lable at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e43

Contents lists avai

Quaternary International

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/quaint

Nothing is wasted: The ideal “nothing is wasted” and divergence in pastand present among caribou hunters in Greenland

Kerstin Pasda a,*, Ulla Odgaard b

a Institute of Palaeoanatomy and History of Veterinary Medicine, University of Munich, Germanyb Sila, Arctic Center at the Ethnographic Collections, National museum of Denmark, Denmark

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 25 January 2011

* Corresponding author.E-mail address: kerstinpasda@yahoo.de (K. Pasda)

1040-6182/$ e see front matter � 2011 Elsevier Ltd adoi:10.1016/j.quaint.2010.12.036

a b s t r a c t

The 75 year old Greenlandic huntress Agnethe Rosing, is one of the last living persons who went huntingfar inland in her youth. In 2003 she told about the ideal concept that “nothing is wasted” of a huntedcaribou, and she demonstrated how the meat and the bones were handled as it was done “in the olddays”. For the bones it meant that they were smashed to small pieces and cooked afterwards. It waspossible to recognise this ideal in the surface bone distribution at numerous Thule archaeological sites incentral West Greenland.

However, this paper also shows that the ideal has not always been applied, and that “the old days”were not always the same. A test excavation in a midden at the site L 14 dated to 1600e1700s ADcontained whole intact spinal columns and many complete, not smashed bones, and bones in anatomicalorder, suggesting a departure from the ideal and a dramatic change in hunting and economic strategies.

� 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

This paper presents results on the study of treatment anddistribution of caribou bone, based on archaeological surveys in thearea of Angujaartorfiup Nunaa in central west Greenland, south ofthe fjord Kangerlussuaq (Søndre Strømfjord) (Fig. 1).

Angujaartorfiup Nunaa is a landscape with a long tradition ofcaribou hunting in a practically intact and fossilised landscape,where the archaeological remains, especially of the Thule culture,are verywell preserved and inmany cases still visible on the surface.The Thule people lived at different settlements on the coast formostof the year, but used to make an annual journey into the more than150km long fjord inkayaks andumiaks (skinboats) andby foot togetto this inland area to spend the summer hunting caribou (Odgaard,2007a; 2007b). The Thule culture was a hunting culture that had itsorigin in Alaska (Friesen and Arnold, 2008; Mason, 2009) fromwhere it spread eastwards and reached Northern Greenland around1200AD.During the following three centuries this expansive culturecolonised most of Greenland, which was then occupied only by theNorse in the south-westernmost part of the country (Gulløv, 1997,2004). Older archaeological traces derive from the Palaeo-Eskimos(2500 BCe1100 AD), whowere part of the Arctic small Tool traditionthat was rooted in the Neolithic cultures of North-eastern Siberia

.

nd INQUA. All rights reserved.

(Dumond, 1984; Powers and Jordan, 1990; Wright, 1995; McGhee,1996). They were not directly related to the Inuit culture and itseems that they had left Greenland, except for the Thule-area inNorthern Greenland, when the people of the Thule culture arrived(Gulløv, 2004).

The observations reported here are primarily based on sites fromthe Thule culture and sub-recent time, since the overwhelmingmajority of recorded sites in the study area derive from theseperiods.

The Thule culture hunters were direct ancestors of modernGreenlanders, of whom some still have the knowledge and skill oftreating the meat in a traditional way implying that - what onehuntress said - “nothing is wasted”. This means that everything ofahuntedcaribou is used to theutmost. In the studyarea at numerousarchaeological sites the following of this ideal could be seen (Pasda,in preparation).

However, the ideal has not always been applied. Examples ofsuch departures from the “nothing is wasted” ideal can be found inmodern hunting as well as in archaeological sites in central westGreenland.

2. The traditional way

“Nothing is wasted” e This sentence was said by the 75 year oldGreenlandic huntress Agnethe Rosing. During her work on a thesison traditional knowledge about caribou hunting in Angujaartorfiup

Fig. 1. Angujaartorfiup Nunaa in Western Greenland between the fjord Kangerlussuaq (Søndre Strømfjord) to the north and the ice caps to the west, south, and east.

Fig. 2. Agnethe Rosing shows how to cut the meat in the traditional way (Knudsen andOdgaard, 2003).

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e4336

Nunaa, Pauline Knudsen interviewed the few still-living personswho used to go hunting inland from the early 1900s to the 1950s,when they were children or young adults (Knudsen, 2001). One ofthese persons was Agnethe Rosing, who is also one of the few whostill knows how to cut and dry the caribou meat in the so-calledtraditional way.

In2003AgnetheRosingwasaccompanied intoher summercampat theold assemblycampAngujaartorfik at the SøndreStrømfjordbythe archaeologists Pauline Knudsen andUlla Odgaard (Knudsen andOdgaard, 2003; Odgaard et al., 2005; Knudsen, 2007). Knudsen andOdgaard video- documented the hunting and the butchering ofa caribou by Agnethe and her family. Agnethe explained the wholeprocess and told how she learned this traditional practise in heryouth. Sheemploied a special techniqueof cutting the lumpsofmeatinto thin, but very big pieces (Fig. 2). In this way the meat could bedried in only a couple of days, in the sun and thewind, and could bepreserved for a long period (Knudsen and Odgaard, 2003; Odgaardet al., 2005). With “nothing is wasted” she meant that everythingof a hunted caribou is used: antler, fur,meat, fat, sinews, bone fat andbone marrow.

At the end of the butchering process Agnethe smashed therichly myelinated bones (Fig. 3). The bones were cooked in a pan toget hold of the marrow and the bone fat. Unfortunately it was notpossible to obtain these bones left by Agnethe’s work in 2003because the archaeologists left the camp on foot to make surveysfurther inland. When the authors had the opportunity to go back to

collect the bones in 2009, they could not be found. They were notvisible on the surface and possibly had been thrown into the river.Agnethe was not going to Angujaartorfik any longer and all otherhunters at the camp did not smash and cook the bones.

Fig. 3. Smashing of reindeer bones by Agnethe Rosing (Knudsen and Odgaard, 2003).

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e43 37

Traces of the same pattern of caribou bone treatment has alsobeen observed in many archaeological sites in the area of Angu-jaartorfiup Nunaa, where archaeological surveys were carried outbetween 2001 and 2003: At numerous sites caribou bones werescattered on the surface (see Fig. 4; and Table 1; Figs. 5 and 6). Thesebones on the surface and those from a few test excavations wereanalysed (e.g. Pasda, in prepartion, Fig. 2, 3 and 5). Most bones weresmashed into small pieces andwereobviously cooked afterwards, as

Fig. 4. Rockshelter with tent remains and bone distribution; Fig. 7 in Pasda inpreparation.

Agnethedid in 2003. The samebone treatment has been observed inmany other archaeological sites in Greenland (compareMøhl, 1972;Outram, 1999, 109, Fig. 5).

Animal fat plays a very important role in the diet of most hunter-gatherers, pastoralists or farmers (Outram, 2002, 51; Pasda, 2009).Dietary fat serves a variety of functions, but it is most important asa concentrated energy source (Speth, 1983, 148). Fat is an essentialdietary resource to any society which relies almost exclusivelyupon animal products for nutrition (Outram, 1999, 103; Cachel,2000) and bones are a very reliable source of good quality fat.Themedullar cavities of bones are the last to be plundered in the fatmobilisation sequence of a dietary stressed animal (Peterson et al.,1982 in Dauphiné,1976, 46e48; Outram,1999,103). Studies suggestthat bone marrow rather than meat is a major source of vitamin C(Speth, 1983, 149). Fats have a much higher calorific value thaneither protein or carbohydrates (Guthrie, 1975, 45; Jochim, 1981,82e83). In addition to being an important component of humandiet, fat may serve directly as fuel (Cachel, 2000, 40).

The heavy exploitation of fat resourcesmay be the onlymeans ofsurvival in any community where there is dietary stress. This willparticularly be the case where a population is very dependent uponanimal products and has little access to sources of carbohydrate.The smashing and opening of the marrow cavity was the onlypossibility in the past to get hold of this valuable food resource andwas practised over thousands of years (compare inter alia Møhl,1972; Gotfredsen, 1996; Outram, 1999; Gotfredsen and Møbjerg,2004): The tradition of the marrow fracturing of the bones, sug-gesting the economic strategy of “nothing is wasted”, could also beseen in front of a Palaeo-Eskimo tent house at the coast (Fig. 7).

3. Caribou hunt in Angujaartorfiup Nunaa

For the economy of the people inwestern Greenland, the caribouhas always played a part. The economy of the Thule culture wasprimarily based on marine resources, but many people preferred tospend the summer inland on a terrestrial diet. In the inland, wherethe principal game was the caribou, most of the meat was dried forstoring, and the skins were used for clothes and for bed skins(Grønnow et al., 1983). Angujaartorfiup Nunaa is one of the summergrazing areas, where hunters found and find well-fed animals witha good fur quality in late summer. The climate is ‘arctic desert’withvery cold winters and temperatures of below �30 �C, but withusually fairly dry and sunny summers. Topographically, Angu-jaartorfiupNunaa is an isolated area surrounded by three ice caps tothe west, south, and east and the only entrance is along the coast ofSøndre Strømfjord to the north. The central part of the area is a rockyhigh plainwith mountain peaks up to 1500 m, and many rivers andlakes (Fig. 1). Today only the areas close to the coast of SøndreStrømfjord are visited by modern hunters.

The caribou population in central west Greenland is unstablewith dramatic population fluctuations (Grønnow et al., 1983,13e16; Grønnow, 1986; see also Stenton, 1991, 18). According to thedata (summarised in Meldgaard, 1986, Fig. 57), the length of thecaribou population cycles may differ from about 65 to 115 years.The decreases and increases of the population seem to be of rathershort duration, usually about 10 years. The maxima may last fromabout 10 to 25 years, the minima longer, usually from about 35 to70 years. The differences in the amount of caribou had an influenceon the behaviour of people and an influence on the hunting. Insome periods with low population level the hunters had to go farinland, near the Ice Cap, to find few animals (Grønnow et al., 1983,87). A well documented case is the 1970 to 1980 reduction of thetotal west Greenland caribou population from about 100,000 downto 8000 animals (Meldgaard, 1986, 59e60). Two populationmaxima between 1830e1853 and 1900e1915 in the Sisimiut area

Table 1L 14 - bones from the top layer (Odgaard et al., 2003, and unpublished data), rockshelter L 218-6 (Pasda, in preparation) and tent house L 16-1 (Pasda, in preparation). The term“long bone” comprises humerus, radius, ulna, femur, tibia, and scapula and pelvis. Ribs and teeth are not shown here.

Base camp L 14 Rockshelter L 218-6 Tent house L 16-1

Skeletal part Complete Fragment Total Complete Fragment Total Complete Fragment Total

Antler e 8 8 e e e e 1 1Cranium e 5 5 e e e e 5 5Mandibula e 19 19 e e e e 9 9Carpals and tarsals 37 e 37 12 1 13 5 7 12Metapodials 46 e 46 e 13 13 e 29 29Phalanges 29 e 29 e 2 2 e e e

Vertebrae 168 e 168 1 3 4 29 37 66Long bones 292 73 365 e 318 318 1 248 249Total 572 105 677 13 337 350 35 336 371

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e4338

are known from historical sources. In the year 2000 the number ofcaribou was estimated at 52,000, and in 2005 it was estimated at90,000 animals for the Sisimiut-Kangerlussuaq herd (Cuyler et al.,2002; Cuyler et al., 2005, 20; Polarfronten 4/2005, 22; Grønnow,2009, 203).

4. Deviation from the ideal “nothing is wasted”

Because of the topography of Angujaartorfiup Nunaa the caribouare widely scattered (also during a population maximum),andfrequently the hunters had towalk a long distance from a kill site tothe camp. Studies of tent house types and camp organisationsuggest that small-scale family hunting and individual huntingwere the most important strategies in the history of the studiedarea. In the archaeological material there is a tendency involvingcamps inhabited through times by two households, interpreted as“two generations” as met in the ethno-history (Odgaard, 2009). Theorganising principle behind this pattern is a hereditary “prior right”based on use, implying that the younger generation had to earntheir prior right by participating in the hunt (Petersen, 1963).

In the western part of the surveyed area almost all huntingstructures are placed on the high plains, separated from the basecamp zone by precipitous 800e1000 m high slopes (Grønnow,2009, 207). The long and exhausting transport meant thata caribou would only reach the base camp in complete conditionwhen the kill site and the camp were not far apart. In the case oflong transport, particular parts of a caribou which contain lessnutrition and would make the transport more difficult are left atthe kill spot. This first example of deviation from the ideal “nothingis wasted” was practised during most of the Thule time, as wasevident in the analysed archaeozoological materials of the area,where certain bones were often missing (Pasda, in preparation; seealso Table 1: rockshelter L 218-6 and tent house L 16-1). Craniums,lower feet and metacarpals are examples of skeletal elements thatwere often left behind at the kill site. The same pattern can be seentoday at modern kill sites (Fig. 8).

A typical camp activity in the past was the smashing andcooking of the remaining bones. The direct connection between theuse of the tent houses and the actual bones on the surface remain tobe established by further archaeological investigations, but theobvious interpretation of this pattern is that remains of the boiledout bones were tipped out in the vicinity of both the archaeologicaland the sub-recent dwellings. With the exception of those skeletalparts that were not introduced into the sites, often everything ofa caribou was exploited and found among the scattered smashedbones (see for example site L 16-1, and L 218-6, Table 1).

However, not only due to organisational reasons in connectionwith the transport, the ideal ”nothing iswasted”hasnot alwaysbeenapplied. Examples of such departures from the ideal can be found inmodernhunting. The tradition of goinghunting at a summer camp is

still upheld bysome families inGreenland, ofwhichmost are not fulltime hunters, but families spending a couple of weeks during theirsummer vacation going caribou hunting and in recent time e afterthe introduction of musk oxen to the area in the 1960s e also muskox hunting. Today, and for the last 50 years, nobodywalks far inland,but some of the ancient camps in the area close to the fjord areoccasionally visited during the summer by modern hunters. Basedon registrations on these sites and on interviews with the hunters,the bones are occasionally smashed today, but not into such smallpieces as in the past, and as Agnethe Rosing did. As a rule, only themarrow cavity is opened to get hold of the marrow, but most bonesare usually not cooked anymore (Fig. 9). Today the meat is also cutinto thin pieces and dried in the sun, but these pieces are smallerthan those cut by Agnethe in “the traditional way”.

As evident in Fig. 10, today the bones are often complete and notsmashed. The modern prey treatment reflects a butchering systemthat leaves much smelly bone refuse. Around the modern tenthouses in the area of Angujaartorfiup Nunaa, which are still in use,no bones were visible on the surface. Today the bones are thrown tocertain waste places near the settlements, into the water or onto toembankment close to the water, with the purpose that the tidewater will take the bones away. Also, bones were put in a boat andthrown far away from the settlement into the fjord (observations in2010 in Angujaartorfik).

Examples of departures from the ideal could also be found inarchaeological sites in the study area. These departures are partic-ularly interesting because they seem to reflect unusual circum-stances or special situations at a time when exploitation of bone fatand bone marrow was absolutely necessary.

One example of such a departure is the base camp L 14, on thesouthern side of the high plain about 75 km away from the SøndreStrømfjord (Odgaard et al., 2003). The site consisted of eightdwelling structures of different types and apparently different ages.In agreenarea,which is always agood signofmuchorganicmaterial,a row of test excavations was placed. In contrast to results from testexcavations and surface analyses (e.g. Odgaard et al., 2002; Odgaardet al., 2003; Pasda, in preparation) in other camps in the area thebones in the site L 14 were mostly complete (Fig. 11). Not only theboneswerewhole, but also complete spinal columns and entire legsin anatomical order were found. Two 14C dates of caribou bones fellwithin the interval of after 1650e1950 AD and could not be placedmore exactly. A glass bead in the top layer of the midden could bedated to after 1730 AD. Apparently the use of themidden at this sitestopped shortly after this period.

The bones from the top layer stem probably from a periodbetween the mid 1600s and mid 1700s. These bones are used fora comparison with two other sites from the area, which date toa later period (Table 1; Fig. 12). Most interesting in this comparisonare the marrow and bone fat rich skeletal elements: the meta-podials, phalanges and long bones: They are in all cases fragmented

Fig. 6. Bone scatter at the site Angujaartorfik over 4 m� 8 m and view from south ontothe bone scatter with a yellow measuring tape lying in the centre of the bone scatter inthe foreground. An archaeological structure could not be seen, but stones from olderstructureshavebeen reused for newhouse constructions in the camp. (For interpretationof the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to theweb versionof this article).

Fig. 5. Bone scatter in front of an archaeological Thule house structure. The arrowpoints to the main bone scatter which can be seen on the above photo.

Fig. 7. Bone scatter and artefacts made of Kiseliaq in front a Palaeo-Eskimo tent houseat the site Angujaartorfik situated at the Søndre Strømfjord (summer 2010).

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e43 39

in the rockshelter and tent house L 16, whereas they are completeto a high percentage in camp L 14.

As mentioned above, small-scale family hunting and individualhunts were the most important strategies in the history of thestudied area. However, it seems that communal hunting also tookplace (Grønnow, 2009; Odgaard, 2009), may be during a relativelyshort period in the 18th century.

Stenton (1991, 35-36) explains the change of the hunting orga-nisation into large groups inWest Greenland as connected with thegood opportunity of finding many animals during this cariboumaximum. According to him, the Thule people returned to small-

Fig. 8. a and b: Cranium andmetacarpus of a recently hunted reindeer. The latter is justcut off, and both are left at the hunting spot. c: Craniums, old remains of a hunt.

Fig. 9. Reindeer bones with opened marrow cavity left by modern hunters.

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e4340

scale family hunting when this maximumwas over, and people didnot find enough animals for large-scale hunting.

However, not all caribou maxima caused similar changes. Forexample, the maximum in the mid-19th century did not causesimilar changes in hunting strategies. The change in hunting orga-nisation may have different reasons. Due to contact with Europeanwhale hunters in the 17th century, with the Danish trade stations inthe beginning of the 18th century, and due to trade within the Inuitsociety, the pattern of travel and social organisation on the coastchanged. The settlement structures altered fromsmall familyhousesto large communal houses in the 18th century when large groups ofpeople went on communal hunting and trade-expeditions(Grønnow et al.,1983; Gulløv,1997, 2004; Jensen, 2009, 235). One ofthe products that were sought after in the trade was caribou skin.The caribou skins could be traded for foreign articles (Gad,1969) butbecame perhaps most important in the accelerated internalexchange of raw materials and finished commodities. The price fora small soap stonekettle for examplewas8e10 caribou skins, and fora lamp 2 to 4 whalebones or 2 to 4 caribou skins (Egede, 1925). Thebones from the midden at camp L14 probably reflect that the skinshad become a trade item and that the hunters had changed theirstrategy drastically.

Fig. 10. Waste place in a camp in the inland of Angujaartorfiup Nunaa used by modernhunters.

Fig. 11. Test excavations at the site L 14 with complete reindeer bones, a; thecompleteness of the bones is also visible in test pit B, b.

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e43 41

In the case that only the fur of an animal is required, a completedisjointing of the skeleton is not necessary. The complete bones andnumerous bones in anatomical order in the camp L 14 indicate anexclusive use of hides. Many bones that contained much meat,marrow and bone fat (see Table 1 and Fig. 12: “long bones”) werediscarded. This emphasises the impression that nutrition was notthe primary aim of the hunt. It also indicates that in this period theGreenlanders obviously gave up the ideal “nothing is wasted”.

The many complete bones in anatomical order is also an indi-cation that communal hunting took place. One watercolour, madeby Jens Kreutzmann (1828e1899), who was a Greenlandic hunter,shows this kind of communal hunting: a large-scale hunting drive,where many people were involved (Fig. 13). Clappers (usuallywomen and young people) surrounded and drove the animalstowards the hunters, who shot the animals with bow and arrows

Fig. 12. Comparison of complete and fragmented bones from the midden areas

from a short distance. Bow and arrow were more or less replacedafter the introduction of the gun in the second half of the 18thcentury. However, during the war between Denmark and England(1807e1814), and also in the period after the war, when ammuni-tion became difficult to obtain in Greenland, the use of bow andarrow enjoyed a revival (Grønnow et al., 1983). However, at thetime of Jens Kreutzmann, communal hunting was not usual, andthe adherent text says that it is portraying how the hunt wascarried out in earlier times.

Previous to the surveys in Angujaartorfiup Nunaa, research wascarried out in a geographically and topographically more accessiblearea where similar phenomenons were discernible. Aasivissuit,north of Søndre Strømfjord, has been used over a long period oftime (early Dorset culture e around 200 BC e until modern times).Archaeological analyses showed that the degree of game exploi-tation changed over time. Excavation in the midden containedlayers with strongly smashed bones and other layers with a not-iceably smaller degree of smashed bones. Hunting drive systemsclose to the campwere well preserved. According to analyses of thecultural layers at the site, the large-scale communal drive huntingwas limited to one or a few decades around 1700 AD (Grønnowet al., 1983, 41e49). The fragments from layer 3 (1650e1750 AD)were on average twice as large as those from the other layers(Grønnow et al., 1983, 70, 72). Besides the low degree of frag-mentation in this layer a large number of articulated bones werefound (Grønnow et al., 1983, their Table 3, pp. 73, 83) which showthat it has not been necessary to utilise the individual animals tothe fullest possible extent.

The Aasivissuit area north of the Søndre Strømfjord is not asmountainous as Angujaartorfiup Nunaa, where the site L 14 is sit-uated. Instead, it has lower hills and grassy valleys. The caribou hasa tendency to follow these valleys in large herds, which make theirmovements to some extent predictable for the hunters. Aasivissuitis strategically placed at a “topographical constriction”, wherecaribou onmigration are naturally concentrated. The large quantityof bones in the midden of layer 3 represented hundreds, perhapsthousands of animals, which show that the bag has been heavy.According to Grønnow et al. (1983), the large bone fragments fromlayer 3 derive from a period in which the utilisation of the carcasshas been relatively extensive. They also write that this is anexpression of “surplus conditions”, which was probably created bythe particularly effective hunting methods of the period.

The base camps in Angujaartorfiup Nuuna are not situated atlocationswith potential for large-scale communal drives (Grønnow,2009, 206e207). The caribou are spread out during the summer inthis area and concentrated migrations have not taken place here,even in periods of caribou population maxima. Neither the topog-raphy nor the migration patterns of the caribou population in thestudied area arewell suited for large-scale drive hunting (Grønnow,2009, 203e205). Nonetheless, nine drive hunt systems have beenregistered during the surveys of 2001e2003e one system started ata camp site and could be followed over 3 km e showing that somedrive hunting took place. The bones in the midden of camp L 14 arean indication of this kind of hunting, where many more animalswere killed than would have been possible by stalking.

of three different sites in the area of Angujaartorfiup Nunaa; see Table 1.

Fig. 13. Painting by Jens Kreutzmann showing drive hunting with bow and arrow. Original at Greenland’s National Museum and Archive.

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e4342

The similarity of the extensive exploitation of animals in Aasi-vissuit and at site L 14 around 1700 AD is evident. However, thestriking difference between the Layer 3 at Aasivissuit and that fromthe site L 14 is that the extent of exploitation of the animals waseven less extensive in site L 14, shown by the completeness of thegreat number of marrow containing bones.

The caribou in central west Greenland is unstable with dramaticpopulation fluctuations. Around the middle of the 18th century thecaribou population became very small (Meldgaard, 1986, 15).Natural causes for the strong diminution of the population are likelybut it is probable that the natural reduction was intensified byexcessive hunting. The crash of the population caused a near stop incaribou hunting in central west Greenland. When hunting againbecame possible, the methods and organisation of the hunt hadchanged back to the original small-scale hunting and individualhunting (Grønnow, 2009, 201). Additionally, the hunters returned tothe intensive exploitation of hunted animals and to the smashingand cooking of most of the bones, which can also be seen in thestrong degree of smashing of bones at Aasivissuit (Grønnow et al.,1983, 72e73) and in numerous archaeological and sub-recentstructures (eg site L 16-1, L 218-6, and other sites documented inPasda, in preparation).

5. Conclusion and Perspectives

A hunting strategy where the killed animals are exploited to theutmost e where “nothing is wasted” e leaves only few traces ofsplintered bones, which can often be found close to the dwellings.Because the bones are smashed and cooked, they do not smell, andit was not necessary to store them in special midden areas. On thecontrary, a hunting strategy aiming for only certain parts (the fur) ofthe animals can produce many smelly bones that have to bedeposited in a midden area away from the house.

Both scenarios can be found in the study area, where the“nothing is wasted” strategy performed by small groups of hunters

seem to have been the most common in prehistory and history.There is, however, evidence that another strategy, leaving middenlayers of unbroken bones, was followed at some point, probably bylarge groups of hunters.

According to Blehr (1990), before the introduction of firearmscommunal hunting was a prerequisite for caribou as a humanresource. It is difficult to get close enough to the animals whenstalking with bow and arrow, and with the ambush method it cantake a very long time before the animals show up at the right place.However, it seems as thesewere the preferredmethods in the studyarea before the communal hunts in the 18th century. Other gamepossibilities are birds and hares, and in some areas fishing. Exca-vations at some of the older base camps in the inland are needed, tolearn about the economical strategy during the times when peopledid not hunt in large groups.

The topography and the migration patterns of the cariboupopulation in the studied area are not well suited for large-scaledrive hunting. Why people did communal hunting in an areawhichis not suited for this kind of hunting, to which extent it was done,and how long, is not fully understood. Until now only a few testexcavations and surface investigations have been carried out. Theonly real indication of communal hunting from the archae-ozoological point of view is found at site L 14. More excavations andanalyses of faunal material are needed to shed light upon thisphenomenon.

Generally, in Greenland today the ideal “nothing is wasted” isnot followed any longer. It is not important for modern huntingethics and it is not necessary for economical reasons. There are,however, still older Greenlandic hunters, who have some knowl-edge and skills concerning traditional hunting and dismembermenttechnologies that have been taught and passed on from onegeneration to the next. Continued interviewing that may help tounderstand the bone distribution patterns of the archaeologicalfinds is planned. Carrying out such investigations in Greenland hasthe advantage that some hunting sites, which have been used for

K. Pasda, U. Odgaard / Quaternary International 238 (2011) 35e43 43

centuries, are still being used in a landscape that has been almostundisturbed since prehistory.

References

Blehr, Otto, 1990. Communal hunting as a prerequisite for caribou (wild reindeer) asa human resource. In: Davis, L.B., Reeves, B.O.K. (Eds.), Hunters of the RecentPast. Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 304e326.

Cachel, S.M., 2000. Subsistence factors among Arctic peoples and the reconstructionof social organization from prehistoric human diet. In: Rowley-Conwy, P. (Ed.),Animal Bones, Human Societies. Monographs in Archaeology Series. OxbowBooks, Oxford, pp. 39e48.

Cuyler, C., Rosing, M., Linnel, J.D.C., 2002. Kangerlussuaq Sisimiut Caribou Pop-ulation (Rangifer Tarandus Groenlandicus) in 2000. Greenland Institute ofNatural Resources, West Greenland. Technical report No. 42.

Cuyler, C., Rosing, M., Egede, J., Rink, H., Møldgaard, H., 2005. Status of Two WestGreenland Caribou Populations 2005, 1) Akia-Maniitsoq, 2) Kangerlussuaq-Sisimiut. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Technical report No. 61.

Dauphiné Jr., T.C., 1976. Biology of the Kaminuriak Population of Barren-GroundCaribou. Part 4. Canadian Wildlife Service. Report Series No. 38.

Dumond, Don, 1984. Prehistory of the bering sea region. Arctic. In: Damas, D. (Ed.),Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 5. Smithsonian Institution, Wash-ington, D.C, pp. 94e105.

Egede, Hans, 1925. Relationer fra Grønland 1721e36(1737) and Det gamle Grønlandsny Perlustration (1741). In: Bobé, L. (Ed.), Meddelelser om Grønland, 54, p. 442.

Friesen, T.M., Arnold, Charles D., 2008. The timing of the Thule migration: newdates from the western Canadian arctic. American Antiquity 73 (3), 527e538.

Gad, Finn, 1969. Grønlands Historie II 1700e1782. Nyt Nordisk Forlag, Copenhagen,760 pp.

Gotfredsen, A.B., 1996. The fauna from the Saqqaq site of Nipisat I: Sisimiut district,west Greenland: preliminary results. In: Grønnow, B. (Ed.), The Paleo-EskimoCultures of Greenland: New Perspectives in Greenlandic Archaeology. DanishPolar Center and The Danish National Museum, Copenhagen, pp. 97e110.

Gotfredsen, A.B., Møbjerg, T., 2004. Nippisat e a Saqqaq culture site in Sisimiut,central west Greenland. Meddelelser om Grønland, Man and Society 31.

Grønnow, B., Meldgaard, M., Nielsen, J.B., 1983. Aasivissuit: the great summer camp.Archaeological, ethnographical and zooarchaeological studies of a caribou-hunting site in west Greenland. Meddelelser om Grønland, Man and Society 5,Copenhagen.

Grønnow, B., 1986. Archaeological investigations of west Greenland caribouhunting. Arctic Anthropology 23, 57e80.

Grønnow, B., 2009. Caribou hunting structures and hunting grounds of the Thuleculture in Angujaartorfiup Nunaa, west Greenland. Papers in Honour of HansChristian Gulløv. In: Grønnow, B. (Ed.), On the Track of the Thule Culture fromBering Strait to East Greenland. Proceedings of the SILA Conference “The ThuleCulture e New Perspectives in Inuit Prehistory” Copenhagen Oct. 26the28th,2006, vol. 15. Publications from the National Museum Studies in Archaeologyand History, Copenhagen, pp. 201e210.

Gulløv, H.C., 1997. From middle ages to colonial times: archaeological and ethno-historical studies of the Thule culture in south west Greenland 1300e1800 AD.Meddelelser om Grønland, Man and Society 23 (Copenhagen).

Gulløv, H.C., 2004. Grønlands Forhistorie. Gyldendal, Copenhagen.Guthrie, H.A., 1975. Introductory Nutrition, Third edn. Mosby, St. Louis.Jensen, E.L., 2009. Stories of the past: collective memory and historical conscious-

ness in the Cape Farwell district. Papers in Honour of Hans Christian Gulløv. In:Grønnow, B. (Ed.), On the Track of the Thule Culture from Bering Strait to EastGreenland. Proceedings of the SILA Conference “The Thule Culture e NewPerspectives in Inuit Prehistory” Copenhagen Oct. 26th e 28th, 2006, vol. 15.Publications from the National Museum Studies in Archaeology and History,Copenhagen, pp. 235e244.

Jochim, M.A., 1981. Strategies for Survival. Academic, New York.Knudsen, P., 2001. Rekonstruktion af brugen af Angujaartorfiup Nunaa I 1900-tallet,

baseret på 6 interviews. Unpublished B.A. thesis delivered at the University ofGreenland.

Knudsen, P.K., 2007. Angujaartorfiup Nunaa: fortidsminder og mundtlig Tradition.Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Tromsø.

Knudsen, P., Odgaard, U., 2003. Video of a Caribou Hunt in Central West Greenland.Angujartorfik.

Mason, O., 2009. Flight from the Bering Strait: Did Siberian Punuk/Thule MilitaryCadres Conquer Northwest Alaska? In: Maschner, H.D.G., McGhee, R.,Mason, O.K. (Eds.), The Northern World A.D. 1100e1350: The Dynamics ofClimate, Economy and Politics. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

McGhee, R., 1996. Ancient People of the Arctic. University of British Columbia Press,Vancouver.

Meldgaard, M., 1986. The Greenland caribou e zoogeography, taxonomy, andpopulation dynamics. Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 20.

Møhl, U., 1972. Animal bones from Itivnera, west Greenland. Meddelelser omGrønland 191 (6) København.

Odgaard, U., Grønnow, B., Gabriel, M., Pasda, C., Pasda, K., 2002. Bosættelsesmønstrei det Centrale Vestgrønland e Rapport om undersøgelserne i AngujaartorfiupNunaa, Manitsoq Kommune, sommeren 2001. Sila Field report 4. Nationalmu-seet, København. http://www.natmus.dk/graphics/natmus2004/sila/Rapporter/4.Feltrapport.pdf, p. 61.

Odgaard, U., Grønnow, B., Gabriel, M., Pasda, C., Pasda, K., Damm, C., 2003. Bosæt-telsesmønstre i det Centrale Vestgrønland e Rapport om undersøgelserne iAngujaartorfiup Nunaa, Maniitsoq Kommune, sommeren 2002. SILA-Fieldreport 12. Nationalmuseet, København. http://www.natmus.dk/graphics/natmus2004/sila/Rapporter/12.Feltrapport.pdf, p. 109.

Odgaard, U., Knudsen, P., Petersen, H.C., Lembo, A., 2005. Bosættelsesmønstre i detcentrale Vestgrønland. Rapport om undersøgelserne i Angujaartorfiup Nunaa,Maniitsoq Kommune, sommeren 2003. SILA e Field report 20. Nationalmuseet,København. http://www.natmus.dk/graphics/natmus2004/sila/Rapporter/20.Feltrapport.pdf, p. 36.

Odgaard, U., 2007a. On the trail of the Caribou hunters: archaeological surveys inwestern Greenland. In: Cummins, V., Johnston, R. (Eds.), Prehistoric Journeys.Oxbow, pp. 21e32.

Odgaard, U., 2007b. Historic and prehistoric caribou hunters in west Greenland. In:Beyries, S., Vaté, V. (Eds.), Les Civilisations du Re nne d’hier et d’aujourd’hui.Approches Ethnohistoriques et Archéologiques et Anthropologiques XXVIIerencontres internationales d’archéologie et d’histoire d’Antibes. APDCA, Anti-bes, pp. 1e22. 2007.

Odgaard, U., 2009. Tent houses, territories and two generations. Papers in Honour ofHans Christian Gulløv. In: Grønnow, B. (Ed.), On the Track of the Thule Culturefrom Bering Strait to East Greenland. Proceedings of the SILA Conference “TheThule Culture e New Perspectives in Inuit Prehistory” Copenhagen Oct. 26th e

28th, 2006, vol. 15. Publications from the National Museum Studies inArchaeology and History, Copenhagen, pp. 185e199.

Outram, A.K., 1999. A comparison of Paleo-Eskimo and medieval norse bone fatexploitation in western Greenland. Arctic Anthropology 36, 103e117.

Outram, A.K., 2002. Bone fracture and within-bone nutrients: an experimentallybased method for investigating levels of marrow extraction. In: Miracle, P.,Milner, N. (Eds.), Consuming Passions and Patterns of Consumption. McDonaldInstitute Monographs, Cambridge, pp. 51e63.

Pasda, K., 2009. Connecting the present with the past: traditional hunting methodsand archaeozoological investigations in central west Greenland. In: Grupe, G.,McGlynn, G., Peters, J. (Eds.), Tracking Down the Past. Ethnohistory MeetsArchaeozoology. Documenta Archaeobiologiae. Jahrbuch der Staatssammlungfür Anthropologie und Paläoanatomie München, vol. 7. Verlag Marie LeidorfGmbH, pp. 81e102. Rhaden/Westf.

Pasda, K., (in preparation). Taphonomy and spatial distribution of bones in caribouhunters’ sites in the interior of Central West Greenland. In: U. Odgaard, (ed).Landscapes of the Caribou Hunters.

Petersen, R., 1963. Family Ownership in West Greenland. Folk, Copenhagen.pp. 269e281.

Peterson, R.O., Allen, D.L., Dietz, M.M., 1982. Depletion of bone marrow fat in mooseand a correlation for dehydration. Journal of Wildlife Management 46, 547e551.

Polarfronten, 2005. Flere rendsdyr i Kangerlussuaq. Polarfronten 4 (22), 2005.Powers, W.R., Jordan, R.H., 1990. Human biogeography and climate change in

Siberia and arctic north America in the fourth and fifth millennia BP. Philo-sophical transactions of the royal society of London, series A. Mathematical andPhysical Sciences 330, 665e670.

Speth, J.D., 1983. Bison Kills and Bone Counts. Decision Making by Ancient Hunters.University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Stenton, D.R., 1991. Caribou population dynamics and Thule culture adaptations onsouthern Baffin Island. N.W.T. Arctic Anthropology 28, 15e43.

Wright, J.V., 1995. A History of the Native People of Canada. Mercury Series PaperNo. 152. In: 10,000e1000 B.C. Archaeological Survey of Canada, vol. 1. CanadianMuseum of Civilization, Hull.