Search

In the 12,000 years preceding the Industrial Revolution, human activities led to significant changes in land cover, plant and animal distributions, surface hydrology, and biochemical cycles. Earth system models suggest that this anthropogenic land cover change influenced regional and global climate. However, the representation of past land use in earth system models is currently oversimplified. As a result, there are large uncertainties in the current understanding of the past and current state of the earth system. In order to improve representation of the variety and scale of impacts that past land use had on the earth system, a global effort is underway to aggregate and synthesize archaeological and historical evidence of land use systems. Here we present a simple, hierarchical classification of land use systems designed to be used with archaeological and historical data at a global scale and a schema of codes that identify land use practices common to a range of systems, both implemented in a geospatial database. The classification scheme and database resulted from an extensive process of consultation with researchers worldwide. Our scheme is designed to deliver consistent, empirically robust data for the improvement of land use models, while simultaneously allowing for a comparative, detailed mapping of land use relevant to the needs of historical scholars. To illustrate the benefits of the classification scheme and methods for mapping historical land use, we apply it to Mesopotamia and Arabia at 6 kya (c. 4000 BCE). The scheme will be used to describe land use by the Past Global Changes (PAGES) LandCover6k working group, an international project comprised of archaeologists, historians, geographers, paleoecologists, and modelers. Beyond this, the scheme has a wide utility for creating a common language between research and policy communities, linking archaeologists with climate modelers, biodiversity conservation workers and initiatives. Fil: Morrison, Kathleen D.. University of Pennsylvania; Estados Unidos Fil: Hammer, Emily. University of Pennsylvania; Estados Unidos Fil: Boles, Oliver. University of Pennsylvania; Estados Unidos Fil: Madella, Marco. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; España Fil: Whitehouse, Nicola. University of Glasgow; Reino Unido Fil: Gaillard, Marie-Jose. Linnaeus University; Suecia Fil: Bates, Jennifer. University of Pennsylvania; Estados Unidos Fil: Linden, Marc Vander. Bournemouth University; Sudáfrica Fil: Merlo, Stefania. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica Fil: Yao, Alice. University of Chicago; Estados Unidos Fil: Popova, Laura. Arizona State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Hill, Austin Chad. University of Pennsylvania; Estados Unidos Fil: Antolin, Ferran. Universiat Basel; Suiza Fil: Bauer, Andrew. University of Stanford; Estados Unidos Fil: Biagetti, Stefano. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; España Fil: Bishop, Rosie R.. University of Stavanger; Noruega Fil: Buckland, Phillip. Universidad de Umea; Suecia Fil: Cruz, Pablo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Salta. Unidad Ejecutora en Ciencias Sociales Regionales y Humanidades. Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. Unidad Ejecutora en Ciencias Sociales Regionales y Humanidades; Argentina Fil: Dreslerová, Dagmar. Institute Of Archaeology Of The Academy Of Sciences Of The Czech Republic; Hungría Fil: Dusseldorp, Gerrit. Leiden University; Países Bajos Fil: Ellis, Erle C.. University of Maryland; Estados Unidos. University Of Johannesburg; Sudáfrica Fil: Filipovich, Ruben Eduardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Salta. Instituto de Bio y Geociencias del NOA. Universidad Nacional de Salta. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales. Museo de Ciencias Naturales. Instituto de Bio y Geociencias del NOA; Argentina Fil: Foster, Thomas. University of Tulsa; Estados Unidos Fil: Hannaford, Matthew J.. Lincoln University.; Nueva Zelanda Fil: Harrison, Sandy P.. University of Reading; Reino Unido Fil: Hazarika, Manjil. Cotton University; India Fil: Herold, Hajnalka. University of Exeter; Reino Unido Fil: Hilpert, Johanna. Universitat zu Köln; Alemania Fil: Kaplan, Jed O.. The University Of Hong Kong; Hong Kong Fil: Kay, Andrea. Max Planck Institute For The Science Of Human History; Alemania Fil: Goldewijk, Kees Klein. Utrecht University; Países Bajos Fil: Kolár, Jan. Masaryk University; República Checa Fil: Kyazike, Elizabeth. Kyambogo University; Uganda Fil: Laabs, Julian. University of Bern; Suiza Fil: Lancelotti, Carla. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; España Fil: Lane, Paul. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica. University of Cambridge; Estados Unidos Fil: Lawrence, Dan. University of Durham; Reino Unido Fil: Lewis, Krista. University of Arkansas; Estados Unidos Fil: Lombardo, Umberto. University of Bern; Suiza Fil: Lucarini, Giulio. Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche; Italia. University of Naples; Italia Fil: Arroyo Kalin, Manuel. Colegio Universitario de Londres; Reino Unido Fil: Marchant, Rob. University of York; Reino Unido Fil: Mayle, Francis. University of Reading; Reino Unido Fil: McClatchie, Meriel. University College; Irlanda Fil: McLeester, Madeleine. Dartmouth College; Estados Unidos Fil: Mooney, Scott. Unsw Sydney; Australia Fil: Moskal-Del Hoyo, Magdalena. Wladyslaw Szafer Institute Of Botany Of The Polish Academy Of Sciences; Polonia Fil: Navarrete, Vanessa. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona; España Fil: Ndiema, Emmanuel. National Museums Of Kenya; Kenia Fil: Neves, Eduardo Góes. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil Fil: Nowak, Marek. Jagiellonian University; Polonia Fil: Out, Welmoed A.. Moesgaard Museum; Dinamarca Fil: Petrie, Cameron. Universitat Pompeu Fabra; España. University of Cambridge; Estados Unidos Fil: Phelps, Leanne N.. Royal Botanic Gardens; Reino Unido. University of Edinburgh; Reino Unido Fil: Szakonyi, Zsolt. Eötvös University; Hungría Fil: Rostain, Stéphen. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Francia Fil: Russell, Thembi. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica Fil: Sluyter, Andrew. Louisiana State University; Estados Unidos Fil: Styring, Amy K.. University of Oxford; Reino Unido Fil: Tamanaha, Eduardo. The Mamirauá Sustainable Development Institute; Brasil Fil: Thomas, Evert. The Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT; Perú Fil: Veerasamy, Selvakumar. Tamil University; India Fil: Welton, Lynn. University of the Witwatersrand; Sudáfrica Fil: Zanon, Marco. Institute of Pre- and Protohistoric Archaeology; Alemania

In the north-east Jordan steppe, gazelle were of considerable economic importance to human groups during the Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic. An influential model argues that gazelle herds mi...

The Early/Middle Epipalaeolithic aggregation site of Kharaneh IV in the east Jordan steppe is one of the largest of the period, showing repeated use, high degrees of site investment, and relatively prolonged periods of occupation. Hunters relied heavily on the single prey species, Gazella subgutturosa. This paper reports on isotopic analyses of gazelle teeth, drawn from the Kharaneh IV assemblage, to explore the seasonal and spatial distribution of gazelle in life and examine models of long-distance seasonal gazelle migrations. Dental microwear analysis is also employed to assess hunting seasons. Results from sequential isotope analyses of 11 Epipalaeolithic gazelle molars show that, with one exception, gazelle did not move seasonally from the limestone steppe onto other geologies, nor did they seasonally relocate to areas with different climate regimes. Rather, seasonal herd mobility seems to have been local, meaning animals would have been available in the vicinity of Kharaneh IV year-round. Results from 19 microwear analyses show some gazelle to have died in spring when grass graze was available, whilst others had been browsing around their time of death, indicating non-spring hunting. Microwear evidence thus suggests gazelle were hunted in more than one restricted season. The implications of these new datasets for hunter-gatherer use of the steppe, and potential hunting methods, is highlighted.

Anthropogenic changes in land use and land cover (LULC) during the pre-industrial Holocene could have affected regional and global climate. Current LULC scenarios are based on relatively simple assumptions and highly uncertain estimates of population changes through time. Archaeological and palaeoenvironmental reconstructions have the potential to refine these assumptions and estimates. The Past Global Changes (PAGES) LandCover6k initiative is working towards improved reconstructions of LULC globally. In this paper, we document the types of archaeological data that are being collated and how they will be used to improve LULC reconstructions. Given the large methodological uncertainties involved, we propose methods to evaluate the revised scenarios by using independent pollen-based reconstructions of land cover and of climate. A further test involves carbon-cycle simulations to determine whether the LULC reconstructions are consistent with constraints provided by ice-core records of CO2 evolution and modern-day LULC. Finally, we outline a protocol for using the improved LULC reconstructions in palaeoclimate simulations within the framework of the Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project in order to quantify the magnitude of anthropogenic impacts on climate through time and ultimately to improve the realism of Holocene climate simulations., Geoscientific Model Development Discussions, ISSN:1991-962X, ISSN:1991-9611

This paper presents an overview of the scientific evidence providing insights into long term ecosystem and social dynamics across the northern Tanzania and southern Kenya borderlands. The data sources covered a range from palaeoenvironmental records and archaeological information to remote sensing and social science studies that examined human-environmental interactions and land use land cover changes (LULCC) in the region. This knowledge map of published LULCC research contributes to current debates about the drivers and dynamics of LULCC. The review aims to facilitate both multidisciplinary LULCC research and evidence-based policy analyses to improve familiarity and engagement between LULCC knowledge producers and end-users and to motivate research integration for land management policy formulation. Improving familiarity among researchers and non-academic stakeholders through the collation and synthesis of the scientific literature is among the challenges hindering policy formulation and land management decision-making by various stakeholders along the Kenya-Tanzania borderlands. Knowledge syntheses are necessary; yet, do not fully bridge the gap between knowledge and policy action. Cooperation across the science-policy interface is fundamental for the co-production of research questions by academics, policy makers and diverse stakeholders aimed at supporting land management decision making. For improved co-development and co-benefitting outcomes, the LULCC scientific community needs to mobilise knowledge for a broader audience and to advance co-development of relevant and meaningful LULCC products.

East African landscapes today are the result of the cumulative effects of climate and land-use change over millennial timescales. In this review, we compile archaeological and palaeoenvironmental data from East Africa to document land-cover change, and environmental, subsistence and land-use transitions, over the past 6000?years. Throughout East Africa there have been a series of relatively rapid and high-magnitude environmental shifts characterised by changing hydrological budgets during the mid- to late Holocene. For example, pronounced environmental shifts that manifested as a marked change in the rainfall amount or seasonality and subsequent hydrological budget throughout East Africa occurred around 4000, 800 and 300 radiocarbon years before present (yr BP). The past 6000?years have also seen numerous shifts in human interactions with East African ecologies. From the mid-Holocene, land use has both diversified and increased exponentially, this has been associated with the arrival of new subsistence systems, crops, migrants and technologies, all giving rise to a sequence of significant phases of land-cover change. The first large-scale human influences began to occur around 4000?yr BP, associated with the introduction of domesticated livestock and the expansion of pastoral communities. The first widespread and intensive forest clearances were associated with the arrival of iron-using early farming communities around 2500?yr BP, particularly in productive and easily-cleared mid-altitudinal areas. Extensive and pervasive land-cover change has been associated with population growth, immigration and movement of people. The expansion of trading routes between the interior and the coast, starting around 1300?years ago and intensifying in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries CE, was one such process. These caravan routes possibly acted as conduits for spreading New World crops such as maize (Zea mays), tobacco (Nicotiana spp.) and tomatoes (Solanum lycopersicum), although the processes and timings of their introductions remains poorly documented. The introduction of southeast Asian domesticates, especially banana (Musa spp.), rice (Oryza spp.), taro (Colocasia esculenta), and chicken (Gallus gallus), via transoceanic biological transfers around and across the Indian Ocean, from at least around 1300?yr BP, and potentially significantly earlier, also had profound social and ecological consequences across parts of the region.\ud \ud Through an interdisciplinary synthesis of information and metadatasets, we explore the different drivers and directions of changes in land-cover, and the associated environmental histories and interactions with various cultures, technologies, and subsistence strategies through time and across space in East Africa. This review suggests topics for targeted future research that focus on areas and/or time periods where our understanding of the interactions between people, the environment and land-cover change are most contentious and/or poorly resolved. The review also offers a perspective on how knowledge of regional land-use change can be used to inform and provide perspectives on contemporary issues such as climate and ecosystem change models, conservation strategies, and the achievement of nature-based solutions for development purposes.

This paper considers the ecological residues of pastoralist occupation at the site of Maili Sita in Laikipia, central Kenya, drawing links with the archaeological record so as to contribute a fresh approach to the ephemeral settlement sites of mobile herding communities, a methodological aspect of African archaeology that remains problematic. Variations in the geochemical and micromorphological composition of soils along transects across the site are compared with vegetation distributions and satellite imagery to propose an occupation pattern not dissimilar to contemporary Cushitic-speaking groups further north. We argue that Maili Sita exemplifies the broad migratory and cultural exchange networks in place during the mid- to late second millennium AD, with pastoralist occupants who were both physically and culturally mobile.

comments on under-representation in archaeology, and draw on some of her points regarding obstacles to career progression in light of my own experiences as an “Africanist”. I believe there are a number of issues beginning to arise not just in African archaeology but in “World Archaeology” more generally that the academic community will sooner or later need to address. African archaeology has a strong history within the Institute; many of the new generation of British Africanists – and a good number of the old – have been affiliated with the department at some stage, whether through undertaking study, research or teaching here, or through collaboration. Until a few years ago an MA course in African Archaeology was available, though this was cancelled due to lack of interest. I would argue that this may be symptomatic of wider issues. For the first time in as long as I have been affiliated with the Institute (since 2007), there are no sub-Saharan African research students here and, to my knowledge, only a single student at Masters-level. The postcolonial era has taken time to impact on the representation of Africans working in archaeology; it is only relatively recently, perhaps as late as the 1980s, that Africans have regularly begun to set research agendas and taken up key positions within the heritage sector (Reid, 2014). Today, however, African archaeology is being reclaimed. A number of universities in sub-Saharan Africa now offer quality undergraduate and graduate courses in archaeology, and these courses are generally taught by Africans. Further, the ethical obligations of foreign researchers towards the countries they work in have become a vital topic and one that today is omnipresent at Africanist meetings (Giblin, King & Smith, 2014). It is – rightly, of course – no longer possible in most African countries to conduct research without the consent of and engagement with, local communities and national heritage institutions. Though it could never be reasonably suggested that these developments are anything but a force for good, I would like to raise the question of where this leaves African archaeology as a subject taught at and practiced by Western universities. Though at present it appears that there are generally enough project-based research positions to accommodate the majority of recent PhDs, there are worryingly few permanent jobs available at the few UK institutions that maintain a focus on Africa. I do not believe that this situation is unique to African archaeology. Indeed, from my own experience working in Mexico prior to Forum

Pastoralism has long been regarded as a difficult subject matter for archaeology, particularly in eastern Africa. Ephemeral settlements are presumed to leave little physical residue, such that reco...

This paper presents the results of a consensus-driven process identifying 50 priority research questions for historical ecology obtained through crowdsourcing, literature reviews, and in-person workshopping. A deliberative approach was designed to maximize discussion and debate with defined outcomes. Two in-person workshops (in Sweden and Canada) over the course of two years and online discussions were peer facilitated to define specific key questions for historical ecology from anthropological and archaeological perspectives. The aim of this research is to showcase the variety of questions that reflect the broad scope for historical-ecological research trajectories across scientific disciplines. Historical ecology encompasses research concerned with decadal, centennial, and millennial human-environmental interactions, and the consequences that those relationships have in the formation of contemporary landscapes. Six interrelated themes arose from our consensus-building workshop model: (1) climate and environmental change and variability; (2) multi-scalar, multi-disciplinary; (3) biodiversity and community ecology; (4) resource and environmental management and governance; (5) methods and applications; and (6) communication and policy. The 50 questions represented by these themes highlight meaningful trends in historical ecology that distill the field down to three explicit findings. First, historical ecology is fundamentally an applied research program. Second, this program seeks to understand long-term human-environment interactions with a focus on avoiding, mitigating, and reversing adverse ecological effects. Third, historical ecology is part of convergent trends toward transdisciplinary research science, which erodes scientific boundaries between the cultural and natural.