ࡱ> Root Entry FbYGData y1TableWordDocumentJp  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnoRqrstuvwxz{|}~ OJPJQJ,@",Header  !, @2,Footer  !&)@A& Page Number@C@R@Body Text Indent `nH_~܃"G !z!z!z!z!z!z!z!z! z! z! z! v! z ".r;XEP<]gDq_~܃x CRoot Entry F1~.YData y1TableVWordDocumentp  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmno"qrstuvwxz{|}~ 88 Heading 1$@& 5OJQJ<A@<Default Paragraph Font2>@2Title$a$5B*OJQJ(O(Body OJPJQJ..Default OJPJQJ,@",Header  !, @2,Footer  !&)@A& Page Number@C@R@Body Text Indent `nH_~܃definition of cannibalism excludes major types of cannibalism, including starvation cannibalism, antisocial--presumably also pathological--cannibalism, and ritual cannibalism for therapeutic purposes as well as cannibalism within the context of mortuary rites. Shankman then develops tables (see below) for endocannibalism and exocannibalism among 60 tribes around the world with respect to method of cooking. These tables, inevitably incomplete [and also questionable in terms of attribution given the context of colonialism and genocide--JH], are enough to suggest that among five tribes practicing both exocannibalism and endocannibalism similar methods, mostly roasting and baking, are applied to both enemies and relatives. Among tribes which practice either exocannibalism or endocannibalism, exocannibalism is associated with boiling, especially in the Americas, or baking, in the Pacific, while endocannibalism is associated with bone ash, especially in the Americas, or roasting. It could also be argued from the data that exocannibalism and endocannibalism both share roasting. In any event, Lvi-Strauss' prediction doesn't stand up to these patterns. "Lvi-Strauss' general hypothesis--that oppositions in modes of preparing people reflects oppositions in social structure--is not supported by cross-cultural evidence." On the other hand, Shankman observes that this does not require us to abandon the search for parallels between language and cooking or their relations to social structure. I am in full agreement, especially since Lvi-Strauss' Mythologiques demonstrates that there is a highly complex culinary code at work in the myth, ritual, and table manners of peoples across the Americas. The problem is that Lvi-Strauss' decoding of deep structure is inadequate to account for his own remarkable findings. I will now suggest a way to re-analyze and salvage the transformational formula of the deep structure of culinary practice. What's needed is a more rigorous group-theoretic mathematization of the deep structure of the culinary code. This will solve the problems that Shankman identified. Basically, Lvi-Strauss' formulation causes problems because it reduces a sixfold group-theoretic structure to a triangle and thus cannot comprehensively account for the full culinary code, which, as it appears from the evidence presented by Shankman, is indeed sixfold. [Lvi-Strauss (1978:484) is not unaware of the problem. "The existence of these deviant systems poses a problem. It suggests that the semantic field of recipes includes a greater number of dimensions than I indicated at the beginning of the discussion." He then suggests adding smoking as a third term to boiling and roasting. He also added fermenting in 1973 but did not consider it a fourth term.] Here's how I suggest the culinary code can be better explained. The initial elemental terms in the transformation function should be mathematized thus: Fx = raw Fy = rotten a = watery fire b = fiery air As Lvi-Strauss argued, the raw and the rotten are set over against the cooked, which is obtained by the transformation process of cooking. Rather than having to posit abstract categories such as elaborated/unelaborated or nature/culture, this function associates with each term of the opposition 'raw versus rotten the opposition between two modes of thermal heating, namely something like 'watery fire' and 'fiery air'. (While these terms seem 'out of the blue', I actually back-derived them from the post-transformation functions of boiling versus roasted.) Fx(a) = raw + watery fire = raw, as a kind of cooking via an internal metabolism, which is how plant life feeds itself and grows. (Note: ancient Greek culture viewed 'rawness' (in humans as in food) as a warm-moist, watery-fiery state that was overcome when internal heat (pepsis) drove off the water. Compare the Hindu notion of tapas.) Fy(b) = rotten + fiery air = rotten, as a kind of cooking via decomposition The transformation of cooking yields Fx(b) = raw + fiery air = roasting Fy(a) = rotten + watery fire = boiling Lvi-Strauss' notion that the boiled is to be associated with the rotted and the roasted with the raw is actually a resonance from these two functions. The inverses might be identified thus: a-1 (inverse) = 1/watery fire = earthy air, i.e., pulverizing to bone ash; or fiery fire, i.e., cremation, holocaust b-1 (inverse) = 1/fiery air = watery air, i.e., baking by steaming; or = earthy fire, baking in earth oven, pit with hot stones x-1 (inverse) = 1/raw = cooking a side-product of that which is otherwise uncooked, either by smoking, inhaling the smoke of the raw substance, rather than the substance itself, as tobacco, or fermenting the substance to distill something out of the raw substance, as honey mead, beer, wine, and so on y-1 (inverse) = 1/rotten = preserving meat from rotting, by fire-smoking or by sun-and-air drying The inverse functions would be something like: Fa-1(y) earthy air, i.e., pulverizing to bone ash +/versus rotten Fb-1(x) watery air, i.e., baking by steaming +/versus raw Fb-1(y) earthy fire, baking in earth oven, pit with hot stones +/versus rotten Fa-1(x) fiery fire, i.e., cremating, holocausting, nothing remaining +/versus raw Fx-1(b) smoking (inhaling smoke), a by-product of cooking, that is, smoke rather than the substance, as tobacco +/versus fiery air Fy-1(a) preserving meat +/versus watery fire, i.e., smoking meat Fy-1(b) preserving meat +/versus fiery air, i.e., sun-and-air drying meat Fx-1(a) fermenting, a by-product of the raw substance +/versus watery fire, i.e. as fermented beverage With these inverse functions, the full group-theoretic formulation covers the primary forms of cooking mentioned by Lvi-Strauss in the Mythologiques, namely, roasting, boiling, smoking, fermenting, and preserving by smoking or sun-and-air drying, as well as additional ones identified by Shankman, such as reduction to bone ash, baking and steaming. This comprehensiveness seems to indicate that we have arrived at an adequate formulation of the deep structure of the culinary code. In short, the group-theoretic transformation for the culinary code is as follows. active : passive reflective : double reflection reflexive inverse Fx(a) : Fy(b) Fx(b) : Fa-1(y) normalized Fy(a) : Fb-1(x) alternative path Fx(b) : Fy(a) Fx(a) : Fb-1(y) first derivative Fy(b) : Fa-1(x) second derivative Fa(x) : Fb(y) Fa(y) : Fx-1(b) third derivative Fb(x) : Fy-1(a) fourth derivative Fa(y) : Fb(x) Fa(x) : Fy-1(b) fifth derivative Fb(y) : Fx-1(a) sixth derivative raw : rotten roasting : reduction to bone ash boiling : baking by steaming : baking in earth oven : cremating : smoking (inhaling) : preserving by smoking : sun-and-air drying : fermenting Rather than a 'culinary triangle' we see that there exists a group-theoretic 'culinary dodecagon'. This accounts for virtually all the basic forms of cooking (although each might have its internal differentiations). It also predicts, as Lvi-Strauss demonstrated in the Mythologiques, that roasting and boiling are the two forms of cooking with the greatest universality. Roasting is the normalized route of the transformation, boiling the secondary or alternative route. This is precisely reflected in the many myths about the origins of cooking, in which roasting is 'prior' to boiling. (Lvi-Strauss imports the distinction between unmediated/mediated between roasting and boiling, but this is not necessary. The mathematical function establishes them as opposites analogous to the opposites raw and rotten). Note that this formula allows us to dispense with Lvi-Strauss' problematic form/content explanation and his various hesitations about whether roasting is allied to raw and boiling to rotten or vice versa. Lvi-Strauss' view (1973) that fermenting is a 'reversal' of cooking would then need to be qualified; fermenting is an inverse transformation. Inverses typically bear the transcendental dimension. This we clearly see among those South American tribes in which honey mead belongs to the most sacred ceremonial of the year. Finally, if we want to continue to use the distinction, nature/culture, we will have to say that 'nature', whether raw or rotten, is prior to the transformations of cooking; all the ten forms of cooking are 'culture'. Two of these, roasting and boiling, partake of 'reflexive' action, while the other eight are 'inverse' actions. A full articulation of the culinary formula also makes clear that raw and rotten nature are, strictly speaking, also operations of fire, the former watery fire, the latter fiery air. Derrida has criticized Lvi-Strauss' notion of the opposition between nature and culture. Derrida (1976) argues that Lvi-Strauss privileges nature over culture and romanticizes the primitive. Rather there is no nature prior to culture and nature is already cultural. Our reanalysis of the transformation underlying culinary rites appears to be in full accord with Derridas critique. Rather than having to posit abstract categories such as elaborated/unelaborated (marked/unmarked, motivated/unmotivated, etc.) or nature/culture, our reanalysis suggests that the equation transforms the opposition 'raw versus rotten together with the opposition 'watery fire' and 'fiery air' into the cooked. The raw defines itself as a kind of watery fire just as the rotten defines itself as a kind of fiery air. They already contain an innate cooking fire. Otherwise they would be totally dead, inanimate, with no capacity for sustenance, for good or for ill. In other words, nature, i.e., the raw and the rotten, is already culture and culture, i.e., the roasted and boiled, is implicitly raw or rotten, that is, nature. Our reanalysis thus seems to be a fully deconstructed analysis. * * * * In the light of the culinary code reflected in historic and ethnographic records of Homo sapiens sapiens, what might have been the culinary codes during the preceding stages of hominid evolution? I suggest the following reconstructions that correspond to hypothetical Piagetian stages in cognitive evolution. First, we can ascribe culinary practice to chimpanzees. [Hence, contra Lvi-Strauss cooking does not correspond to becoming human.] When eating meat, chimpanzees tear off chunks of meet with their teeth and hands. Large bones are cracked open and marrow extracted; small bones chewed and swallowed. In case of small prey, first the face is bitten into and the skull is bitten open, blood sucked and the brain consumed. Large prey skulls are bitten open or opened by enlarging the foramen magnum. Then viscera are eaten. Almost always a morsel of meat is chewed together with a wadge of leaves, and usually discarded along with unwanted pieces of bone or skin. Sometimes the brain is scraped out of the skull with a leaf wadge (Goodall 1986). The leaf wadge practice is an example of chimpanzee culture (Whiten 1999). (At the other end of the alimentary process, chimpanzees use leaves to wipe themselves after defecating, a practice also considered a cultural tradition.) Rather than spitting out gristle or bone chimpanzees may be avoiding crudity in the eyes of other chimpanzees or they may be showing respect for the source of their food, another living being. Either way the etiquette of the leaf wadge belongs to a chimpanzee culinary code. During the Oldowan we may hypothesize a simple sequential ordering of culinary activities beginning with using a stone flake to deflesh meat from bones, yielding meat, and then moving on to using a hammerstone and anvil or a chopper core to split and break open bones, yielding marrow, or skulls, yielding brain, both of which are greasy, fatty substances of high nutritional value. defleshing meat bone, skull  w/flake bone, skull breaking marrow, brain w/core The two sequential culinary activities involve complementary pairs of tools, a cutting flake and core (chopper core, hammerstone), as well as the pairings of bone and meat and bone and marrow. Meat, which is on the surface of bone, is analogous to flakes and also obtained by using sharp-edged flakes, which themselves come from the surface of stone blanks. On the other hand, as inside the skin or hide, meat is analogous to a core. Marrow is inside bone which is inside flesh, which is inside the skin or hide; it is within the within. Marrow is analogous to chopper cores, which are inside cutting flakes, and is also obtained by using chopper cores to break open bones (or hammer and anvil technique, such that the bone is like a stone blank that releases a core). The activities adhere to an analogical schema: flake (outside of stone) : inside hide : meat :: chopper core (inside of stone) : inside bone, skull : marrow, brain As manifesting proximity, separation, pair, alternation, and sequential order these culinary schemas exemplify the cognitive stage of preoperations A, which Wynn (1989) suggests is the minimal cognitive competence manifest in Oldowan tool technology. The analogical schema associates two levels or layers of sustenance, meat and marrow, one deeper inside than the other. defleshing meat bone  bone breaking marrow: core sustenance There is a doubling intensification of the nutritional value of the raw, from meat to marrow and brain, which are also inside the inside, as a second doubling. This intensification is placed in analogy, in turn, to the core of the chopper core, which would be also an inside of an inside. To obtain marrow or brain is to obtain the core sustenance. This lends a symbol of life, or life-concept, as obtaining the core that sustains us. This matches the ontogenetic first stage of the life-concept as an activity that benefits us. The Oldowan culinary activities clearly precede the use of fire and hence the Oldowan culinary code precedes a code that contrasts the raw and the cooked. Nevertheless it is still a cultural code. A more complex pre-fire culinary code involves an extended sequence of culinary activities and ends with a reversal, from defleshing to re-fleshing. This is a mirror reversal, which is a cognitive procedure at the stage of preoperations B. (If it were a concrete operations reversal, then it would return to defleshing.) The code involves a sequence of four transformations or conversions. defleshing meat (eating) bone, skull  bone, skull breaking marrow, brain marrow, brain (eating) vital essence vital essence (digesting)  re-fleshing bones (revitalization) This culinary code contrasts concepts of flesh and bone and involves two abstract, although very concrete, concepts, (a) vital essence, the soul or spirit that is obtained from the nutritionally rich fatty tissue of marrow and brain, and (b) health, vitalization, life-energy as capacity for movement. That which causes the re-fleshing and revitalization is the vital essence. This is a second stage symbol of life, or life-concept, in which life is conceived as an ego-independent capacity for movement (kinesis), a vital essence that can be incorporated into a person, by ingesting food, so that that individual moves, is alive, vigorous, fat and healthy. This culinary model and its corresponding cognitive stage, preoperations B, would correspond to the Early Acheulian stage of tool technology. Like the Oldowan culinary code, this Early Acheulian code also precedes the use of fire and hence precedes a code that contrasts the raw and the cooked. Nevertheless it is still a cultural code like its Oldowan predecessor and one that involves sophisticated ideas of soul-spirit and life-energy. Holly Smith (1999) argues that the lessened degree of dental wear on the erectus KNM-WT 15000 versus habilis OH7 suggests increased dependence on meat eating, but not cooking in ashes, which would introduce greater grit into the diet. If so, this accords with a hypothetical Early Acheulian culinary code focused on uncooked meat eating. We can propose the hypothesis that prior to the advent of the controlled use of fire in cooking modes of cooking without fire were invented. McGrew (1999) suggests cooking methods such as marinades to denature protein and soaking in water to dilute toxins. Milton (1999) adds pulverizing. Such cooking would be especially useful in preparing underground roots and tubers and other potentially toxic or indigestible vegetal foods. If so, this might be the first appearance of the culinary code of the raw and the cooked. inedible, indigestible  cooked raw poisonous The oppositions are organized into a quaternion of cross-complementarities that contains a state change, in this case from the raw to the cooked by the transformative power of one or another liquid (marinade, water) or air (sun-and-air drying, pulverizing) or the paradoxical supplement, fermenting, which has the quality of liquid and of air, that is, bubbling. The quaternion is analogous to Piagets notion of a quaternary groupa cornerstone of concrete operationsbut different. A quaternary group is a four-cell matrix containing the position and negation of two things, events, actions or states of affairs, which permits the testing and falsification of causal or other logical relations between them. It is implicitly dependent upon set-theoretic logics. A quaternion is a four-cell matrix containing positive and negative values applied to four possible states of a cultural-symbolic transformation. It is implicitly dependent upon group-theoretic logics. The two kinds of logics are as different as sign and symbol, and perhaps, left-brain neural substrates and right-brain substrates. To cook is to convert something not yet edibleat least culturally speakingto edible sustenance. Cooking in this model involves a state change, a transmutation or metamorphosis that requires the application of a curious and paradoxical element, that we can only call liquid air. It is a work, an alchemical opus without fire. Such a culinary code, which involves a quaternion with its state transformation, could have arisen during the Middle Acheulian period, which, as Wynn argues, has a tool technology for which the minimal cognitive competence is early concrete operations. We may also hypothesize that the third stage symbol of life arose during this period. This is the life-concept in which life is conceived as the capacity for spontaneous self-initiated movement. It moves itself (autokinesis). It is like seed, root, tuber, or menses that through spell or song (logos spermatikos) is turned into vigorous growth, birth, the breath of life, or what the Irian Jaya Dani call the singing-seed of life, i.e., the soul-spirit. This spontaneous movement would be seen in the Middle Acheulian as a kind of fermentation, a paradoxical liquid air, liquid sunlight or liquid dryness, a bubbling that yields sustenance, and like fermented honey, intoxicating joy. With the innovation of the controlled use of fire and its use in cooking, perhapsas current archaeology suggestsduring the Later Acheulian period, the culinary code of the raw and the cooked, or more precisely, the raw and the cooked with fire, would have made its appearance. It is not necessary to hypothesize that the full culinary code formulated by Lvi-Strauss, which as he articulates it requires some notion of formal operations, appeared at this time. Rather we can hypothesize a code that would correspond to full concrete cognitive operations. At first thought it might have been something like this: rotten  fire cooked raw burnt The oppositions are organized into a quaternion of cross-complementarities that contains a state change, in this case from the raw to the cooked by the transformative power of fire. The activity of cooking is structured by an analogy: rotten : burnt :: raw : cooked. By implication the raw involves an aspect of inner fire or inner cooking which keeps it from rotting, which like rigor mortis has the quality of coldness, or too cold. Conversely, the burnt is overcooked, too hot. Logically, the cooked should retain a bit of rawness, as when meat is cooked rare or vegetables lightly steamed and still crisp. Here again, as in the case of cooking without fire, we have a quaternion, a four-cell matrix containing positive and negative values applied to four possible states of a cultural-symbolic transformation. Cooking in this model involves a state change, a transmutation or metamorphosis that requires the application of fire. It is a work, an alchemical opus. To cook with fire is to convert something raw into something fire cooked. The conversion is by means of fire. In a sense, fire is something added to the cooked, its supplement. Fire, which at this cognitive stage would have been viewed as a kind of spontaneous self-initiated movement, that is, as something alive, is added to the raw. By a kind of mystical arithmetic the result is a sustenance that contains or is infused with life (soul, spirit). The application of fire in the act of cooking is itself a self-initiated movement. Without such self-initiated movement nothing gets cooked. Fire transforms raw inner fire into cooked inner fire. In cooking with fire there is a triple fire: the fire of the cook brings fire to bear upon a food material to turn it into a sustenance that sustains by its innate, inner fire, which in turn the eater incorporates into this own inner fire. As in the Middle Acheulian case of the life in fermentation, the Later Acheulian art of cooking with fire also would evoke a third stage symbol of life as spontaneous self-initiated movement. It moves itself (autokinesis) as it makes itself (autopoiesis). It is like a transmutation from coal to spark (the alchemical scintilla) to fire. This transmutation is effected by the spark of life, the breath of life, or soul-spirit as a kind of fire that is added to the body, which would otherwise be raw, mere matter subject to rot and decay. Or, conversely, a frail body subject to being blasted by too much fire, too much spirit. The alchemical work is to find just the balance of spirit and matter, soul and body, so as to make the balanced . . . heart, knowing the strength and frailty of the human condition. Such concrete operations models for cooking, first by liquid air (fermenting, marinating, drying), and then by fire, or more precisely by either fiery air (roasting) or watery fire (boiling), seems likely to have preceded the more complex model proposed by Lvi-Strauss, and to be phylogenetically deeper than the formal operations model, which I articulated in the first section of this study. Table 1. Evolution of the Culinary Code Hypothetical Culinary CodeHypothetical Piagetian Cognitive and Life-Symbol Stages (after Wynn 1989; Case 1985, Piaget 1967)ChimpanzeeTearing off chunks of meat, breaking skull for brain and bones for marrow; using leaf wadge for discard of inediblesSensorimotor: action schemas, transferred across situations and/or Preoperations A.Oldowandefleshing meat bone  bone breaking marrow: core that sustains usPreoperations A: action rehearsal  in thought ; spatial concepts of proximity, separation, pair, sequential order. Life-concept 1: being-alive is activity, especially that benefits (or harms) egoEarly Acheuliandefleshing meat (eating) bone, skull; bone, skull breaking marrow, brain; marrow, brain (eating) vital essence; vital essence (digesting)  re-fleshing bones (vitality)Preoperations B: actors independent of ego, ego de-centering, artifact independent of action and thought of ego; preceding spatial concepts plus constant interval, mirror reversal of shape, artifact as whole overall 2-D shape; bipolar, binary opposites of shape qualities. Life-concept 2: being-alive is to be capable of, or in the act of, movement Middle Acheulian inedible indigestible  cooked raw poisonous Early Concrete Operations*: object as whole with parts; coordination of multiple points of view (plan, profile, cross-section); 3-D Euclidean space, inner volume; measured space and conservation of shape under motion; straight edge, quantity displacement; regular cross-section; congruence symmetry of reversed shapes; bilateral symmetry across all three planes; quaternary group** Life-concept 3: being-alive is to be capable of spontaneous self-initiated movementLater Acheulianrotten  fire cooked*** raw burntFull Concrete Operations: refinement of preceding Middle PaleolithicdittoFull Concrete Operations: Levallois reflexive cross-application of volume shaping and flake retouchingUpper Paleolithicraw : rotten boiled : ash roasted : steamed (after C. Lvi-Strauss)Formal Operations (Case s  Vectorial ): preceding now generalized to all possible situations of things; abstract systems of thought, proportional reasoning, solving verbal analogy problems, inference of psychological traits in others; coordination of inversion and reciprocity. Life-concept 4: being-alive is a quality that belongs to animals and plants Historic H. sapiens sapiensdittoAdvanced Formal Operations: hypothetical-deductive reasoning and propositional logic; group-theoretic logic* Operations = conservation and reversibility, the latter including inversion, reversing operation to return to starting point, and reciprocity; they provide for pre-correction of errors (Wynn 1989). ** Wynn 1989 does not differentiate Middle and Later Acheulian intelligence, and attributes to the latter early concrete operations, although Middle Acheulian tools also reflect concrete operations. It would make more sense to ascribe early concrete operations to the Middle Acheulian and full concrete operations to the Later Acheulian. *** Early evidence for controlled use of fire is debatable. Arguments and counterarguments have been made for sites such as FxJj20 Main and FxJj20 East, Koobi For a, Kenya (1.64 MYA); Chesowanja, Kenya (1.42 MYA); Gadeb, Ethiopia (700,000-1.4 MYA); Swartkrans MIII (1.0 MYA); LEscale Cave, France (400-700,000 BP); Olorgesailie (400,000 BP); Menez-Dregan I, France (465,00065K BP); and St. Estve-Janson (250-300,000 BP). Diverse opinions in Wrangham et al (1999) suggest that while Early and Middle Acheulian provides evidence for controlled use of fire strong evidence for cooking (hearths, dental wear), does not occur until the Later Acheulian. If it were shown that cooking with fire occurred in the Middle Acheulian period or earlier, my proposed cooking stages could be shifted back in time.  * * * * What is the relation, if any, between Lvi-Strauss formal operations formulation of the culinary code and cannibalism? Of course, there is no immediate relation; in the realm of mythology there are only cross-mappings of one structure upon another. Thus, to perform a comparison or cross-mapping between the culinary code and cannibalism one must develop a group-theoretic analysis of cannibalism. Clearly, as Shankman notes, cannibalism is far more categorically complex than the distinction exocannibalism versus endocannibalism. But even without comprehensively developing a group-theoretic structure for cannibalism that covers warfare cannibalism, nutritional cannibalism, mortuary cannibalism and virtue or therapeutic cannibalism--which I have done elsewhere--it is possible to see some cross-mappings in Shankman's tables. Exocannibalism is differentially associated with boiling, especially in the Americas, or baking, in the Pacific. Endocannibalism is associated with bone ash, especially in the Americas, or roasting. Roasting is also frequent to both exocannibalism and endocannibalism. This highly tentative set of findings might be viewed as reflecting, and confirming, the culinary code transformation formula, as I have reformulated it. For roasting and reduction to bone ash belong to the normalized path of the transformation, with bone ash being its inverse, while boiling and baking belong to the alternate path, with baking its inverse. Table 1. Cannibalism and Cooking Methods [after Shankman 1969: Tables 1, 2, 3]Exocannibalism (only N=29+*5 practicing both)Endocannibalism (only N=26+*5 practicing both)CasesRoastedBoiledBakedBone AshOtherCasesRoastedBoiledBakedBone AshOtherPacific Lau Lesu Tanga Malekula Maori Kurtatachi Kwaio Keraki Battas Jale *Daribi *Duau *North Fore *Usurufa + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + pr r cAustralia & Pacific Dieri Marula Tangara Boucat Bay Murgin Mara Mukjarawaint Turrbal Djibaru *Daribi *Duau *North Fore *Usurufa + + + + + + + + ? r r r cAmericas Apac Carib Araucanians Tupinamba Cubeo Amani Quimbaya Aztec Shipaya Piritu Umotina Gae Witoto *Kwakiutl + + + + + + + +  + + + + + + + + + s r s s po, pr dr po rAmericas Tarairiu Uraba Cashibo Nuevo de Leon Mayoruna Guaipunabi Tariana Tucano Amahuaca Yanomam Remo Waica Poinauas Mor + + + +  + + + + + + + + + + + + s, deAfrica Boloki Mambila Sura Ganawuri Rukuba Azande + + + + + + s r r rGuayape Sliva Sae Mujaranguana *Kwakiutl + ++ + + + depo = powdered, pr = preserved, dr = dried, s = smoked, c = cooked on a fire in bamboo tube, r = raw, de = decomposed Sources: for each tribe cited in Shankman 1969. Accuracy of these accounts given colonial oppression and active genocide remains an open question. References Case R. (1985). Intellectual development: Birth to adulthood. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Derrida J. (1976). Of grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Goodall J. (l986). The chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Holly Smith B. (1999). Comment on Wrangham et al, The raw and the stolen. Current Anthropology 40,1:585-6. Lvi-Strauss C. (1966). The culinary triangle. Partisan Review 33:586-95. Lvi-Strauss C. (1969). The raw and the cooked: Introduction to a science of mythology: 1. New York: Harper and Row. Lvi-Strauss C. (1973). From honey to ashes: Introduction to a science of mythology: 2. New York: Harper and Row. Lvi-Strauss C. (1978). The origin of table manners: Mythologiques: 3. New York: Harper and Row. Milton K. (1999). Comment on Wrangham et al, The raw and the stolen. Current Anthropology 40,1:583-4. McGrew WC. (1999). Comment on Wrangham et al, The raw and the stolen. Current Anthropology 40,1:582-3. Piaget J. (1967). The childs conception of the world. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams. Shankman P. (1969). Le Roti et le Bouilli: Levi-Strauss' theory of cannibalism. American Anthopologist, New Series, 71,1:54-69. Whiten A, Goodall J., McGrew WC, Nishida T, Reynolds V, Sugiyama Y, Tutin CEG, Wrangham RW, Boesch C. (1999). Cultures in chimpanzees. Nature 399:682-5. Wrangham RW, Jones JH, Laden G, Pilbeam D, Conklin-Brittain N. (1999). The raw and the stolen: Cooking and the ecology of human origins. Current Anthropology 40,1:567-94. Wynn T. (1989). The evolution of spatial competence. Chicago: University of Illinois. James B. Harrod v1 2.15.2004  PAGE 11 p%.,HMPUms  C!I!S!U!!!!!""##U#V##########$ $$+$Q$Y$k$t$$$$$&%/%[%c%g%h%p%%%%%%% B*phCJ 6CJnHCJnH 5CJnH *5CJ6nHnHV4opqVW  ./P^`4opqVW  ./P  E!!"U#V####$Q$$$'%h%%&&'((((T)))l*:,,-../H00J11^22p3r3667799 ;;?????@AEEqGrG    `  E!!"U#V####$Q$$$'%h%%&& ^`^%%&&&&&((((())))))**V*l*z*|****0+2+@+l+++++,j,n,p,~,,,,--:-J-----.L.N.\....../H/J/Z///F0H0N00000H1J1T1Z115nH5CJ5CJOJQJnHCJnHPJ5OJQJnH 5CJnH6nHnH B*phCJ5CJM&'((((T)))l*:,,-../H00J11^22p3r3667`^ ^`^11h2n222p3r344;?@1@sGtGHHH HfHhHHHLMNOOO OOOORRTTTTTT*U,UzU|UUUVVX$X[[]]*^+^^``.`bc9d=d#f *CJ *nHPJnHj6CJUmH 6CJnH6CJOJQJnH6CJjCJUmHCJnHCJOJQJnH6nHnHCJ55OJQJnHB7799 ;;?????@AEEqGrGsGtGH:H?MNQRSTUhijklnprt{|ʁҁف 5789:;<BCKRZ_hovwxɂʂ˂̂͂ЂтFڃ܃݃ރGH<='(\]89Ҋӊ֋׋$$$$$$$$ $$ $$$$ $$$$$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$v:$$$$$$$$$s $$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$ $$$s$s$$$$$$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$ssV$$Ifl  hTD 4$y#&*.2W000004 laV$$Ifl  hTD 4$y#&*.2W000004 laV$$Ifl  hTD 4$y#&*.2W000004 laV$$Ifl  hTD 4$y#&*.2W000004 lash sh spspspv:x!sh sps sh sh sh sh sh spspswA sh sh sh sh spsps sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh h s pspslsh sh sh sh sh sh spspssh spsZsh sh v:psps $ssh spsZ$s$s $s,$$$$ $$$$$$/sssssssssss@ss!ssss@ssjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjjjjjj@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj!j!j!j!j!j i0@0NormalCJOJQJmH 8@8 Heading 1$@& 5OJQJ<A@<Default Paragraph Font2>@2Title$a$5B*OJQJ(O(Body OJPJQJ.O.Default OJPJQJ,@",Header  !, @2,Footer  !&)@A& Page Number@C@R@Body Text Indent `nH=~"G !z!z!z!z!z!z!z!z! z! z! z! v! z ".r;XEP]eg"q=~x  4opqVW ./P EUVQ'h  !"U"V""""6#$x$$g%h%%$&b&&&/'t'''**++-- //333334599q;r;s;t;;;;;;; ??)`B  c $D1'<)`B  c $D1):+b E (P,  #" `B B c $D1 ,*{*ZB  S D1E (E 4*ZB  S D1*P,b Y H + #" `B ,B c $DjJ2 ,ZB - S DjJY Y ZB . S DjJH8HTB 0@ c $D1B S  ?;AFN[%ifln$t0abit Jt+Rt G(tYtsGtU t PR##E#G#####$$0$2$?$A$$$$$$$$$.%0%ooonrsxy"'(./67=EKQ]^efmnouvw{Ԁڀۀ  !(),-3tv|~Ɂʁсҁ؁فKQRYZ^_ghnouтӂ&5=ʅЅ ωӉډ׋PS EFTV*,kmc"i"""""E#H#$ $$$$$%%%&$&F&g&&&&&'4'V'y''t;~;;;;;;;???@A:A>AEEFF*F0FRFWFNNNNO O'O0O[[,[0[<[?[P[U[C\K\h hii(i,i@iDi+j5jRjVjxj~jjjOlWlYlelyllllllnnnnnnnnooooooQqXqaqfqerfryy Ȁɀlmnopqrstv|~<=͂ςтӂZm_ln =Tˇ(?oԉ։,3ъ׋ James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod6System:Temporary Items:AutoRecovery save of Reanalyzin James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinaj3jjjjjjjjjjjj@j@j@j@j@jjjjjj!j!j!j!jjjj@j@j@j@j@j /v:/v:t$$s$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$st;;slxȃ%&|}abφІhiЈш:;]^Ջ00`000000000000000000 i0@0NormalCJOJQJmH 8@8 Heading 1$@& 5OJQJ<A@<Default Paragraph Font2>@2Title$a$5B*OJQJ(O(Body OJPJQJ.O.Default OJPJQJ,@",Header  !, @2,Footer  !&)@A& Page Number@C@R@Body Text Indent `nH_~܃"G !z!z!z!z!z!z!z!z! z! z! z! v! z ".r;XEP<]gDq_~܃x  4opqVW ./P EUVQ'h  !"U"V""""6#$x$$g%h%%$&b&&&/'t'''**++-- //333334599q;r;s;t;;;;;;; ???MNQRSTUhijklnprt{|ʁҁف 5789:;<BCKRZ_hovwxɂʂ˂̂͂ЂтFڃ܃݃ރGH<='(\]89Ҋӊ֋׋$$$$$$$$ $$ $$$$ $$$$$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$v:$$$$$$$$$s $$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$ $$$s$s$$$$$$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$sssh sh spspspv:x!sh sps sh sh sh sh sh spspswA sh sh sh sh spsps sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh h s pspslsh sh sh sh sh sh spspssh spsZsh sh v:psps $ssh spszZ$s$s $s,$$$$ $$$$$$/sssssssssss@ss!ssss@ssjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjjjjjj@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j3jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj jjj@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@j@jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!j!jjjjjjjjjj jj@j@j@j@j@j@j3jjjjjjjjjjjj@j@j@j@j@jjjjjj!j!j!j!jjjj@j@j@j@j@j /v:/v:t$$s$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$st;;TUUXX[sxۃ܃GH<='(\]89Ҋӊ֋׋00000`000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ---------------0%1#f~#\RVX]dv&7LVh wwz~Fu|xn%\SUWY[\^_`bcefghiklmopqrtuw{rGy9#yTZajnsUnknown James Harrod '*0!8/1@ 00 L ( c TB @ c $D1TB @ c $DjJT E < #" fB B s *DjJ H`B  c $DjJE <E `B   c $DjJXT  ). #" `B B c $DjJ )l*`B B c $DjJ +, `B B c $DjJ -. @ ':+ fB B s *D1*)>)`B  c $D1'<)`B  c $D1):+b E (P,  #" `B B c $D1 ,*{*ZB  S D1E (E 4*ZB  S D1*P,b Y H + #" `B ,B c $DjJ2 ,ZB - S DjJY Y ZB . S DjJH8HTB 0@ c $D1B S  ?;AFN[%ifln$t0abit Jt+Rt G(tYtsGtU tPR##E#G#####$$0$2$?$A$$$$$$$$$.%0%oonrsxy"'(./67=EKQ]^efmouw{Ԁڀۀ  !(),-3tv|~Ɂʁсҁ؁فKQRYZ^_ghnouтӂ&5=ʅЅ ωӉډ׋PSEFTV*,kmc"i"""""E#H#$ $$$$$%%%&$&F&g&&&&&'4'V'y''t;~;;;;;;;???@A:A>AEEFF*F0FRFWFNNNNO O'O0O[[,[0[<[?[P[U[C\K\h hii(i,i@iDi+j5jRjVjxj~jjjOlWlYlelyllllllnnnnnnnnooooooQqXqaqfqerfryy Ȁɀlmnopqrstv|~<=͂ςтӂZm_ln =Tˇ(?oԉ։,3ъ׋ James Harrod,System:Temporary Items:Word Work File A_2518 James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod6System:Temporary Items:AutoRecovery save of Reanalyzin James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary ^`5OJQJo(-hh^h`B*OJQJo(.hh^h`o()  gggggg0h1hQhij7BCvwɂЂтڃۃՋ"""@(~(~.T cc(~(~ CJFGCJmH CJPJ"#$%&'(;<@AEFAUGUWW Y(Y9YYYYYhijkopvvvv4wWwawbwmwzwwwwwww xxx)x7xxxx (*05?AUVW\^_l҅^_nuvՋ֋׋0 @0(0*0,0.00020h@0H0@0N0@0T0@10z@1 0@11@1*@1R1@1T0@0x0z0|0@00@1111@11,1@1B1X1r11111(1411141X1t110@0+@00111111111B1D1F1P1T1V1p1111111110 0 11<1z1111T1V1t110-@0-@0-@008@08@1V08@08@08@GTimes New Roman5Symbol3 Arial;Wingdings3Times"q'h3Æd&(3's : !>0dj|B#Q:NOTES ON PAL 000000000000000000000 ---------------0%1#f~# RVX]dv&7LVh wwz~Fu|xn% SUWY[\^_`bcefghiklmopqrtuw{rGy9#yTZajnsUnknown James Harrod '*0!8/1@ 00 L ( c TB @ c $D1TB @ c $DjJT E < #" fB B s *DjJ H`B  c $DjJE <E `B   c $DjJXT  ). #" `B B c $DjJ )l*`B B c $DjJ +, `B B c $DjJ -. @ ':+ fB B s *D1*)>)`B  c $D1'<)`B  c $D1):+b E (P,  #" `B B c $D1 ,*{*ZB  S D1E (E 4*ZB  S D1*P,b Y H + #" `B ,B c $DjJ2 ,ZB - S DjJY Y ZB . S DjJH8HTB 0@ c $D1B S  ?;AFNZiDlfn$t0abit Jt+Rt G(tYtsGtU tPR##E#G#####$$0$2$?$A$$$$$$$$$.%0%ooexhxLPQVW_fpqvw}~ #)/;<CDKMSUYgnʀˀԀՀڀۀ RTZ\^`owx}~ȁɁ́΁Ӂԁ܁݁)/078<=EFLMSmtu{|΂ЂPSEFTV*,kmc"i"""""E#H#$ $$$$$%%%&$&F&g&&&&&'4'V'y''t;~;;;;;;;???@A:A>AEEFF*F0FRFWFNNNNO O'O0OZZ [[[[.[3[!\)\gghhi ii"i jj0j4jVj\j~jj-l5l7lClWl]lclflplyl_nennnnnnnnnwozooo/q6q?qDqCrDrwkxyyJKLMNOPQRTZ\^`deefghijklȃ׃8K=JL`І2Mq nȋ James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod,System:Temporary Items:Word Work File A_2518 James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James Harrod6System:Temporary Items:AutoRecovery save of Reanalyzin James Harrod[Data:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary James HarrodZData:aClarisWorks docs:MiddlePaleolithic:mortuary, cannibalism:Reanalyzing L-S on Culinary ^`5OJQJo(-hh^h`B*OJQJo(.hh^h`o()  dgfggggghhhhhhh4iii jjll(l|lNnOn_nnnnnndoeowoo!q"q#q?qEqqqlxmx;~<~=~~~~~~~~#*09?@o/FGHf !TUbcdm"""@ hxhx.T hxx CJFGCJmH CJPJl"#$%&'(;<@AEFhijkop^v`vavxvw5w?w@wKwXwwwwwwwwwwxxhxixkxȃ345:<=J`stυ<=LST`ab݋ߋ0 @0(0*0,0.00020h@0H0@0N0@0T0@0x0z0|0@00@1111@11,1@1B1X1r11111(1411141X1t 4opqVW ./P EUVQ'h  !"U"V""""6#$x$$g%h%%$&b&&&/'t'''**++-- //333334599q;r;s;t;;;;;;; ??Qhij7BCvwɂЂтڃۃՋ"""@0?MNQRSTUhijklnprt{|ʁҁف 5789:;<BCKRZ_hovwxɂʂ˂̂͂ЂтFڃ܃݃ރGH<='(\]89Ҋӊ֋׋$$$$$$$$ $$ $$$$ $$$$$s$s$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$s$s$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$$$$$$$s$s$s$s$s$s$s$v:$$$$$$$$$s $$$$$$$$ $$$$$$