Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:48:12.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neolithic postscript

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Paul F. Wilkinson
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Article
Information
Antiquity , Volume 45 , Issue 179 , September 1971 , pp. 193 - 196
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1971

Footnotes

*

In view of the interest generated by Mr Case's article (1969, 176–86) and subsequent discussion (1970, 105–14), Mr Wilkinson felt that this might be the proper time to introduce the Musk Ox to prehistorians in its new role as a domesticated animal, and make brief reference to some of the other experiments of a large body of useful data which remain largely untapped by archaeologists. Mr Wilkinson, a research student in the Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology in the University of Cambridge, also holds the post in the University of Alaska of Associate Director of Research for the Institute of Northern Agricultural Research, which is responsible for the domestication of the musk ox. He wishes to point out that the principal aim of this project is to develop a textile industry based on ‘qiviut,’ the wool of the musk ox, and thus to better the economic situation of the people of the arctic.

References

Case, H. 1969. Neolithic explanations, Antiquity, XLIII, 176–86.10.1017/S0003598X00040448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huxley, E. 1965. Getting a bead on the ’roos, New York Times Magazine, 24 October.Google Scholar
Knorre, E.P. 1961. Results and perspectives of moose domestication, Papers of the Pechora- Ilych State Reservation, IX, 5–177. Translation in Canadian Wildlife Service Library.Google Scholar
Leeds, A. 1965. In A. Leeds and A. P. Vayda (eds.), Man, culture and animals, 87–128.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1968. Models in prehistory, Antiquity, XLII, 132–4.10.1017/S0003598X00107860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teal, J.J., Jr. 1958. Golden fleece of the arctic, The Atlantic, 201, 76–81.Google Scholar
Teal, J.J., Jr. 1970a. Domesticating the wild and woolly musk ox, National Geographic, 137, 862–79.Google Scholar
Teal, J.J., Jr. I970b. Operation musk ox 1969, American Scandinavian Review, LVIII, 10–23.Google Scholar
Treus, V. and Kravchenko, D.. 1968. Methods of rearing and economic utilization of eland in the Askaniya-Nova Zoological park, Symp. zool. Soc. London, 21, 395–411.Google Scholar
Trigger, B.G. 1969. More on models, Antiquity, XLIII, 59–62.Google Scholar
Woolpy, J.H., and Ginsburg, B.E.. 1967. Wolf socialization: a study of temperament in a wild social species, Amer. Zool., VII, 357–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar