannibalism as a survival event are found within the environmental context and the opportunistic behaviour associated with the cannibalistic act. On the other hand, evidence for ritualistic cannibalism comes from its recurrent appearance within a historical context, as a widespread activity over time and as an established customary behaviour for the group involved.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field,  presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline.   The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology.    Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines.  Specific topics covered in recent issues include:  the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology,  new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing.  The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues.  Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List.  For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信