同类相食的考古学:与生存和仪式性同类相食相关的语音学特征综述

IF 3.2 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Pub Date : 2024-12-10 DOI:10.1007/s10816-024-09676-3
Silvia M. Bello
{"title":"同类相食的考古学:与生存和仪式性同类相食相关的语音学特征综述","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

骨考古人类组合的语音学研究主要集中在建立可识别的标记,使我们能够区分人为引起的变化和自然原因,或者如何区分同类相食和二次埋葬。很少有人关注与同类相食的不同动机相关的具体音素模式。在本文中,我提出了考古人类组合的回顾,其诱导的修改被解释为生存或仪式性的同类相食,基于它们与历史和民族志证据的联系。在这些组合中观察到的不同屠宰和修饰模式的广泛范围表明,仅凭骨学证据和地形学特征的频率不能明确地识别不同形式的同类相食。然而,环境、历史和考古背景可以为同类相食的类型提供线索。特别是,在环境背景和与同类相食行为相关的机会主义行为中,发现了将同类相食作为一种生存事件的最有力论据。另一方面,仪式性同类相食的证据来自于它在历史背景下的反复出现,作为一种广泛的活动,作为一种既定的习惯行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Archaeology of Cannibalism: a Review of the Taphonomic Traits Associated with Survival and Ritualistic Cannibalism

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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
期刊最新文献
Moments of Movement and Stillness for Senebtisi Since 1907 “Slow” Network Research? A Mixed-Methods Approach Towards Funeral Status Representation in the Late Urnfield Period Shining Light on Dark Matter: Advancing Functional Analysis of Obsidian Tools with Confocal Scanning Microscopy Archaeological and Experimental Lithic Microwear Classification Through 2D Textural Analysis and Machine Learning Beyond the Surface: Exploring Ancient Plant Food Processing through Confocal Microscopy and 3D Texture Analysis on Ground Stone Tools
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1