On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 14:46:21 -0500, Philip Thrift <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>>Another article on homo erectus hearths and cooking:
>>>
>>>   http://www.discoveringarchaeology.com/0599toc/5feature3-fire.shtml
>>

>While cooking of some tubers or other plants is more speculative, the
>extensive remains of big game bones show they were cooking and
>eating a lot of meat.
>
>We are hunters and cookers of big game meat.

Did you read the article at
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CA/journal/issues/v40n5/995001/995001.html
If you haven't and I will dig it up i'll sent it to you.
(if anyone else has it - i'd be pleased to get it mailed).

Dou you refer to signs of *fire* on the bones?
I don't recall any evidence of "grilled" bones (plain bones yes).
Do you have some?

While cooking tubers greately improves digestibility and edibility of some
varieties, cooking meat has the disadvantage that the fat (which is most
important and probably already low) may melt and escape in the process.

In addition there's the problem than in reagions where animals were fat
(northern) in the ice ages *wood* has been very rare. The whole ice age
(glaciation eras) shows few trees due to the extreme dryness.
Ray's steppe/tundra (with the "herds") doesn't show trees, does it?

People with access to fatty meat, like inuit don't cook it.
Eskimo means "eater of raw meat".

Some thoughts about fire....

Amadeus