Several previous emails commented on problems of estimating meat weights
from faunal remains. There's a wonderful old reference concerning the
faunal analysis of a British fort in western Pennsylvania which comes to
very similar conclusions. I've appended a quote from the publication
which summarizes the principal finding of the study. The author attempted
to estimate meat weights from the faunal remains recovered in the
excavations and then compared the results to the historical documentation
for the fort. Below are his conclusions.
Grimm, Jacob L. 1970 Archaeological Investigation of Fort Ligonier,
1960-1965. Annals 42. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Museum.
[Fort built in 1758 by British and used for several years in French and
Indian war.]
"At standard field ration of one pound of meat per man per day, 4,000
pounds would have sustained only two men for the length of time of the
known occupancy, or the entire garrison at full strength for just one day!
Calculations such as these are patently ridiculous. The major portion of
the meat ration (salt pork) left no archaeological trace, troops were not
on full rations at all times, the sample recovered is but a portion of the
full archaeological sample at the site, and the facilities for garbage
disposal in the creek, where it would be lost to the archaeologists, were
excellent...." (p. 186).
Qualitatively, however, a fair idea of the relative importance of the
various meat animals in the military diet and the relative importance of
hunting can be derived from the collection (p. 186).
John D. Speth Home (734) 662-9505
Museum of Anthropology Office: (734) 764-1240
4009 Museums Building E-mail: [log in to unmask]
University of Michigan Fax: (734) 763-7783
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1079 USA
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|