Observations on the Butchering Technics of Some Aboriginal Peoples Numbers 7, 8, and 9

1955 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore E. White

The Following 3 papers continue a series of brief articles on this subject appearing from time to time in American Antiquity (Vols. 17, 19). Each paper presents a group of raw data with some brief suggestions for their interpretation. All but one are the result of the study of materials recovered from archaeological sites excavated by the River Basin Surveys program of archaeological salvage in the Missouri Basin. That one (No. 6) dealt with an elk specimen from Michigan. Paper Number 1 was concerned with the analysis of the antelope bone from 2 sites in the Angostura Reservoir, South Dakota. Number 2 dealt with the bison bone from 2 earth-lodge villages sites in the Oahe Reservoir near Pierre, South Dakota. Number 3 compared the use of small and large animals as food in one site in the Garrison Reservoir, North Dakota. Number 4 was a comparison of the treatment of bison bone from 3 earth-lodge villages, 2 in Oahe Reservoir and one in Garrison Reservoir.

1953 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore E. White

In a brief report, which was read before the 8th Conference for Plains Archeology by George Metcalf, 1 attempted to reconstruct the procedure by which the carcass of an antelope was prepared for food. The inferences thus drawn were based upon the ratio of the various elements to each other and to the greatest number of individuals represented, as well as the location of the breaks or cuts in the bones. Since the antelope is one of the smaller food animals and could be moved to a convenient butchering place, the question immediately posed itself: “How would size affect the butchering technique since a bison must necessatily be butchered where it is killed?“The bison bone which provides the basis for this study was collected during the excavation of two archaeological sites near Pierre, South Dakota. The Dodd site was a multi-component village, but there was evidence of only a single cultural complex at the Phillips Ranch site (Lehmer, 1952).


1953 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore E. White

The renewed activity in Plains Archaeology as a result of the salvage program of the River Basin Surveys of the Smithsonian Institution and cooperating agencies has reemphasized some very striking differences in the types of animals used for food by prehistoric peoples. Some groups, such as the Woodland and Upper Republican, set an extremely varied “table” while others appear to have subsisted almost entirely on one species of food animal. With those groups which subsisted on a variety of game, the question naturally poses itself: “What percentage does each species contribute to the diet of the people?” Although complete data on the “dressedout” weights of the various food animals found in archaeological sites is not available, calculations based on the data and procedure outlined here should provide a means of arriving at a reasonably reliable answer to the above question.


1952 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore E. White

During the identification of the osteological material from two archaeological sites (39FA23 and 39FA83) in the Angostura Reservoir basin, South Dakota, the distribution of the various elements began to assume a pattern which invited closer examination on the chance that inferences might be drawn concerning the method of preparing the carcass for food.Although the numerical count of the elements is subject to the accidents of preservation and the size of the excavation, the distribution of the various elements from an excavation which meets the archaeological requirements is probably a reasonably accurate reflection of the parts brought into camp, since one element has as good a chance of being preserved as another.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document