Excume, but I don't read Bird text.

Canniabalism are "aberrant" human behavior for us, and we prefer
think others posibilities. Archeologically we can know when an human
bone is modified. The last years the bibliography are very important,
for example Bodo  (African Middle Pleistocene) T. White described
operational marks at the cranium. At TD-4 Atapuerca (Lower
Pleistocene) the human remains have cut-marks and impact scarcs.

At 1985, Villa worked an interesting case at Fontbregoua (Neolithic
french cave). The humans remains have impact notch and cut-marks, and
they are diposed with deer, roe deer, boar, etc.... I accept this
pattern is religious if you accept the same ritual for the deer,
boar, ect...

Arens books is very interesting, but recently are more information
about cannibalism, and posibles "functional context" associated.
Not is the same Maya cannibalism (posibily they are a political and
cohercitive power in statal context) and the history of Fontbregoua
people.

Yes, I'm a school of thougth wich maintains that bone modifications
on human bones are evidence of human manipulation.....Explanation are
other history.....

Thought for food?


Jorge