Cutmarks on the Engis 2 calvaria?

Interspecific perspective on mechanical and nonmechanical models of primate circumorbital morphology

Linear dimensions and angular orientations of the browridge, postorbital bar, and postorbital septum were obtained from a representative series of primates and compared with variables associated with several nonmechanical and biomechanical/mechanical models put forward to explain the form and function of the circumorbital region. Analyses of the results indicate that face size is the primary determinant of variation in primate circumorbital morphology. Anteroposterior browridge thickness is correlated with neural-orbital disjunction among anthropoid primates, but not among prosimians. This difference appears related to differences in the construction of the upper face and anterior cranial fossa between prosimians and anthropoids. Little support is demonstrated for the anterior dental loading model of browridge development. Mediolateral postorbital bar width and (to a lesser degree) browridge height are correlated with neurofacial torsion during mastication and variation in masticatory muscle size. These analyses further suggest that since circumorbital structures (especially the browridges) are located the farthest away from the chewing apparatus, they are least affected by masticatory stresses.

Ontogenetic perspective on mechanical and nonmechanical models of primate circumorbital morphology

Dimensions of the supraorbital torus, postorbital bar, and postorbital septum were collected in an ontogenetic series of Macaca fascicularis and compared with expectations based on models that attribute morphological variation in these features to spatial factors, allometry, anterior dental loading, and neurofacial torsion. Each model was evaluated using correlation, partial correlation, and regression techniques (model I/least squares; model II/reduced major axis) applied to log-transformed and size-corrected data. Results indicate clearly that face or skull size is the primary determinant of variation in circumorbital structures. Strong support is found for the influence of spatial influences on anteroposterior supraorbital torus development (Moss and Young, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 18:281-292, 1960). Only minor support is noted for the neurofacial torsion model of Greaves (J. Zool. 207:125-136, 1985), and no support is indicated for the anterior dental loading model. The sexes do not differ significantly in any relevant comparisons of ontogenetic trajectories.

Endo's stress analysis of the primate skull and the functional significance of the supraorbital region

A review of Endo's experimental and theoretical procedures and data indicates that the magnitude of the principal strains in the glabella region of both humans and gorillas are low as compared to other parts of the face. Therefore, his data do not provide support for the hypothesis that the glabella region is a highly stressed region during biting. In addition, increased levels of strain in the supraorbital region are directly related to increased levels of masticatory muscle and reaction forces, and not necessarily to anterior tooth loading as opposed to posterior tooth loading. His data also indicate that the supraorbital region in extant humans cannot be accurately modeled as a beam. These conclusions either differ from those of Endo or are not clearly presented or emphasized throughout any of Endo's papers. Therefore, we suggest that a number of investigators have made unsupported or erroneous conclusions based on Endo's work. This is particularly true for those studies that have emphasized the existence of powerful bending stress in the glabella region during incisor biting in both humans and non-human primates.

Engis: preparation damage, not ancient cutmarks

Scratches found on the Engis 2 cranium have been described as perimortem and interpreted as intentional scalping marks by Russell and LeMort (Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 69:317-323, 1986). These marks are described and compared to damage on other fossil hominids. The Engis marks have been misinterpreted. These marks are sandpaper striae formed during restoration of the vault, moulding striae formed when mold part lines were incised into the fossil and profiling striae formed when craniograms were made with sharp steel instrument tips. None of them have anything to do with prehistoric behavior.

Mortuary practices at the Krapina Neandertal site

It has often been reported that the Krapina Neandertal remains bear incised linear striations which appear to be cutmarks. Here, the plausibility of the striations as cutmarks is tested by comparing them to Mousterian butchery marks on large fauna and to cutmarks on modern human skeletons known to have been defleshed with stone tools. The anatomical location, gross appearance, and frequency of occurrence of the striations on the Krapina material do not resemble Mousterian butchery marks on reindeer. The Krapina striations do closely match authenticated cutmarks on 22 modern human skeletons defleshed with stone tools after partial decomposition, preparatory to secondary burial. Data are presented supporting the hypothesis that the striations on the Krapina Neandertal remains are consistent with postmortem processing of corpses with stone tools, probably in preparation for burial of cleaned bones.