. Breviora. 971 CERION FROM INDIAN SHELL-HEAPS 17 whorls. I have never seen a natural accumulation, cither recent or fossil, in which many specimens are missing their apical whorls. After suffering one dental misfortune, I am quite sure that the tops cannot be bitten off. Apices can be removed by rubbing either against limestone or volcanic rock, but the process is much too laborious and time-consuming. I am convinced that the tops were removed by striking. They were not crushed by striking the top of the shell while holding the bottom against a substrate (and keeping the shell vertical), for
. Breviora. 971 CERION FROM INDIAN SHELL-HEAPS 17 whorls. I have never seen a natural accumulation, cither recent or fossil, in which many specimens are missing their apical whorls. After suffering one dental misfortune, I am quite sure that the tops cannot be bitten off. Apices can be removed by rubbing either against limestone or volcanic rock, but the process is much too laborious and time-consuming. I am convinced that the tops were removed by striking. They were not crushed by striking the top of the shell while holding the bottom against a substrate (and keeping the shell vertical), for this process invari- ably breaks the lower lip of the aperture before crushing the top. If, however, the shell is placed on its side, horizontally against the substrate, the top can easily be removed by striking with a sharp instrument. In fact, the flint chips and stone tools of Rooi Rincon and Kintjan, are excellent devices for this purpose. With a bit of practice, the apices can be removed with a single blow. This leaves open the question of why the apices were removed. 1 can imagine three interpretations: A) Removal is unrelated to eating; the shells were used for an ornamental or other purpose. B) When the top is removed, the animal can be sucked out through the apical hole thus produced. C) Removal of the top aids, somehow, in sucking the animal out through its normal aperture. I cannot imagine what nongastronomical purpose so many thousand decapitated shells could have served. Moreover, the following demonstration that decapitation is an aid to removal of the animal argues strongly against Figure 5. X-ray photographs of decapitated Ccrion uva from Kintjan (left 2 specimens) and Rooi Rincon (right 2). Since internal whorl parti- tions are intact, animal was not removed through apical hole. Specimen on left is mm Please note that these images are extracted from scanned page images that may have been digitally enhanced for readability - coloration and appear
Size: 2390px × 1046px
Photo credit: © Library Book Collection / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorharvarduniversitymuseumofcomparative, bookcentury1900
