Sorry Umberto - but previous messages appeared to be doing just that! If
people are going to try to use bone counts to estimate meat weights then
there are better ways than using MNI, and using MNE would be one of them.
Or MAUs...
Ariane
On Thu, 18 May 2000, U ALBARELLA REG: wrote:
> Please, let's try not to confuse the use of the MNI as a mean to
> estimate the actual minimum number of animals that were present
> on a site, or the total output of meat that could have been produced
> at a given time with the use of the MNI as a handy - though, as all the others, terribly
> imperfect - quantification system for assessing <underline>relative</underline> proportions
> of species.
> Umberto Albarella
> Department of Ancient History and Archaeology
> University of Birmingham
> Edgbaston
> Birmingham B15 2TT
> U.K.
> tel. +44/121/4147386
> fax. +44/121/4145516
> email [log in to unmask]
> http://www.bham.ac.uk/BZL
>
Ariane Burke, Assoc. Prof.
Dept. of Anthropology,
U. of Manitoba, Winnipeg,
MB, Canada, R3T 5V5
Tel. (204) 474-6654 Fax. (204) 474-7600
"Scholarship is
the enemy of romance.
Where does that leave me?
Alone in the rain again."
(B. Bragg from "Life's a Riot")
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|