Limits...
Experimental butchering of a chimpanzee carcass for archaeological purposes.

Saladié P, Cáceres I, Huguet R, Rodríguez-Hidalgo A, Santander B, Ollé A, Gabucio MJ, Martín P, Marín J - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: As a result, about 40% of the remains showed some kind of human modification.In case of the MIR4 assemblage, the results are similar except in the treatment of skulls.Our results indicate that high frequencies of anthropogenic modifications are common after an intensive butchering process intended to prepare a hominin body for consumption in different contexts (both where there was possible ritual behavior and where this was not the case and the modifications are not the result of special treatment).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: IPHES, Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolució Social, Tarragona, Spain; Área de Prehistoria, Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV), Tarragona, Spain; GQP-CG, Grupo Quaternário e Pré-História do Centro de Geociências (uI and D 73-FCT), Tomar, Portugal; Unit associated to Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Ciéntíficas (CSIC), Departamento de Paleobiologia, Museo de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN), Madrid, Spain.

ABSTRACT
Two archaeological assemblages from the Sierra de Atapuerca sites show evidence of anthropogenic cannibalism. These are the late Early Pleistocene level TD6-2 at Gran Dolina, and the Bronze Age level MIR4 in the Mirador Cave. Despite the chronological distance between these two assemblages, they share the common feature that the human remains exhibit a high frequency of anthropogenic modifications (cut marks, percussion pits and notches and peeling). This frequency could denote special treatment of bodies, or else be the normal result of the butchering process. In order to test these possibilities, we subjected a chimpanzee carcass to a butchering process. The processing was intensive and intended to simulate preparation for consumption. In doing this, we used several simple flakes made from quartzite and chert from quarries in the Sierra de Atapuerca. The skull, long bones, metapodials and phalanges were also fractured in order to remove the brain and bone marrow. As a result, about 40% of the remains showed some kind of human modification. The frequency, distribution and characteristics of these modifications are very similar to those documented on the remains of Homo antecessor from TD6-2. In case of the MIR4 assemblage, the results are similar except in the treatment of skulls. Our results indicate that high frequencies of anthropogenic modifications are common after an intensive butchering process intended to prepare a hominin body for consumption in different contexts (both where there was possible ritual behavior and where this was not the case and the modifications are not the result of special treatment).

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Examples of cut marks on the chimpanzee sample.a) Slicing marks on a scapula. b) Slicing marks on the shaft of a chimpanzee femur. c) Another example of slicing marks on an ulna. d) Phalange with cut marks. e) Cut marks on a pisiform. f) Chop marks on a shaft of femur performed during the fracture of the bone.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4368797&req=5

pone.0121208.g003: Examples of cut marks on the chimpanzee sample.a) Slicing marks on a scapula. b) Slicing marks on the shaft of a chimpanzee femur. c) Another example of slicing marks on an ulna. d) Phalange with cut marks. e) Cut marks on a pisiform. f) Chop marks on a shaft of femur performed during the fracture of the bone.

Mentions: Of the cut marks, slicing marks were the most abundant (Fig. 3). These were documented on 106 specimens. Scrape marks were recorded on eight specimens and chop marks on six (Fig. 3). Forty-one of the skeletal elements examined exhibited signatures produced during the hammerstone-anvil bone breakage: 21 percussion pits, 20 percussion notches, and three anvil abrasions. A combination of these modifications was detected on three specimens. Peeling was documented on 37 pieces of the ribs and vertebrae.


Experimental butchering of a chimpanzee carcass for archaeological purposes.

Saladié P, Cáceres I, Huguet R, Rodríguez-Hidalgo A, Santander B, Ollé A, Gabucio MJ, Martín P, Marín J - PLoS ONE (2015)

Examples of cut marks on the chimpanzee sample.a) Slicing marks on a scapula. b) Slicing marks on the shaft of a chimpanzee femur. c) Another example of slicing marks on an ulna. d) Phalange with cut marks. e) Cut marks on a pisiform. f) Chop marks on a shaft of femur performed during the fracture of the bone.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4368797&req=5

pone.0121208.g003: Examples of cut marks on the chimpanzee sample.a) Slicing marks on a scapula. b) Slicing marks on the shaft of a chimpanzee femur. c) Another example of slicing marks on an ulna. d) Phalange with cut marks. e) Cut marks on a pisiform. f) Chop marks on a shaft of femur performed during the fracture of the bone.
Mentions: Of the cut marks, slicing marks were the most abundant (Fig. 3). These were documented on 106 specimens. Scrape marks were recorded on eight specimens and chop marks on six (Fig. 3). Forty-one of the skeletal elements examined exhibited signatures produced during the hammerstone-anvil bone breakage: 21 percussion pits, 20 percussion notches, and three anvil abrasions. A combination of these modifications was detected on three specimens. Peeling was documented on 37 pieces of the ribs and vertebrae.

Bottom Line: As a result, about 40% of the remains showed some kind of human modification.In case of the MIR4 assemblage, the results are similar except in the treatment of skulls.Our results indicate that high frequencies of anthropogenic modifications are common after an intensive butchering process intended to prepare a hominin body for consumption in different contexts (both where there was possible ritual behavior and where this was not the case and the modifications are not the result of special treatment).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: IPHES, Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolució Social, Tarragona, Spain; Área de Prehistoria, Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV), Tarragona, Spain; GQP-CG, Grupo Quaternário e Pré-História do Centro de Geociências (uI and D 73-FCT), Tomar, Portugal; Unit associated to Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Ciéntíficas (CSIC), Departamento de Paleobiologia, Museo de Ciencias Naturales (MNCN), Madrid, Spain.

ABSTRACT
Two archaeological assemblages from the Sierra de Atapuerca sites show evidence of anthropogenic cannibalism. These are the late Early Pleistocene level TD6-2 at Gran Dolina, and the Bronze Age level MIR4 in the Mirador Cave. Despite the chronological distance between these two assemblages, they share the common feature that the human remains exhibit a high frequency of anthropogenic modifications (cut marks, percussion pits and notches and peeling). This frequency could denote special treatment of bodies, or else be the normal result of the butchering process. In order to test these possibilities, we subjected a chimpanzee carcass to a butchering process. The processing was intensive and intended to simulate preparation for consumption. In doing this, we used several simple flakes made from quartzite and chert from quarries in the Sierra de Atapuerca. The skull, long bones, metapodials and phalanges were also fractured in order to remove the brain and bone marrow. As a result, about 40% of the remains showed some kind of human modification. The frequency, distribution and characteristics of these modifications are very similar to those documented on the remains of Homo antecessor from TD6-2. In case of the MIR4 assemblage, the results are similar except in the treatment of skulls. Our results indicate that high frequencies of anthropogenic modifications are common after an intensive butchering process intended to prepare a hominin body for consumption in different contexts (both where there was possible ritual behavior and where this was not the case and the modifications are not the result of special treatment).

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus