Southeastern Arabia Research Articles

New Evidence of the Initial Appearance of Iron in Southeastern Arabia

The third season of excavations at Muweilah in the United Arab Emirates has revealed new evidence of the initial use of iron in southeastern Arabia. The evidence is contextualised within existing evidence of iron use in this region and some tentative interpretations of the importance of the find are presented.

Des feux sacrificiels pour la divinityé solaire à ed‐Dur

Phytoliths have been identifed in a sample taken from a large black lens of burned sand located in front of the main entrance of a temple at ed‐Dur (Umm al‐Qaiwain, United Arab Emirates). Comparisons with a reference collection allow the identification of the sample with Phoenix dactylifera L., the date palm. Attention is also drawn to the interpretation and symbolism of the date palm in southeastern Arabia during the late pre‐Islamic era.

Settlement patterns, polities and regional complexity in the Southeast Arabian Iron Age

Analysis of environmental and settlement data highlights the existence of a series of piedmont settlements with which are associated : irrigation systems, the potential for intensive agriculture and the ability to control and defend such resources. When combined with historical evidence, these are interpreted as a series of politically complex polities existing in a restricted environmental z.one. The focus of fieldwork in southeastern Arabia has led to an over-emphasis of the importance of these settlements in terms of regional hierarchies and polity interaction. An examination of settlements in other environmental zones in combination with distributional analysis of artefacts suggests that piedmont settlements did not economically and politically dominate the region as a whole.

The Iranian Iron Age and the Chronology of Settlement in Southeastern Arabia

L'objectif de cet article est de mettre l'accent sur l'importance des contacts entre les populations du Golfe durant l'Age du Fer et en particulier, sur l'influence de l'Iran sur les cultures du sud de l'Arabie, en proposant une chronologie de l'assemblage ceramique de Rumeilah (Oman), recemment reevalue par une datation absolue (1991), en particulier, et de l'habitat du sud-est de la peninsule arabique, en general

Rewriting the Late Prehistory of South-Eastern Arabia: A Reply to Jocelyn Orchard

In a pair of recent articles Jocelyn Orchard has presented what is arguably the most radical interpretation of late fourth and third millennium BC cultural development in the Oman peninsula to appear since archaeological excavations began in this region during the 1950s. Her theses challenge many aspects of current thinking and as such deserve to be scrutinised by all scholars working in East and South Arabian archaeology. Moreover, given the fact that Orchard has reviewed the status of the Jamdat Nasr pottery found in the Hafit-type graves of Oman and the United Arab Emirates, it is important that Mesopotamian specialists examine what she has said about relations between Jamdat Nasr Mesopotamia and the Oman peninsula.In an effort to extract the salient points from Orchard's 1994 and 1995 articles I shall both quote directly and paraphrase her theses in point form. In this way I believe it will be easier to see how her argument is constructed out of a series of interlocking propositions.1. In 1994 Orchard coined the term “Al-Hajar oasis towns”, asserting that these differed from so-called “Umm an-Nar settlements”. The two settlement types, she maintained, had been conflated erroneously by scholars working in the area in part because of “the fact that on a number of sites Umm an-Nar tombs are found intermingled with al-Hajar buildings”. Orchard, however, argued that “these two types of third millennium settlement are very different in style” (Orchard 1994: 63). She characterised the Umm an-Nar buildings — in actual fact she only means tombs — as being “built wholly or in part of white limestone”, which differed from the “al-Hajar form of masonry-revetted platform construction”. “Indeed”, she wrote, speaking of the ceramic evidence for such a partitioning of third millennium culture in the Oman peninsula, “the general assumption that all third millennium wares found in the al-Hajar region represent a single culture is curious in view of the fact that three groups of wares can be distinguished, each of which is firmly associated with a different milieu (viz. Umm an-Nar tombs, settlements on Umm an-Nar and Ghanadha islands and al-Hajar settlements)” (Orchard 1994: 64).

Re-writing the late prehistory of south-eastern Arabia: a reply to Jocelyn Orchard

In a pair of recent articles Jocelyn Orchard has presented what is arguably the most radical interpretation of late fourth and third millennium BC cultural development in the Oman peninsula to appear since archaeological excavations began in this region during the 1950s. Her theses challenge many aspects of current thinking and as such deserve to be scrutinised by all scholars working in East and South Arabian archaeology. Moreover, given the fact that Orchard has reviewed the status of the Jamdat Nasr pottery found in the Hafit-type graves of Oman and the United Arab Emirates, it is important that Mesopotamian specialists examine what she has said about relations between Jamdat Nasr Mesopotamia and the Oman peninsula.In an effort to extract the salient points from Orchard's 1994 and 1995 articles I shall both quote directly and paraphrase her theses in point form. In this way I believe it will be easier to see how her argument is constructed out of a series of interlocking propositions.1. In 1994 Orchard coined the term “Al-Hajar oasis towns”, asserting that these differed from so-called “Umm an-Nar settlements”. The two settlement types, she maintained, had been conflated erroneously by scholars working in the area in part because of “the fact that on a number of sites Umm an-Nar tombs are found intermingled with al-Hajar buildings”. Orchard, however, argued that “these two types of third millennium settlement are very different in style” (Orchard 1994: 63). She characterised the Umm an-Nar buildings — in actual fact she only means tombs — as being “built wholly or in part of white limestone”, which differed from the “al-Hajar form of masonry-revetted platform construction”. “Indeed”, she wrote, speaking of the ceramic evidence for such a partitioning of third millennium culture in the Oman peninsula, “the general assumption that all third millennium wares found in the al-Hajar region represent a single culture is curious in view of the fact that three groups of wares can be distinguished, each of which is firmly associated with a different milieu (viz. Umm an-Nar tombs, settlements on Umm an-Nar and Ghanadha islands and al-Hajar settlements)” (Orchard 1994: 64).

Excavations at Muweilah. Preliminary Report on the First Two Seasons

Two seasons of excavation have been completed at the site of Muweilah in the United Arab Emirates. The excavation is prompted by a desire to examine the manner in which humans inhabited arid regions in the past. The project seeks to understand the subsistence practices at this site within the broader context of settlement patterns in late prehistoric southeastern Arabia and to examine some of the biases and prior assumptions concerning human occupation of environments which are often considered hostile and marginal. The results obtained in the first two seasons of excavations are presented below and they indicate that a positive contribution will be made towards achieving these objectives.

The origins of agricultural settlement in the al-Ḥajar region

The earliest agricultural settlements in the al-Ḥajar region of southeastern Arabia were large, well-planned centres with a sophisticated and varied architecture. Because of their close environmental relationship with the al-Ḥajar mountain range and in order to distinguish them from the late 3rd millennium buildings and tombs of the type initially discovered and excavated on the island of Umm an-Nar, I have named these first settlements the al-Ḥajar oasis towns. To date, al-Ḥajar oasis towns have been identified at the sites of al-Khashbah, Firq, Bisyā, al-Ghubra, ʿAmlā, Bāt, Hili and Bidya, but there is every reason to believe that they also existed at Ṭawī Sim and Maysar, and at locations in Wadi Jizzi, Wadi Tayin, Wadi ʿAndām and Wadi Ḥalfayn (Fig. 1).Associated with the ruins of the al-Ḥajar oasis towns are extensive cemeteries of Beehive tombs. These well-built funerary structures, usually circular or oval in plan, have a single, paved, corbelled chamber, encompassed by one or two contiguous walls of carefully selected, skilfully laid, flattish limestones. Their beehive shape is formed by spanning the gap at the top of the corbelling with large, flat stones and piling more flat stones on top of these to form a domed superstructure (Fig. 2a–b). While generally similar in appearance as a class, the Beehive tombs may nevertheless vary in size, in the number of their walls, in the shape of the entrance (which may be triangular, wedge-shaped or rectangular) and in whether features such as external plinths or kerbstones are present. It remains to be determined whether these variations have any social, regional or chronological significance.

The Origins of Agricultural Settlement in the al-Ḥajar Region

The earliest agricultural settlements in the al-Ḥajar region of southeastern Arabia were large, well-planned centres with a sophisticated and varied architecture. Because of their close environmental relationship with the al-Ḥajar mountain range and in order to distinguish them from the late 3rd millennium buildings and tombs of the type initially discovered and excavated on the island of Umm an-Nar, I have named these first settlements the al-Ḥajar oasis towns. To date, al-Ḥajar oasis towns have been identified at the sites of al-Khashbah, Firq, Bisyā, al-Ghubra, ʿAmlā, Bāt, Hili and Bidya, but there is every reason to believe that they also existed at Ṭawī Sim and Maysar, and at locations in Wadi Jizzi, Wadi Tayin, Wadi ʿAndām and Wadi Ḥalfayn (Fig. 1).Associated with the ruins of the al-Ḥajar oasis towns are extensive cemeteries of Beehive tombs. These well-built funerary structures, usually circular or oval in plan, have a single, paved, corbelled chamber, encompassed by one or two contiguous walls of carefully selected, skilfully laid, flattish limestones. Their beehive shape is formed by spanning the gap at the top of the corbelling with large, flat stones and piling more flat stones on top of these to form a domed superstructure (Fig. 2a–b). While generally similar in appearance as a class, the Beehive tombs may nevertheless vary in size, in the number of their walls, in the shape of the entrance (which may be triangular, wedge-shaped or rectangular) and in whether features such as external plinths or kerbstones are present. It remains to be determined whether these variations have any social, regional or chronological significance.

Excavations at ed‐Dur (Umm al‐Qaiwain, U.A.E.) — Preliminary report on the sixth Belgian season (1992)

The results of six weeks’research in 1992 by a Belgian team from Gent University at ed‐Dur in the Emirate of Umm al‐Qaiwain are presented. The excavations concentrated on the areas BQ and BR, where a total of almost 2700 m2 were excavated. Both areas contained mostly graves, all plundered, however, except for some plain earth‐burials. These large exposures provided a vast amount of various objects and pottery and gave further information on burial practices of the 1st cent. A.D. in southeastern Arabia.

Third Millennium Oasis Towns and Environmental Constraints on Settlement in the al-Hajar Region

Concentrations of substantial ruins, sometimes occurring as isolated but neighbouring structures, have been recorded at a number of locations in the foothill zone of the al-Ḥajar mountain range in south-eastern Arabia (Fig. 1), an area widely identified with the ancient copper-producing land of Magan. These assemblages are always distinguished by the presence of large, circular structures and may also include the remains of houses and other features, as well as cemeteries either in close proximity to the buildings or sited on nearby hills. They are attributed to the 3rd millennium B.C. by their related pottery, by carbon-14 dates where these are available and, when such criteria are lacking, by their architecture, masonry and brickwork which are notably different from those of adjacent 2nd and 1st millennium buildings. In view of their close environmental relationship with the al-Ḥajar range and in order to separate them from the late 3rd millennium buildings and tombs which were first discovered and excavated on the island of Umm an-Nar, Abu Dhabi, and which have since been located at many sites in the al-Ḥajar zone, I shall refer to these 3rd millennium assemblages as the al-Ḥajar settlements.

Third millennium oasis towns and environmental constraints on settlement in the Al-Hajar region Part I: The Al-Ḥajar Oasis Towns

Concentrations of substantial ruins, sometimes occurring as isolated but neighbouring structures, have been recorded at a number of locations in the foothill zone of the al-Ḥajar mountain range in south-eastern Arabia (Fig. 1), an area widely identified with the ancient copper-producing land of Magan. These assemblages are always distinguished by the presence of large, circular structures and may also include the remains of houses and other features, as well as cemeteries either in close proximity to the buildings or sited on nearby hills. They are attributed to the 3rd millennium B.C. by their related pottery, by carbon-14 dates where these are available and, when such criteria are lacking, by their architecture, masonry and brickwork which are notably different from those of adjacent 2nd and 1st millennium buildings. In view of their close environmental relationship with the al-Ḥajar range and in order to separate them from the late 3rd millennium buildings and tombs which were first discovered and excavated on the island of Umm an-Nar, Abu Dhabi, and which have since been located at many sites in the al-Ḥajar zone, I shall refer to these 3rd millennium assemblages as the al-Ḥajar settlements.

A new Bactrian find from southeastern Arabia

A new and handsome find, a decorated bone comb from Tell Abraq in the United Arab Emirates dated about 2100–2000 BC, provides another link between eastern Arabia and the distant Bactrian lands.

Structuring the Late Stone Age of Southeastern Arabia

This paper treats the classification of a number of facies in the Late Stone Age of Southeastern Arabia. The basis for this classification is a selection of substantial find complexes of chipped stone artifacts from sites located along the coast of Oman. Human occupation in the region dates to the beginning of the Holocene, but insufficient material is available for the first quarter of the post‐Pleistocene era. At the beginning of the second quarter of the Holocene, we find a relatively undifferentiated stone tool‐using facies (Wadi‐Wutayya‐Facies) which was appar‐ ently contemporary with the Qatar B blade‐arrowhead horizon in the interior of the Oman peninsula. Early in the 5th millennium BC, the Wadi‐Wutayya‐Facies was superseded by the Saruq‐Facies which can be seen as a local variant of the “Arabian bifacial tradition”. The high point in the Late Stone Age occupation of the coast was reached early in the 4th millennium BC when various local facies can be distinguished. These include the Ra's‐al‐Hamra‐Facies in the central coastal zone around Muscat and the Bir‐Bira‐Facies in the area around Sur. This phase, which was characterized particularly by the formation of shell middens, seems to have lasted only about 500 years. An essentially aceramic occupation on the coast of the Gulf of Oman, called the Bandar‐Jissa‐Facies, represents the final phase in the classification of Late Stone Age occupation outlined here. This facies was characterized by the use of a simple stone tool industry alongside of metal artifacts, and was contemporary with the Early Bronze age occupation of the southern and southwestern flanks of the Oman mountains. Information on categories of finds other than chipped stone, particularly those made of groundstone and shell, as well as observations on the economic and environmental history of the periods discussed, complement the study of the stone tool industries and form the basis for an outline of the history of Southeastern Arabia in the second quarter of the post‐glacial era.

Chronostratigraphy of the Cretaceous carbonate shelf, southeastern Arabia

Abstract Carbonate deposits dominated the southeastern part of the Arabian Shelf from Berriasian to Santonian time, approximately 60 Ma. Deposition was terminated by the development of the Oman Foredeep in Coniacian-Santonian following the initial emplacement of the Hawasina and Semail nappes in the Turonian. The Lower and middle Cretaceous units in Arabia correlate with European reference sections and the current ages of the stage boundaries can be used to form a quantitative scale. The Thamama-Kahmah Group to the Ilam-Halul Limestone consists of four major unconformity-bounded, shoaling-up depositional sequences that range in duration from 3 to 22 Ma. These sequences represent significant transgressive events on the shelf. The Rayda-Salil-Habshan sequence represents drowning and extensive incursion of the deep shelf landward; it lasted about 13 Ma. Small-scale, possibly climatic cycles comprise the Salil and Rayda formations. The contact with the overlying Lekhwair-Kharaib-Shuaiba sequence is normally sharp with no evidence of erosion. This sequence lasted about 18 Ma and consists of numerous shoaling-up cycles and local disconformities. The unconformity between the Shuaiba and Nahr Umr is a regional disconformity with evidence of local exposure. The hiatus spans most of the Late Aptian in the Oman Mountains, and in Abu Dhabi it spans the youngest part of the Late Aptian. The Nahr Umr-Natih sequence in Oman spanned about 22 Ma and consists of four shoaling-up cycles. An important drowning event in the Oman Mountains occurred during the earliest Middle Cenomanian and is represented by the submarine hardground at the top of the ‘E’ member. The youngest sequence consists of the Laffan-Ilam formations in the Khatiyah Basin and lasted about 3 Ma. These depositional sequences correspond to transgressive events on other plates and represent eustatic sea level changes. The onlapping unconformities in the Oman Mountains represent times when the peripheral swell was active. Restricted, intraplatform basins, in which organic-rich muds were deposited, developed four times. These units are best developed in the Bab-Khatiyah Basin and locally extended eastward into Oman. The Bab Member of the Shuaiba Formation is mainly Late Aptian. The Khatiyah Formation is coeval with the Early Cenomanian, lower ‘E’ member of the Natih in Oman. The ‘B’ member of the Natih is Late Cenomanian in age. The Laffan Formation is mainly Coniacian in age and represents the final restricted basin upon the southeastern Arabian Shelf.

Estudios sobre la Herpetofauna Canaria I. El Cariotipo de Gallotia simonyi stehlini y de G. atlantica spp. en Poblaciones de la Isla de Gran Canaria1

Abstract A karyological analysis on lizards of the Canary Islands Gallotia simonyi stehlini and G. atlantica ssp., resulted in both cases in a formula of 2n = 40 (38 1 + 2 m; NF = 40); what, besides the results in Gallotia galloti, defines the genus Gallotia (Lacertidae) endemic of the Canary Islands as a monophyetic unit. Considering the ancestral characteristic demonstrated in several species of this genus by diferent authors such as some morphological aspects (the hemipenis) as well as ethological aspects (copulatory ritual), it pointed out the important coincidence of the karyotype of these species and its relictual character. The similarities with Lacerta jayakari of Oman, are commented taking into consideration the botanical connections between the Canary Islands and south-eastern Arabia.

Freshwater snails of Oman, South Eastern Arabia

A systematic account is given of the extant freshwater snail fauna of Oman, based on recent collections made in Dhofar and in the northern mountainous areas. Also included are certain species found in brackish coastal localities. A total of 8 freshwater species is regarded as belonging to the fauna of normal freshwater; 7 have been found alive (Thiara scabra, Melanoides tuberculata, Lymnaea natalensis, Gyraulus piscinarum, Biomphalaria arabica, Bulinus wrighti and Indoplanorbis exustus) and one is known only as shells (Paludestrina glaucovirens). This report of G. piscinarum is the first for Oman and may be the first reliable identification for Arabia. Three taxa from brackish water, Gangetia miliacea, Iravadia quadrasi and Melanoides sp., are new for the fauna of Oman and of the whole Arabian peninsula. The finding of G. miliacea provides the first instance of any member of the Stenothyridae living west of the Gulf of Oman and identified from whole snails rather than empty shells. I. quadrasi is the first member of its genus to be found alive west of the Gulf of Oman.

Parallel Evolution in African and Mascarene Hypericum

Summary. The East African Hypericum keniense is distinct from H. angustifolium of Reunion, but each species has a closely related derivative taxon which differs from it by similar characters, respectively H. revolutum and H. lanceolatum. These pairs of taxa are regarded as only subspecifically distinct (the appropriate nomenclatural changes being made); and they are shown to have evolved from an ancestral species that probably occupied a single area in the East Africa-Madagascar-Mascarene region in the Cretaceous era, before these land blocks were separated by rift and drift. The species of Hypericum that have the greatest number of primitive characters belong to sect. Campylosporus, a section that is represented in tropical and south-eastern Africa, Madagascar, the Comoro Islands, Reunion, Socotra, south-eastern Arabia and Fernando Po (Robson, 1977). Within this section the most primitive species appears to be H. bequaertii De Wild., which is confined to the Ruwenzori Mountains of Uganda and Zaire (Milne-Redhead (i953), Bamps (1970)), where it grows in the upper part of the ericaceous belt and the lower part of the alpine belt (Hedberg, 1957). Very closely related to it is the taxon known hitherto as H. keniense Schweinf., which occurs at somewhat lower altitudes on several of the East African mountains, including Ruwenzori (Ross (1955)), where its zone of occurrence (from the montane forest belt to the alpine belt) overlaps that of H. bequaertii. The species are, however, ecologically distinct, as H. bequaertii inhabits moist and protected localities whereas H. keniense grows on comparatively dry, more open ground. This evolutionary series is continued with H. revolutum Vahl, which is present in the montane forest belt at lower altitudes than H. keniense but overlaps it in range. It is characteristic of the uppermost zone of this belt, together with Hagenia abyssinica (Bruce) Gmelin (Rosaceae; Hedberg (1950)). Its distribution, however, is much wider than that of H. keniense and includes almost the whole of the mainland area of sect. Campylosporus, i.e. except the extreme west (Nigeria, Guinea), the extreme northeast (Somalia, northeastern Ethiopia) and Angola; but it is absent from the islands except Fernando Po (Map 2). This series of species ends with H. gnidiifolium A. Rich., which has a restricted distribution in the Tigre and Shoa Provinces of Ethiopia. Its foliar, inflorescence and floral characters can be easily derived from those of H. revolutum, but not from those of H. roeperanum Schimper ex A. Rich., of which Moggi & Pisacchi (1967) considered it a subspecies. In 1797 Lamarck described from the island of R6union two species,

Sovereignty and Jurisdiction in Eastern Arabia

A REMINDER of the difficulties and complications that can arise from the absence of any agreed frontiers in Eastern and SouthEastern Arabia has recently been afforded by the struggle in Oman between the Sultan of Muscat and the soi-disant Imam, Ghalib ibn Ali. To some observers at the time the gravest implication of the struggle appeared to lie in the opportunity it offered Saudi Arabia to resume the pursuit of her long-standing ambition to gain control of South-Eastern Arabia by giving the Imam and his followers material and moral backing; it was even suspected that the Saudi Arabian Government might have actively instigated the Imam to raise the standard of revolt. While there is a danger, in so emphasizing the external influences that may have contributed to the uprising, of under-estimating its more relevant internal causes, it is nevertheless true to say, as some commentators have said, that the opportunities for Saudi Arabia to exploit a disturbed situation of this kind might have been considerably fewer if the frontiers in this part of Arabia had been delineated. So long as these remain vague and unfixed King Saud will continue to feel free to challenge the authority of the Sultan of Muscat and Oman and that of the rulers of the Trucial Shaikhdoms in the western marches of their dominions, as he did five years ago when he despatched a force to seize the Buraimi Oasis. Unfortunately, the demarcation of the frontiers of Eastern Arabia is a task of far greater complexity than the readiness with which the suggestions were put forward during the Oman troubles would indicate, and the opposition of Saudi Arabia, now as in the past, to any boundary settlement not based upon the complete acceptance of her claims is far from being the only difficulty in the way of such a settlement. Sovereignty and jurisdiction, the essential accompaniments of frontier delineation, are not subjects that admit of easy discussion in the context of the desert borderlands of Eastern Arabia; nor has the political evolution of the countries of the region yet reached a stage where these concepts might be expected to possess easily recognizable force and meaning. The only frontiers in existence in Eastern Arabia, defined by treaty and internationally recognized, are those of Kuwait with Saudi Arabia and the frontiers of both with the neutral zone lying between them on the Persian Gulf coast. Elsewhere in Eastern Arabia there are what might be termed frontieres de convenance which have not yet received the sanction i6

The Social Organization of Mecca and the Origins of Islam

Previous articleNext article No AccessThe Social Organization of Mecca and the Origins of IslamEric R. WolfEric R. Wolf Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Volume 7, Number 4Winter, 1951 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.7.4.3628510 Views: 87Total views on this site Citations: 18Citations are reported from Crossref Journal History This article was published in the Southwestern Journal of Anthropology (1945-1972), which is continued by the Journal of Anthropological Research (1973-present). PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Niccolo Caldararo A Question of Dose and Context: LSD, Peyote and Chemical Interactions, Human Variation, and Interpretation, (Feb 2023): 33–133.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13745-7_2Umar Aimhanosi Oseni Sharī‘ah court-annexed dispute resolution of three commonwealth countries – a literature review, International Journal of Conflict Management 26, no.22 (Apr 2015): 214–238.https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-06-2012-0050Mark Allen Peterson Consumption in the Middle East/Arab World, (Mar 2015): 1–6.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118989463.wbeccs069Kevin O'Gorman, Derek Bryce, Kevin D. O'Gorman, Ian W.F. Baxter Commerce, empire and faith in Safavid Iran: the caravanserai of Isfahan, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 25, no.22 (Mar 2013): 204–226.https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111311301603Saïd Amir Arjomand THE CONSTITUTION OF MEDINA: A SOCIOLEGAL INTERPRETATION OF MUHAMMAD'S ACTS OF FOUNDATION OF THE UMMA, International Journal of Middle East Studies 41, no.44 (Oct 2009): 555–575.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743809990067Michel Mouton The settlement patterns of north-eastern and south-eastern Arabia in late antiquity, Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 20, no.22 (Nov 2009): 185–207.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0471.2009.00314.xMary Nicolaou, Colleen M. Doak, Rob M. van Dam, Johannes Brug, Karien Stronks, Jaap C. Seidell Cultural and Social Influences on Food Consumption in Dutch Residents of Turkish and Moroccan Origin: A Qualitative Study, Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 41, no.44 (Jul 2009): 232–241.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2008.05.011Anthony Marcus Interrogating the neo-pluralist orthodoxy in American anthropology, Dialectical Anthropology 32, no.1-21-2 (Oct 2008): 59–86.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-008-9053-xBrian Keith Axel Introduction, (Jan 2002): 1–44.https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822383345-001Helaine Silverman The archaeological identification of an ancient Peruvian pilgrimage center, World Archaeology 26, no.11 (Jun 1994): 1–18.https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1994.9980257Patricia W. Romero Possible sources for the origin of gold as an economic and social vehicle for women in lamu (Kenya), Africa 57, no.33 (Dec 2011): 364–376.https://doi.org/10.2307/1160719George J. Jennings Psychocultural Study in Missiology: Middle Eastern Insecurity, Practical Anthropology 15, no.11 (Jan 1987): 91–111.https://doi.org/10.1177/009182968701500107Mahmood Ibrahim Social and Economic Conditions In Per-Islamic Mecca, International Journal of Middle East Studies 14, no.33 (Jan 2009): 343–358.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743800051977M. S. Ashoor The formation of Muslim names, International Library Review 9, no.44 (Aug 2014): 491–500.https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7837(77)90022-X Review Essays, Religious Studies Review 2, no.33 (Jul 1976): 1–42.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.1976.tb00094.x Reviews, Religious Studies Review 1, no.11 (Sep 1975): 1–34.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.1975.tb00045.xSusan H. Lees, Daniel G. Bates The Origins of Specialized Nomadic Pastoralism: A Systemic Model, American Antiquity 39, no.2Part12Part1 (Jan 2017): 187–193.https://doi.org/10.2307/279581Jack Goody Economy and Feudalism in Africa, The Economic History Review 22, no.33 (Dec 1969): 393.https://doi.org/10.2307/2594117