Cannibalism As We Know It

By Shane Rodak

The argument of cannibalism is a sensitive one in todays day and age as it seems that either academics look to disprove cannibalism in the name of reputation of a modern ancestor, or even in the name of civil humanity as a whole, or they go out of their way to prove its existence as a means of evolutionary breakthrough, attempting to prove that cannibalism used to be commonplace. These two extremes govern how we study cannibalism; however cant cannibalisms place in history be accommodating to both? Perhaps the way we view cannibalism is similar to how it was viewed in history: frowned upon with disgust, however occurring at times. Perhaps by nature humans have become less animalistic, and thus as time has passed humans feel more and more reluctant to consume their own species. So how has it became so popular to argue that either cannibalism is not the conclusion of evidence found, or that cannibalism was a regular part of nature for our Neanderthal ancestors. Probably the earliest evidence of cannibalism was discovered by Arizona State University bio archaeologist Christy Turner who discovered that remains of American Indians he found, the Anasazi were in jumbled piles, with evidence that the bodies had been skinned due to precise cut marks on their bones similar to cuts seen on preyed animals. Turner began investigating his suspicions, gathering thousands of specimens in the Four Corners area and comparing them, concluding that cannibalism was very much so commonplace in that region. Turner speculates due to the frequency of cannibalistic findings within the Anasazi and as well the Fiji and Aztec people that cannibalism might have been done in the name of social control, potentially the response to mob threats. He further concluded that this practice was originated and popularized by the Toltecs from Mexico who invaded and terrorized the area, making it a

common practice for nearly four centuries. Turner holds that it is a modern bias to insist that cannibalism isnt a part of human nature, and likens our potential for intra-special consumption to that of animals saying it is completely possible, potentially done for reasons such as religious, military, or medicinal purposes. However, Karl J. Reinhard, an expert in coprology came to defend the Anasazi, in the name of the reputation of their modern counterparts, the Pueblo people. After analyzing the coprolites, or fecal remains he concluded that this particular person had an irregular diet in comparison to most Anasazi and could possibly have been a cannibal. Before this discovery Reinhard was certain he had properly outlined the Anasazi diet from the study of some 500 coprolites, concluding that their lifestyle mainly consisted of hunting and gathering combined with agriculture. However, his discovery at Cowboy Wash arguably made the argument for cannibalism conclusive. What he discovered was a typical Anasazi pit-house which housed the jumbled remains of a small group of people, and found close by were stone tools covered in blood and as well, blood spatters everywhere. In a nearby room was where the coprolite was found, however upon analysis Reinhard concluded that due to the mostly meat content of the fecal reserves, it could not have originated from a typical Anasazi person. Sometime later this research was handed off to scientists who concluded that the coprolite had belonged to someone who ate another human being, and regardless of Reinhards observation that the coprolite did not conform to the standard diet of the Anasazi, all the sudden the Anasazi people came under scrutiny for being cannibals. This conclusion did not make sense to Reinhard who had studied the Anasazi diet extensively and had pegged them as peaceful. Why would an adaptive society used to famine and drought resort to cannibalism to meet their needs? Evidence shows that even in droughts the Anasazi were always finding new way for

nourishment, including prickly pear pads and cactus, so why would cannibalism be necessary for these people if they are constantly nourished by their external environment? Regardless of his logic the prevailing opinion for a while was that the Anasazi was a cannibalistic society, until Turner changed his hypothesis saying that they we terrorized by a more violent culture and indeed were not cannibals. Reinhard warns that it is not right with the lack of information modern society has to classify the Anasazi as cannibalistic or even not cannibalistic, however fears that people inadvertently make these classifications anyways. Another argument to cannibalism was set forth by a man named Tim D. White who first had his suspicions when discovering a 600 000 year old Ethiopian skull which had very precise cuts on his eyelids. He then set out to differentiate between cannibal induced cutting and animal induced cuts, as folklore had stated that the ancient people of the region had cannibalistic feasts. However, none of his proof could be substantiated and physical anthropologists were quick to dismiss his work, for instance Mary Russell who stated that the cuts found on the ancient skull could have been a mortuary ritual and other fragments could have been the result of environmental interference. As more evidence started to publicize though, White became more intensive using technology to analyze burn marks and cuts, and further establishing ways to distinguish animal ravage from cannibalism. He also discovered that the bones of cannibal victims had what he called pot polish by boiling deer bones in a replica of an Anasazi pot he realized that cannibalized bones had shiny abrasions on them that could be used as a distinguishing factor. Using his own criteria he concluded that the site entailed leavings of a cannibalistic feast of adults and children, all of whom had their heads cut open and their bones fractured in order to gain the marrow.

The patterns noted by White turned out to be quite similar to those noted by Turner and his wife. In his investigation of the four corners he found 40 sites in which he discovered a total of 300 individual remains, all processed in a very similar matter to Whites discovery, namely that in both cases the long bones were purposely fractured for bone marrow. The process is consistent with the work of Yolanda Fernandez-Jalvo, a palaeontologist at the Museum of Natural History of Madrid who has focused on the remains of six 800 000 year old bodies found in a cave at Atapuerca. Similar aspects appear, for instance the cut marks on bones, evidence of skinning, and breaking open large bones for marrow. At another Spanish excavation site, a 49 000 year old family was found (they were proven to be a family through mitochondrial evidence; the three men were from the same matrilineal heritage.) Similar story again here: fragmentation of the bones, skinning, and a new discovery that potentially the Neanderthals broke open skulls to eat brains for its rich fat and protein content. Due to the malnourishment of these people detected by analyzing their teeth, scientists have speculated that this family was eaten in an act of desperate hunger; however the scalped heads of the youth are troubling in their insinuations. Again similarities are seen at the Vindija Cave in Europe where Neanderthal remains have been found, again with the same cutting and dismemberment, as well as the lackadaisical disposal of the remains near animals as though equivalent. Whites graduate student David DeGusta in his studies of the Fiji people discovered remains that were among heaps of waste and trash, and when comparing these remains to those that the Fiji people properly buried, he discovered that the bones found among the waste had bite marks and burns as if they were consumed, while the properly buried bodies were left untouched and intact. The last and most recent instance of this is the Druids, the remains of 150 of them found in an English cave, all of their deaths dating back to around the Roman conquest. There is a theory that the Druids

ceremoniously sacrificed in hopes of appeasing the gods and achieving victory over the Romans and due to their starvation, conveniently ate what was left over. With all these similarities piling up heavily transcending both time and space, it is difficult not to acknowledge that cannibalism or some variation of it was at one point just another part of human life. However many have taken the stance that cannibalism is not the answer to these questions. Paul Bahn for example does not think that one can conclude for sure that cannibalism has taken place without a piece of human tissue to prove it, although the bone cuts used as evidence closely resemble how an animal might be consumed. Bahn points to other possible alternatives, for instance that the destruction of remains could have been a ritual mortuary practice, or even a result of warfare. The most recent and exciting proof of cannibalism in humanitys history is genetic research that indicates that genes that prevent brain diseases commonly contracted by eating contaminated flesh are increasingly common in humans. These diseases, called prion diseases are caused by molecules clumping together in the brain and creating small cavities, resulting in dementia, paralysis, or death. Recent studies have concluded that natural selection has caused a polymorphism, or mutation of the prion protein that protects against these diseases, suggesting that potentially cannibalism was extremely common in the early days of humanity as the human race as a whole has developed immunity to these diseases. An example of this is the Fore people, whose oral history tells mortuary feasts in which the dead is consumed as a sign of respect. Recently, in the mid-20th century the prion disease natively labelled kuru became epidemical amongst the Fores and it was suggested that those that survived the disease were genetically resistant to prion diseases. Thus, looking at the big picture it seems logical that these increasingly common prion-resistant mutations were in response to widespread cannibalism.

So if indeed cannibalism is as widespread as this study suggests, and even if it werent, why might individuals/societies resort to such behaviour? Researchers in the field have divided up types of cannibals by exocannibalism and endocannibalism: exocannibalism is when one tribe systematically consumes other surrounding tribes in hopes of physically scaring them off and spiritually taking on their virtues and skills, while endocannibalism (or mortuary cannibalism) is the act of consuming someone in their own tribe as a sign of respect, as well due to the belief that eating the deceased will keep them alive within the tribe. An example of an exocannibalistic society is the North American Iroquoian people, whose culture believed that consuming their enemies would appease the gods and give them more military power, while an endocannibalistic society would be the Fore people who eat their diseased as a sign of respect. Aside from spiritual reasons, some even resort to cannibalism simply for the taste or nutritional value of cannibalism however this has become basically extinct since the 60s. Based on the information put forth in this essay, it is undeniable to say that cannibalism is a part of human nature, and it is in a way ethnocentric to believe otherwise. However, the question still remains and will remain for year to come is to what extent was cannibalism part of human nature? Was it part of Neanderthal life or even survival to consume their own kind? While the information and discoveries offered by Turner and White can tell us a lot of the cannibalistic practices of particular societies, how did it impact ancient human life as a whole? Perhaps as man has evolved he has become less animalistic, and thus less cannibalistic, however just like anything else in evolution there are always surviving remnants of a past trait. Perhaps mans perception was that they were animals just like any other living thing in the wild, simply trying to survive by any means necessary. And because we are so distant from these animalistic human societies, we will never truly know.

Works Cited Bell, Rachael. "All about Cannibalism: The Ancient Taboo in Modern Times, by Rachael Bell Divine Hunger Crime Library on TruTV.com." TruTV.com: Not Reality. Actuality. Web. 8 Mar. 2011. <http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/cannibalism/2.html>. Bowdler, Neil. "Neanderthal Family Found Cannibalised in Cave in Spain." BBC - Homepage. BBC News, 21 Dec. 2010. Web. 9 Mar. 2011. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scienceenvironment-12049854>. Owen, James. "Neandertals Turned to Cannibalism, Bone Cave Suggests." Daily Nature and Science News and Headlines | National Geographic News. 5 Dec. 2006. Web. 8 Mar. 2011. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/12/061205-cannibals.html>. Parker, Mari Pritchard, and Elvio Angeloni. Annual Editions: Archaeology. New York.: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print. Roach, John. "Cannibalism Normal For Early Humans?" Daily Nature and Science News and Headlines | National Geographic News. Web. 9 Mar. 2011. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0410_030410_cannibal.html>.