It's unlikely to exist. Today's historians and anthropologists have generally abandoned the term "tribal civilization" (and more generally 'tribal' anything). It is a term that is rooted in racist and colonialist ideas of the past, where human civilization progressed in a kind of linear, evolutionary form (not that biological evolution is linear either but that's another misconception). "Naturally", Europeans considered themselves the most advanced and evolved here, and 'tribal' society was quite a number of rungs lower on the ladder of civilizations.

This came under scrutiny in the late 20th century, with the advent of post-colonial studies and such. The problem that lead to the term being almost entirely abandoned was not merely that it had a long history of racist connotations. It was that nobody could really come up with a functional definition that wasn't rooted in them. There was never any real common denominator to all these "tribal societies" other than they were considered primitive and backwards .

These terms and preconceptions were so ingrained they still live on in popular conceptions. (both in its derogatory form and its mirror image of romantic primitive) But within academic study it's a not really used in serious contexts (except of course where it's the subject, in things like colonial studies).

This might be too non-in depth an answer for this sub, and I certainly don't want to preclude anyone giving a longer and more thorough explanation. But in any case I really suggest you see the entry "Tribe", in the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Anthropology which is much more detailed, a good read and very well-sourced.

So it's hard to talk about 'tribal civilizations' without a meaningful definition of what that would actually entail.