The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Animal economy during the Early Bronze Age in South-East Arabia
Abstract
Animal remains from four Early Bronze Age sites in the UAE and Oman (Hili 8, Tell Abraq, Umm an-Nar and Maysar) are analysed with regard to the animal component of the economies represented. Archaeozoological information from sites at Ra’s al-Jinz and Ra’s al-Hadd (Oman) is used for comparison. The latter sites as well as Umm an-Nar are characterized by a very low contribution of domestic fauna to their subsistence economies. More than 90% (by bone weight) of the analysed faunal remains from these sites derive from marine animals (mostly dugong at Umm an-Nar and turtle at Ra’s al-Jinz). Tell Abraq is intermediate with a contribution of ca 50% from the domesticates, while at the inland sites (Hili 8 and Maysar) domestic fauna provided over 90% of the analysed finds. The wild fauna at all sites corresponds well to the respective environments. The domestic fauna is dominated by cattle at the sites in UAE, while in Oman, sheep and goats were more important. Among these, goat is better represented at all sites. Ass remains are present at all sites with the exception of Umm an-Nar. Most likely they represent domestic donkeys. Dromedary remains are frequent at Umm an-Nar, but are rare or absent at the other sites. There are no indications for domestication of this animal during the Early Bronze Age. Cattle seem to have been used as draught animals in agricultural communities (Hili 8), but potentially also for overland transportation of goods. However, there are no indications for an exchange system which delivered preserved products of marine animals (e.g. dried fish) into the hinterland.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For example, at Hili 8, the animal economy was made of nearly 90% of domestic fauna throughout its occupation, and cattle contributed around 60% of these remains, while small ruminants such sheep and goats provided the rest [28].”
From Identifying pastoral and plant products in local and imported pottery in Early Bronze Age southeastern Arabia (2025) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Preservation of other types of bioarchaeological remains in southeastern Arabia, such as macrobotanical [12], faunal [27,28], and human remains [29–31] is variable, which limits information about ancient human dietary practices.”
From Identifying pastoral and plant products in local and imported pottery in Early Bronze Age southeastern Arabia (2025) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Domestic cattle, sheep and goat played a vital role in the EBA subsistence economy [28].”
From Identifying pastoral and plant products in local and imported pottery in Early Bronze Age southeastern Arabia (2025) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“The minimal presence of non-ruminants in the faunal record from inland sites in southeast Arabia [28] and absence of modern reference data adds further complexity to the interpretation.”
From Identifying pastoral and plant products in local and imported pottery in Early Bronze Age southeastern Arabia (2025) · cites this paper as [28]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Suryanarayan, A., Méry, S., Swerida, J., Esposti, M. D., Dollarhide, E., Döpper, S., Douglas, K. A., Eddisford, D., Al-Jahwari, N. S., Mazuy, A., et al. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0324661 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Uerpmann, M., & Uerpmann, H.-P.
- Venue
- Travaux de la Maison de l'Orient et de la Méditerranée
- Publisher
- PERSEE Program
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 465-485
- ISSN
- 1955-4982
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Language
- fr
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review