SC - lack of proof of cannibalism OT OOP-ish (GROSS-OUT Warning...)

[lilinah at earthlink.net]

There is surprising little documentation of *actual* cannibalism in 
the historic and anthropological record. I was recently reading an 
anthropology book that analyses reports of cannibalism - from 
centuries' past accounts laden with ethnocentric prejudice through 
modern anthropological reports.

Unfortunately, my daughter has it at her college, so i can't find it. 
I think it is: _The Anthropology of Cannibalism_ by La R. Goldman. 
Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. : 1999, but i'm not absolutely 
positive. When she comes back from her Spring Break vacation, i'll 
get the definite title from her.

It's a comparatively slim book. It documents how, while cannibalism 
may figure in some cultures' myths, no one seems to have actually 
seen a documentable act of cannibalism. And it pointed out how eager 
we seem to be to find that *someone else* is or has been a cannibal - 
usually as proof of the barbarism of other "less civilized" groups or 
our "brutish" ancestors.

In fact, modern anthropologists have reported stories told them by 
their informants - to the effect that "We aren't cannibals and never 
have been, but "evil tribe over there" (ETOT) are!" - as if they are 
proof that ETOT are in fact cannibals, yet with no definitive 
evidence.

If the anthropologist bothers to go to ETOT, as only happens 
occasionally, and asks them, members of ETOT invariably deny 
practicing cannibalism. It is one of those great cultural tabus. 
Sometimes ETOT will tell the anthropologist that the "first tribe 
back there" (FTBT) that s/he visited were cannibals. But since the 
anthropologist lived with FTBT, s/he knows that isn't true. So the 
anthropologist persists in their questioning, along the lines of "but 
FTBT said you were". There is continued denial by ETOT, and continued 
persistance on the part of the anthropologist, until finally ETOT 
says, "well, maybe, long ago, but we haven't done it for many 
generations."

Variations on this scenario have been repeated for around 100 years. 
No one has actually found hard evidence of cannibalism - that is, no 
person who is not a member of the group in question has been on the 
spot to witness...
"people,
people who eat people..."
but there are frequent stories that "the other group over there" did 
it, or "well, you Christians or you college educated guys said we did 
it, but it hasn't happened in my lifetime or my parents lifetime, but 
maybe we did do it, many generations ago" and this gets reported as 
"group X admits to cannibalism".

The archaeological reports are also questioned - not because the 
author of the book is squeamish, but because the "evidence" is often 
similar to this report from Britain - a broken human bone with the 
marrow removed. All too often the bones do not represent a cache - 
like a midden - but, rather, a unique individual which can hardly 
prove a persistent complex. Is this evidence of  a regular system of 
cannibalism, of humans eating human flesh on a regular or ritualized 
basis? an individual case of cannibalism because of impending 
starvation? or just the predations of a passing animal?

The only well documented cases of true cannibalism are those that 
have taken place in situations of extreme duress, such as The Donner 
Party (Donner party of 5, errr, Donner party of 4...), those soccer 
players who crashed in the Andes, etc., usually where there is 
nothing else to eat. ...And a few wackos, such as Jeffrey Dahmer...

So i await more conclusive evidence, since we'll never have absolute 
proof (dang, this Time Machine isn't working...). But what is 
reported in this article is certainly insufficient evidence.

Anahita al-skepticiyya