Diversified subsistence strategies in early sedentary populations of mainland Southeast Asia: insights from the faunal remains at Lò gạch, Southern Vietnam
Quý Thị Kim Trần, Christine Hertler, Kính Ngọc Đặng, Philip J. Piper
{"title":"Diversified subsistence strategies in early sedentary populations of mainland Southeast Asia: insights from the faunal remains at Lò gạch, Southern Vietnam","authors":"Quý Thị Kim Trần, Christine Hertler, Kính Ngọc Đặng, Philip J. Piper","doi":"10.1007/s12520-025-02295-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the past two decades, zooarchaeology combined with improved dating techniques has provided significant insights into the initial appearance of domestic animals in Southeast Asia. The suite of domestic animals commonly associated with Neolithic introduction—pigs (Sus scrofa), dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), chicken (Gallus gallus), and bovines (Bubalus bubalis and Bos sp(p).)—arrived early in some areas but not others. In Southern Vietnam, analysis of animal bone assemblages and radiocarbon dating of Neolithic sites (c. 4200–3500 cal. BP) indicate that early managed animal populations were linked to sedentary lifestyles. Research has shown that pigs and dogs are present in the Neolithic, but bovines and chicken are absent. But the timing of integration of these domesticates into economic strategies remains unclear due to the lack of zooarchaeological studies on early metallurgical sites. Lò Gạch, the focus of this project, an early copper-base metallurgy settlement on the Vàm Cỏ Tây River, shows that animal management was supplemented by hunting around 3000–2200 cal. BP, with limited evidence of bovines and no domestic chicken. This highlights the complexity and regional variability in the spread and integration of domestic animals in the region.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8214,"journal":{"name":"Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences","volume":"17 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12520-025-02295-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-025-02295-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the past two decades, zooarchaeology combined with improved dating techniques has provided significant insights into the initial appearance of domestic animals in Southeast Asia. The suite of domestic animals commonly associated with Neolithic introduction—pigs (Sus scrofa), dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), chicken (Gallus gallus), and bovines (Bubalus bubalis and Bos sp(p).)—arrived early in some areas but not others. In Southern Vietnam, analysis of animal bone assemblages and radiocarbon dating of Neolithic sites (c. 4200–3500 cal. BP) indicate that early managed animal populations were linked to sedentary lifestyles. Research has shown that pigs and dogs are present in the Neolithic, but bovines and chicken are absent. But the timing of integration of these domesticates into economic strategies remains unclear due to the lack of zooarchaeological studies on early metallurgical sites. Lò Gạch, the focus of this project, an early copper-base metallurgy settlement on the Vàm Cỏ Tây River, shows that animal management was supplemented by hunting around 3000–2200 cal. BP, with limited evidence of bovines and no domestic chicken. This highlights the complexity and regional variability in the spread and integration of domestic animals in the region.
期刊介绍:
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences covers the full spectrum of natural scientific methods with an emphasis on the archaeological contexts and the questions being studied. It bridges the gap between archaeologists and natural scientists providing a forum to encourage the continued integration of scientific methodologies in archaeological research.
Coverage in the journal includes: archaeology, geology/geophysical prospection, geoarchaeology, geochronology, palaeoanthropology, archaeozoology and archaeobotany, genetics and other biomolecules, material analysis and conservation science.
The journal is endorsed by the German Society of Natural Scientific Archaeology and Archaeometry (GNAA), the Hellenic Society for Archaeometry (HSC), the Association of Italian Archaeometrists (AIAr) and the Society of Archaeological Sciences (SAS).