Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Brian Roberts" <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>]

My understanding is that typically the distinction is similar to the
following:

1. If camel bones are found in campfires, with signs of having been eaten or
prepared as food, then camels were likely not being used as beasts of burden
at that site;

2. If camel bones were being found, but without signs of having been eaten,
then the likelihood is high that camels were domesticated in that area.

It doesn't hurt to find some artwork depicting camels being used in such a
fashion.

Hope that helps,

R. Brian Roberts
Amateur Researcher in Biblical Archaeology



-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of kenneth greifer
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 6:51 PM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] proof of camel domestication


Does anyone know what kind of proof experts are looking for to figure out
when camels were domesticated? 
 
Kenneth Greifer
_________________________________________________________________
i'm is proud to present Cause Effect, a series about real people making a
difference.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_Cause_Effect
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew