Animals as Symbols—Past Perception of Animals by Humans, the Zooarchaeological Evidence

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2022) | Viewed by 9194

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Dept. of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
Interests: zooarchaeology; social zooarchaeology; animal domestication; food-ways and culture; Near Eastern archaeology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Human–animal relations in the past are reflected in the zooarchaeological record in various ways—in the way prey animals were hunted and domesticated, how farm animals were raised and treated, as well as the interaction with pet animals, and animals’ roles in ritual behavior. A symbolic value may have been attributed to wild and domestic animals—a value that was based on their interaction with, and their perception by, past human populations. These symbolic roles may be archaeologically visible in rituals, but are also expressed in daily life activities, when animals and their products are used as tools to define status, group identity, and culture, among other roles.

Original manuscripts that address any aspect of the use of animals as symbols in the past are invited for this Special Issue. Topics of special interest include but are not limited to the changing relationship with specific animals (both wild and domestic animals) over time, and the use of animals by different cultures.

Dr. Lidar Sapir-Hen
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • zooarchaeology
  • rituals
  • symbols
  • human–animal interaction
  • identity
  • culture

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

46 pages, 19513 KiB  
Article
Household Rituals and Merchant Caravanners: The Phenomenon of Early Bronze Age Donkey Burials from Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath, Israel
by Haskel J. Greenfield, Jon Ross, Tina L. Greenfield, Shira Albaz, Sarah J. Richardson and Aren M. Maeir
Animals 2022, 12(15), 1931; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12151931 - 28 Jul 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3760
Abstract
Most studies of ritual and symbolism in early complex societies of the Near East have focused on elite and/or public behavioural domains. However, the vast bulk of the population would not have been able to fully participate in such public displays. This paper [...] Read more.
Most studies of ritual and symbolism in early complex societies of the Near East have focused on elite and/or public behavioural domains. However, the vast bulk of the population would not have been able to fully participate in such public displays. This paper explores the zooarchaeological and associated archaeological evidence for household rituals in lower-stratum residences in the Early Bronze Age (EB) of the southern Levant. Data from the EB III (c. 2850–2550 BCE) deposits excavated at the site of Tell eṣ-Ṣâfi/Gath, Israel, are illustrative of the difficulty in identifying the nature of household rituals. An integrated analytical approach to the architecture, figurines, foundation deposits, and domestic donkey burials found in lower-stratum domestic residences provides insights into the nature of household rituals. This integrated contextual perspective allows the sacred and symbolic role(s) of each to be understood and their importance for EB urban society to be evaluated. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

14 pages, 1074 KiB  
Review
Wild Meets Domestic in the Near Eastern Neolithic
by Nerissa Russell
Animals 2022, 12(18), 2335; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12182335 - 8 Sep 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 4168
Abstract
The categories of wild and domestic are one of the classic ways the nature/culture dichotomy manifests itself in human interactions with the environment. Some argue that this distinction is not helpful and a projection of modern thought, and certainly the boundaries are complicated. [...] Read more.
The categories of wild and domestic are one of the classic ways the nature/culture dichotomy manifests itself in human interactions with the environment. Some argue that this distinction is not helpful and a projection of modern thought, and certainly the boundaries are complicated. However, we should try to determine in each case whether it was meaningful to particular people in the past. Here I explore whether wild and domestic were relevant concepts to the inhabitants of the Neolithic Near East in their relations with animals around the time when livestock herding began. Drawing on depictions of animals and the treatment of living animals and their remains, I examine three case studies (Cyprus, Upper Mesopotamia, and Çatalhöyük in central Anatolia) to evaluate whether emic distinctions between wild and domestic existed. I conclude that this was in fact a crucial distinction that shaped economic choices as well as ritual activities. Differential treatment of wild and domestic animals indicates that they were accorded different forms of personhood. The particular nature of human relations with wild animals helped shape the spread of both wild and domestic animals. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop