Cited by 395Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Prehistoric Cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346

White, Tim D.·1992·Princeton University Press eBooks

Abstract

Cannibalism is one of the oldest and most emotionally charged topics in anthropological literature. Tim White's analysis of human bones from an Anasazi pueblo in southwestern Colorado, site 5MTUMR-2346, reveals that nearly thirty men, women, and children were butchered and cooked there around A.D. 1100. Their bones were fractured for marrow, and the remains discarded in several rooms of the pueblo. By comparing the human skeletal remains with those of animals used for food at other sites, the author analyzes evidence for skinning, dismembering, cooking, and fracturing to infer that cannibalism took place at Mancos. As White evaluates claims for cannibalism in ethnographic and archaeological contexts worldwide, he describes how cultural biases can often distort the interpretation of scientific data. This book applies and introduces anatomical, taphonomic, zooarchaeological, and forensic methods in the investigation of prehistoric human behavior. It is an important example of how we can exchange opinion for knowledge. "Cannibalism is a controversial topic because many people do not want to believe that their prehistoric ancestors engaged in such activity, but they will be hard put to reject this meticulous study."--Kent V. Flannery, University of Michigan "This is the best piece of detailed research yet to appear that seeks to put in place a body of justified knowledge and a procedure for its use in making inferences about the past. No student of bones can ignore this work."--L…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1515/9781400852925

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • At Charity site, 33 fragments show evidence of thermal exposure and 12 fragments show evidence of pot polishing.

    “Thirtythree fragments show evidence of thermal exposure, and 12 fragments show evidence of pot polishing (sensu White, 1992, pp. 120-124).”
  • At Erebus Bay scattered remains, 27 human remains representing a minimum of two individuals were identified; no knife-marks or burning were identified; two long bone fragments have proximal and distal breaks associated with polishing tentatively interpreted as pot polishing.

    “Mays and Beattie (2016) identified 27 human remains (seven long bones, two scapulae, a rib, a metatarsal, a metacarpal, a vertebra and 14 articulated foot bones), representing a minimum of two individuals.No knife-marks or traces of burning were identified on any of the human remains.Two long bone fragments have evidence of proximal and distal breaks associated with polishing.”
  • Archaeological sites of Pueblos in Mesa Verde dating between 1150 and 1300 CE have been described as bearing evidence of cannibalism, and the modifications on human remains, their spatial distribution and contexts have been used as baselines to define taphonomic traits associated with cannibalism.

    “Archaeological sites of Pueblos in Mesa Verde dating between 1150 and 1300 CE (during the Pueblo III period), not only have been described as bearing evidence of cannibalism, but the modifications on the human remains, their spatial distribution and contexts have been used as baselines to define the taphonomic traits associated with cannibalism (Turner & Turner, 1999;White, 1992).”
  • Many archaeological sites dating to the Pueblo III period (1125-1175 CE) have been associated with evidence of aggressive exo-cannibalism.

    “many archaeological sites dating to the Pueblo III period (1125-1175 CE) have been associated with evidence of aggressive exo-cannibalism (Turner & Turner, 1999;White, 1992),”
  • The taphonomic evidence closely matches the indicators documented in other prehistoric assemblages interpreted as cases of cannibalism.

    “Taken together, this taphonomic evidence closely matches the indicators documented in other prehistoric assemblages interpreted as cases of cannibalism16,27,28,33,36,42,43,50–52.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

Cited by 395

Authors
White, T. D.
Corresponding author
White, Tim D.
Venue
Princeton University Press eBooks
Published
1992-12-31
OpenAlex
W4300671645
Cited by
395
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 14
FWCI
53.88
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Princeton University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
Ancestral Puebloans, skeletal remains, taphonomy, zooarchaeology, bone marrow aspiration, dismemberment, Ancestral Puebloan culture, prehistoric human behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review