What animal evidence account for fishing when no fish remains from funerary contexts?

Éva David (1, 2)

1 ArScAn - Archéologies et Sciences de l'Antiquité
2 AnTET - Anthropologie des techniques, des espaces et des territoires au Pliocène et au Pléistocène

Symbolism is more important than food! Some animal species reach a specific metaphysics when others that are also consumed never bear any particular status, remaining "just" as food. This is the case with fish. This apparent dichotomy is already shaped in the practices of certain communities of the Later Mesolithic (6e millennium cal. BC), notably in the Teviecian culture (Téviec and Hoëdic sites, Brittany). Whereas the subsistence is mainly turned towards coastal and fish resource for protein diet, only taxa related to inland species participate to socio-cultural representations. In the use of bone material transformed or used as tools from other funerary contexts, it will be argued for a dichotomous approach to anthropology of fishing.

Mots clés: Bone Artefacts; Burial Practices; Mesolithic representations

Domaines: Sciences de l'Homme et Société

Éva David. What animal evidence account for fishing when no fish remains from funerary contexts?. Anthropologie de la pêche (I), Anne Bridault; Eva David, Mar 2022, Nanterre, France. ⟨halshs-03663762⟩