Archaeological markers of agricultural risk management

Marston, John M.

doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2011.01.002

Cited by 145 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since change in agricultural intensity can only be detected using a diachronic approach, we also include crop isotope data from four Neolithic sites in the same region ( Fig. 1 & Table 1), plus functional weed ecological data for these and other previously collated samples from Neolithic sites in south-west Germany (Bogaard 2004;2011); there were insufficient archaeobotanical remains dating to the Bronze Age. The Neolithic crop isotope data come from previously published studies by this research group Fraser et al 2013b; Selecting and preparing crop samples for isotope analysis Each crop δ 13 C and δ 15 N value represents a homogenised batch of between four and ten carbonised cereal grains or pulse seeds of the same taxon from the same 'deposit'.…”

Section: Selecting Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Centralisation and long-term change in farming regimes: Comparing agricultural practices in Neolithic and Iron Age south-west Germany

Styring¹,

Rösch

Stephan

et al. 2017

Proc. Prehist. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study uses two novel archaeobotanical techniques -crop carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis and functional weed ecology -to determine directly how the intensity of agricultural practice changed from the Neolithic to the Early Iron Age in south-west Germany, with the emergence of fortified hilltop settlements (Fürstensitze or chiefly seats) regarded as the first urban centres in central Europe. The crop isotope and functional weed ecological evidence suggest that surplus cereal production in the Early Iron Age was achieved through sustained use of manure combined with expansion in arable cultivation, both developments that are connected with more widespread use of animal traction. The increased scale of cultivation is broadly apparent across rural as well as fortified hilltop centres in the Early Iron Age, and considerable variability in manuring intensity is consistent with agricultural decision-making at a local level rather than centralised control. Additionally, the more intensive manuring of hulled six-row barley, used in beer production, demonstrates that the political importance of drinking and feasting in Early Iron Age society was reflected in crop husbandry practices. In terms of animal husbandry, faunal isotope data reveal a radical decrease in forest cover, potentially reflecting an expansion in the scale of herding accompanying that of arable cultivation. Sitespecific patterning points to a range of herding strategies, from specialised herding of cattle at the Heuneburg to generalised patterns of livestock management at rural sites.

show abstract

Section: Selecting Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Centralisation and long-term change in farming regimes: Comparing agricultural practices in Neolithic and Iron Age south-west Germany

Styring¹,

Rösch

Stephan

et al. 2017

Proc. Prehist. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the various approaches share a commitment to evolutionary explanation even though they emphasize different processes, questions, and types of causation. EE (inclusive of HBE and OFT) (61,64,109), niche construction theory (19,26), and models of cultural transmission and geneculture coevolution (19,(110)(111)(112) all have the potential to link empirical findings to a wellestablished body of knowledge, but they target different implications of selection. OFT predicts how organisms might mobilize evolved decision-making mechanisms to maximize utility in the face of conflicting needs; niche construction theory asks how environmental engineering sets up pathways of ecological inheritance that affect the fitness of the organism and its descendants; cultural transmission theory asks how patterns of social learning peculiar to our species generate patterns of descent and divergence in cultural lineages.…”

Section: Integration Of Evolutionary Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Particularism and the retreat from theory in the archaeology of agricultural origins

Gremillion

Barton

Piperno

2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

131

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of new analytic methods and expansion of research into previously untapped regions have greatly increased the scale and resolution of data relevant to the origins of agriculture (OA). As a result, the recognition of varied historical pathways to agriculture and the continuum of management strategies have complicated the search for general explanations for the transition to food production. In this environment, higher-level theoretical frameworks are sometimes rejected on the grounds that they force conclusions that are incompatible with real-world variability. Some of those who take this position argue instead that OA should be explained in terms of local and historically contingent factors. This retreat from theory in favor of particularism is based on the faulty beliefs that complex phenomena such as agricultural origins demand equally complex explanations and that explanation is possible in the absence of theoretically based assumptions. The same scholars who are suspicious of generalization are reluctant to embrace evolutionary approaches to human behavior on the grounds that they are ahistorical, overly simplistic, and dismissive of agency and intent. We argue that these criticisms are misplaced and explain why a coherent theory of human behavior that acknowledges its evolutionary history is essential to advancing understanding of OA. Continued progress depends on the integration of human behavior and culture into the emerging synthesis of evolutionary developmental biology that informs contemporary research into plant and animal domestication. evolutionary theory | behavioral ecologyOver the last decade there has been a major expansion of knowledge regarding the timing and socioecological context of plant domestication and emerging agricultural systems. This wealth of data is due in large part to methodological innovations (e.g., in genetics and paleogenomics, in the analysis of plant micro-and macroremains and biological residues, and in the physical and biogeochemical analyses of anthropogenic sediments), reexcavations of some important archaeological sites, and the expansion of archaeological research into regions whose record of agricultural origins has been until recently poorly known [such as New Guinea (1, 2), lowland areas of Mesoamerica and northern South America (3-7), and northern and southern China (8-13)]. These research activities have enriched both the scale and resolution of the data relevant to agricultural origins worldwide. One result of this welcome enhancement of the empirical record is wider acknowledgment of the variability in the historical pathways taken by emerging food production systems across space and time. The dichotomy between foraging and food production has been discarded in favor of a continuum of landscape, plant, and animal management strategies that sometimes resist classification. However, for some scholars (2, 14), the richly detailed records of change seem to have dampened the appeal of general explanations for the transition to agriculture. This tr...

show abstract

“…Amongst other things, maslin cropping is a form of risk buffering (Marston 2011;see Halstead and O'Shea 1989), and has been described ethnographically and archaeobotanically (e.g. Halstead and Jones 1989;Jones and Halstead 1995).…”

Section: How Are Cropping and 'Multi-cropping' Identified Archaeologimentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Multi-cropping’, Intercropping and Adaptation to Variable Environments in Indus South Asia

Petrie

Bates

2017

J World Prehist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past human populations are known to have managed crops in a range of ways. Various methods can be used, singly or in conjunction, to reconstruct these strategies, a process which lends itself to the exploration of socio-economic and political themes. This paper endeavours to unpack the concept of 'multi-cropping' by considering diversity and variation in the cropping practices of the populations of South Asia's Indus Civilisation. It argues that nuanced interpretations of the evidence provided by the combinations of crop seeds and weeds present in specific contexts and phases of occupation can reveal much about Indus cropping strategies, which in turn enables consideration of issues related to adaptation, intensification and resilience in the face of changing social, political, economic and environmental climates.

show abstract

Archaeological markers of agricultural risk management

Cited by 145 publications

References 98 publications

Centralisation and long-term change in farming regimes: Comparing agricultural practices in Neolithic and Iron Age south-west Germany

Centralisation and long-term change in farming regimes: Comparing agricultural practices in Neolithic and Iron Age south-west Germany

Particularism and the retreat from theory in the archaeology of agricultural origins

‘Multi-cropping’, Intercropping and Adaptation to Variable Environments in Indus South Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About