Re: Homo sapiens idaltu

[Nick Pharris <npharris@umich.edu>]

Quoting Dann Pigdon <dannj@alphalink.com.au>:

> Why is it that in the old days, marks on bones like this would have been
> taken as definite signs of cannibalism, yet these days they are usually
> suggested as 'ritual behaviour'? Why can't humans simply have eaten each
> other, without the need for symbolic activity to set them apart from
> 'common animals'?

As I understood the argument, the scratch marks on the skull are not the sort 
one would expect to see if the skull were simply being defleshed for 
consumption.  Take that for what it's worth.

Nick Pharris
Department of Linguistics
University of Michigan