Hypotheses on cannibalism and burials Gorjanović-Kramberger was first to propose the possible existence of
cannibalism among the Krapina Neanderthals, in 1901. He based this assumption on three factors: mixing of animals and human skeletal remains, breaking of long bones (in order to access the
marrow), and the fact that not a single skull was found in a non-broken state. The idea of possible cannibalism was supported by a number of subsequent scientists, such as
Mirko Malez, H. Ulrich and K. Tomić Karlović. The extreme fragmentation and the occasional burning traces and cranial fragments suggested that Krapina Neanderthals committed cannibalism. Percussion marks on split tibia fragments, opened marrow channels in
humerus,
radius,
ulna and
femur point to marrow extraction. Additionally, breakage patterns and blow marks on
skull fragments specify perimortem skull fracturing for removing the brain. In 1985, anthropologist Trinkaus hypothesized that the skulls were broken because of sediment pressure and movement, and the pieces were separated postdepositionally. He attributes the scattered and incoherent parts of the skeleton to the collapse of rocks, the activities of other mammals, man-made activities like the construction of hearths near the buried skeletons and sedimentary settling of the deposits and so on. Another anthropologist, Russell, hypothesized in 1987 that the remains of the Krapina hominid were defleshed in preparation for the secondary burial. Others have seen the damage on bones as a result of a
secondary burial or other ritual actions, which may have included cannibalism. As such, the meat may have been exposed to nature for animals, or it could have been removed using sharp stone tools. • Krapina 4, 5, 20 and 31 show evidence of small
blunt trauma, which would have resulted in short term pain and blood loss, and would have required cleaning. It may have also resulted in short term cognitive impairment, long term possibly asymptomatic. • Krapina 34.7 shows evidence of a significant
depressed parietal skull fracture. It would have resulted in significant pain, blood loss and inflammation of the wound. Aside from help in cleaning and dressing the wound, the community might have cared for an individual who exhibited short term, and possible long term cognitive disturbance. • Krapina 106 and adult Krapina 110 show a high degree of degeneration to the
C4 and
C7 cervical spinal nerves. It would have limited the mobility of the individuals, as well as their range of motion. If the nerves were affected by degeneration, the individuals would have required constant care. • Krapina 120.71 had a fragmented rib with signs of
fibrous dysplasia. If the dysplastic neoplasm was asymptomatic no care would have been necessary, but a symptomatic neoplasm would have required a high level of care.
Other Krapina recoveries Krapina 3 was a skull recovered by Gorjanović-Kramberger, which he initially identified as Cranium C. When discovered, the skull was missing the left side. The cranium is said to be of an adult woman. After Gorjanović-Kramberger recovered the talons from the site he cataloged and sent them to be identified by Lambrecht. Lambrecht identified the talons from a white-tailed eagle. In the same site they were able to recover twenty-nine different bird species. Among those birds, the majority were eagles and owls. While analyzing the talons they saw that they were the only ones with changes made by someone. ==Skeletal remains==