Cannibalism in prehistoric Europe

Abstract

Abstract The key argument for the identification of prehistoric cannibalism is provided by analysis of close similarities in the treatment of human and animal remains. Such analysis requires precise data on depositional context, meticulous excavation records, detailed bone modification studies, a relatively large sample of human and animal postcranial bones, and data on local mortuary practices. With the exception of Fontbrégoua Cave, these necessary conditions are lacking at all Stone Age European sites where it has been hypothesized that cannibalism occurred. The alternative hypothesis of secondary burial practices has been proposed informally for some sites and, in a more formal and detailed way, for Krapina and Fontbrégoua. However, this hypothesis does not have a higher probability, is not justified by current data, and uses ethnographic analogies to prop up interpretations of materials for which contextual data are missing or have been neglected. At Fontbrégoua, cannibalism remains the simplest and most plausible explanation of the evidence; at Krapina and other sites the available evidence is insufficient to prove either secondary burial or cannibalism.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 85 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.