{"title":"The Rise of Pastoralism in the Ancient Near East","authors":"Benjamin S. Arbuckle, Emily L. Hammer","doi":"10.1007/s10814-018-9124-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we present a history of pastoralism in the ancient Near East from the Neolithic through the Bronze Age. We describe the accretional development of pastoral technologies over eight millennia, including the productive breeding of domestic sheep, goats, and cattle in the early Neolithic and the subsequent domestication of animals used primarily for labor—donkeys, horses, and finally camels—as well as the first appearance of husbandry strategies such as penning, foddering, pasturing, young male culling, and dairy production. Despite frequent references in the literature to prehistoric pastoral nomads, pastoralism in Southwest Asia was strongly associated with sedentary communities that practiced intensive plant cultivation and was largely local in nature. There is very little evidence in prehistoric and early historic Southwest Asia to support the notion of a “dimorphic society” characterized by separate and specialized agriculturists and mobile pastoralists. Although mobile herders were present in the steppe regions of Syria by the early second millennium BC, mobile pastoralism was the exception rather than the rule at that time; its “identification” in the archaeological record frequently derives from the application of anachronistic ethnographic analogy. We conclude that pastoralism was a diverse, flexible, and dynamic adaptation in the ancient Near East and call for a reinvigorated and empirically based archaeology of pastoralism in Southwest Asia.","PeriodicalId":47005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-018-9124-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this paper, we present a history of pastoralism in the ancient Near East from the Neolithic through the Bronze Age. We describe the accretional development of pastoral technologies over eight millennia, including the productive breeding of domestic sheep, goats, and cattle in the early Neolithic and the subsequent domestication of animals used primarily for labor—donkeys, horses, and finally camels—as well as the first appearance of husbandry strategies such as penning, foddering, pasturing, young male culling, and dairy production. Despite frequent references in the literature to prehistoric pastoral nomads, pastoralism in Southwest Asia was strongly associated with sedentary communities that practiced intensive plant cultivation and was largely local in nature. There is very little evidence in prehistoric and early historic Southwest Asia to support the notion of a “dimorphic society” characterized by separate and specialized agriculturists and mobile pastoralists. Although mobile herders were present in the steppe regions of Syria by the early second millennium BC, mobile pastoralism was the exception rather than the rule at that time; its “identification” in the archaeological record frequently derives from the application of anachronistic ethnographic analogy. We conclude that pastoralism was a diverse, flexible, and dynamic adaptation in the ancient Near East and call for a reinvigorated and empirically based archaeology of pastoralism in Southwest Asia.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Archaeological Research publishes the most recent international research summaries on a broad range of topics and geographical areas. The articles are intended to present the current state-of-the-discipline in regard to a particular geographic area or specific research topic or theme. This authoritative review journal improves access to the growing body of information and literature through the publication of original critical articles, each in a 25-40 page format.2-Year Impact Factor: 4.056 (2017) 5-Year Impact Factor: 4.512 (2017)2 out of 85 on the Anthropology listIncluded in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) PLUS The European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS) was created and developed by European researchers under the coordination of the Standing Committee for the Humanities (SCH) of the European Science Foundation (ESF). https://dbh.nsd.uib.no/publiseringskanaler/erihplus/about/indexSCImago Journal and Country Rank (SJR) 2018: 1.7102 out of 263 on the Archeology (Arts and Humanities) list3 out of 254 on the Archeology list2 out of 131 on the General Arts and Humanities listSJR is a measure of the journal’s relative impact in its field, based on its number of citations and number of articles per publication year.Source Normalised Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 2.112The SNIP measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the total number of citations in a subject field. The impact of a single citation is given higher value in subject areas where citations are less likely, and vice versa.CiteScore 2018: 3.86Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list.htm
SCImago Journal and Country Rank (SJR) 2011 1.227 Archeology 1 out of 96 Archeology (Arts and Humanities) 1 out of 59 Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous) 1 out of 243