Search

Megan Kassabaum has developed a useful approach for interpreting feasting remains, but its application to the Feltus site demonstrates that modifications need to be made. In particular, the characterization of competitive feasting is too simplistic, and her model does not include work types of feasts, which may be responsible for the remains at the Feltus site. The interpretation of feasting at the Feltus site as resulting from social solidarity needs of a dispersed egalitarian society appear questionable on the basis of a high incidence of special meat, the occurrence of smoking pipes, monumental architecture, and indications of possible human sacrifices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study of feasting has gradually emerged from early descriptions and bewilderment to more sophisticated attempts to understand the logic and reasons behind the often lavish displays. We chart the various models that have been, and still are, used by anthropologists and archaeologists to explain this unique human behavior. Acquiring prestige is a popular explanation used by ethnographers, while coping with social conflicts is commonly invoked by archaeologists. However, more practical benefits behind feasts have also been proposed, as well as experiential motivations. Whichever explanation is endorsed, there is widespread agreement that feasts play important roles in establishing social identities and memories, creating political power and inequalities, gender identities, accomplishing work, and developing prestige technologies, possibly including domesticates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]