Showing posts with label Archaeology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archaeology. Show all posts

Tuesday, 12 July 2016

A multidisciplinary view of pre-Columbian Amazonia

In June 2016 a multidisciplinary group of researchers working in Amazonia got together in Barcelona to discuss to what extent and in what way pre-Columbian populations changed the landscape of ancient Amazonia.  The meeting was funded by the INQUA Commission for Humans and the Biosphere and SIMULPAST. Here you can find the talks that were given on the 8th of June. Unfortunately, the first talk, given by Marie-Pierre Ledru, was not recorded due to technical problems.

Marie-Pierre Ledru - Palaeoecologist: Paleoecological changes in the Amazon basin during the Holocene

Abstract:
Amazonia supports the largest rainforest system in the world. However this rainforest-dominant basin is composed of several types of vegetation including savanna, dry forests and mangrove mostly found on the transition zones. We will examine the different responses of the plant assemblages that characterize each of these vegetal communities and, how the global climate and the sea level changes  affected Amazonian landscape and plant diversity throughout the Holocene. Observed differences in tree cover, biomass, elevation, climate all over the territory altered the plant responses in different manners thus increasing the range of environmental responses.We will review and compare pollen records located in each vegetation type that compose the Amazon Basin. Hiatuses in sedimentation are common to all pollen records, although at different time intervals in function of their location. Expression of the environmental responses in northern, eastern, western and coastal Amazonia will be examined and compared to their adjacent biome evolution. Drier climate or drier soil conditions prevailed until the early Holocene although he re-start of lacustrine sedimentation is observed at different time intervals throughout Amazonia. The mid Holocene drought 8 to 5 kyr was prolongated in south and eastern Amazon until 3 kyr. Alternance of wet and dry episodes characterized the last millennia. We will also examine how the predicted increase of sea level and the global warming may affect this extremely moist and warm region in the future.

Umberto Lombardo - Geographer: El paisaje antrópico de la Amazonia Boliviana (In Spanish)

Abstract:
Los Llanos de Moxos, en la Amazonia Boliviana, son un conjunto de sabanas inundables ubicadas en la parte más meridional de la cuenca Amazonia. Esta región se caracteriza por la presencia de numerosas obras de tierra pre-Colombinas, como lomas monumentales, terraplenes, canales de irrigación y drenaje, campos agrícolas elevados (camellones) e islas de monte. Todos estos restos arqueológicos son la expresión de sociedades de cazadores recolectores antes y agrícolas después, que vivieron allí antes de la llegada de los españoles, desde hace 10000 años. A lo largo de estos 10.000 años, estás sociedades pre-Colombinas han sido afectadas por cambios medioambientales, y al mismo tiempo, han afectado el medio ambiente de manera permanente, tanto que el increíble paisaje de los Llanos de Moxos es el resultado de las complejas interacciones entre gente, ríos y clima. En mi charla exploraré estas dinámicas y interacciones entre pre-Colombinos y medioambiente en distintos lugares de la Amazonia Boliviana, intentando mostrar como la variabilidad espacial de las obras pre-Colombinas se corresponde con cambios en las características del paisaje y en las propiedades del los suelos.


Eduardo Góes Neves - Archaeologist: En búsqueda del año 6K en la Amazonia Antigua: Evidencias Tempranas de Cambios Paisajísticos (In Spanish)

Abstract:

Investigaciones arqueológicas recientes en la cuenca amazónica enseñan que esta región estuvo densamente ocupada en el pasado precolombino y que las poblaciones que allá vivían hicieran cambios en las condiciones ecológicas de la región. Si correcta, tal hipótesis sugiere que lejos de prístinos, los ambientes amazónicos tienen una larga historia de manejo hecho por los pueblos indígenas. Aunque tales formas de cambio sean visibles en los hallazgos arqueológicos relacionados a ocupaciones de pasado relativamente reciente, al rededor de 2 mil años BP, poco sabemos sobre ocupaciones mas antiguas fechadas al rededor de 6 mil años BP, o 6K. De hecho, por razones que todavía no son claras, en la arqueología amazónica asimismo como de otras partes de las tierras bajas de Sudamérica, parece más fácil encontrarse evidencias de ocupación humanas fechadas de la transición Pleistoceno-Holoceno, al rededor de 12-10 K BP, que del Holoceno medio, alrededor de 6K. Esta charla presentará los resultados preliminares de un proyecto de investigaciones el SW de la Amazonía, donde contextos fechados al rededor del año 6K han sido identificados. Los resultados preliminares nos permiten identificar algunas formas tempranas de manejo en la Amazonía e proponer hipótesis más amplias sobre la relación de largo plazo entre cambios climáticos y dinámicas culturales en la Amazonia antigua.




Charles R. Clement - Biologist: Plant domestication and dispersal in Amazonia (In English)


Abstract:

Throughout history, humans have developed uses for some 5000 native Amazonian plant species, and at least 85 of them have also been selected and propagated, which is the beginning of domestication. Domestication is a process in which humans select and propagate plant populations with traits that are useful to them; the interaction between human agency and natural selection results in anthropogenic plant populations embedded in landscapes that are increasingly useful to humans. In these populations, domestication can create subtle or dramatic changes in morphology, biochemistry and genetics. Likewise, landscape domestication may be subtle or dramatic, from modest changes in forest species composition to complete transformation of the landscape in swiddens and settlements. In recent years, studies combining molecular genetics and biogeography have allowed the identification of centers of domestication and routes of dispersal of some important Amazonian domesticates. Manioc (Manihot esculenta) was domesticated in southwestern Amazonia and selected for minimum toxicity; this ‘sweet’ manioc was widely dispersed quite early, arriving in Pacific coastal Peru by 8000 BP. ‘Bitter’ manioc appears to have been selected later in swiddens and was important in central and northern Amazonia. Cacao (Theobroma cacao) was semi-domesticated by 5000 BP in Amazonian Ecuador for the sweet pulp around the seeds and was dispersed both to Mesoamerica (where chocolate was invented) and to eastern Amazonia, which went unnoticed until recently because there was no chocolate there! Peach palm (Bactris gasipaes) was also domesticated in southwestern Amazonia and dispersed both northwestward to Central America, becoming a major starch crop used for fermented drinks, and northeastward to central and eastern Amazonia, where it was used as a snack. Guaraná (Paullinia cupana) is a stimulant and the only crop known to be domesticated in central Amazonia; it is a high level polyploid with very little genetic diversity, suggesting a very recent domestication (1000 BP). Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) was used by 11,200 BP, and is incipiently domesticated and widely dispersed across central and eastern Amazonia in forest stands associated with archaeological sites. Its center of domestication is not yet confirmed, with southwestern and northeastern Amazonia being considered. Future integration with archaeology, especially archaeobotany, and palaeoecology will increase the relevance of these studies to understand the history of Amazonian crops, people and landscapes.




Manuel Arroyo-Kalin - Archaeologist: Los Suelos Antrópicos de la Amazonía: algo más que tierra negra… (In English)




Stéphen Rostain - Archaeologist: Amazonía, el dinamismo de un paisaje tropical único (In Spanish)


Abstract:

Se admite hoy en día que los paisajes en los cuales vivimos son resultado tanto de antiguas actividades humanas como de procesos naturales. Los ecosistemas amazónicos, al igual que otras tierras antiguamente ocupadas por el hombre, han evolucionado en función de las acciones de este. Así, solo la asociación de las ciencias de la Vida y de la Tierra permite una evaluación de las contribuciones respectivas del  hombre y de la naturaleza en la construcción del paisaje ecuatorial. Es el caso de un proyecto llevado a cabo en las sabanas costeras de las Guyanas, el mismo que contó con la colaboración de arqueólogos, arqueobotánicos, ecólogos, pedólogos, etc. Si bien la arqueología alimenta a las ciencias de la naturaleza con temas de estudio cruzados, para la lectura del pasado se  nutre también  de  otras  ciencias que  le proporcionan nuevos métodos complementarios de los clásicos y la ayudan a reconstruir de manera mucho más completa el contexto medio ambiental en el cual la cultura antigua se hallaba inserta. Es entonces, una nueva historia del paisaje la que se dibuja poco a poco. 



Maximilien Guèze - Ethnobotanist: Shifts in indigenous culture relate to forest tree diversity: A case study from the Tsimane’, Bolivian Amazon (In Spanish)


Abstract:

Understanding how indigenous peoples’ management practices relate to biological diversity requires addressing contemporary changes in indigenous peoples’ way of life. This study explores the association between cultural change among a Bolivian Amazonian indigenous group, the Tsimane’, and tree diversity in forests surrounding their villages. We interviewed 86 informants in six villages about their level of attachment to traditional Tsimane’ values, our proxy for cultural change. We estimated tree diversity (Fisher’s Alpha index) by inventorying trees in 48 0.1-ha plots in old-growth forests distributed in the territory of the same villages. We used multivariate models to assess the relation between cultural change and alpha tree diversity. Cultural change was associated with alpha tree diversity and the relation showed an inverted U-shape, thus suggesting that tree alpha diversity peaked in villages undergoing intermediate cultural change. Although the results do not allow for testing the direction of the relation, we propose that cultural change relates to tree diversity through the changes in practices and behaviors that affect the traditional ecological knowledge of Tsimane’ communities; further research is needed to determine the causality. Our results also find support in the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, and suggest that indigenous management can be seen as an intermediate form of anthropogenic disturbance affecting forest communities in a subtle, non-destructive way.




Evert Thomas - Biologist: Spatial patterns in the natural and human history of Brazil nut across the Amazon Basin: megarodents, glacial refugia, terra preta and geoglyphs (In Spanish)




Amy Goldberg - Mathematician and Anthropologist: Post-invasion human demography in prehistoric South America: a continental view (In English)


Abstract:

As the last habitable continent colonized by humans, the site of multiple domestication hotspots, and the location of the largest Pleistocene megafaunal extinction, South America is central to human prehistory. Yet remarkably little is known about human population dynamics during colonization, subsequent expansions, and domestication. Here we reconstruct the continental-scale spatiotemporal patterns of human population growth in South America using a database of 1,147 archaeological sites and 5,464 calibrated radiocarbon dates spanning fourteen thousand to two thousand years ago (ka). Notably, our database demonstrates substantial regional variation in coverage, suggesting further work for Northeastern South America and Amazonia.
We demonstrate that early human expansions showed the same pattern characteristic of invading animal populations, with resource-limited growth. Only with widespread sedentism, beginning ~5 ka, did a second demographic phase begin, with evidence for exponential population growth in cultural hotspots, characteristic of the shift to agriculture worldwide.



Carla Jaimes Betancourt - Archaeologist: La dinámica cultural al suroeste de la Amazonia a la luz del registro arqueológico (In Spanish)


Abstract:

La arqueología amazónica enfrenta grandes cuestionamientos paradigmáticos. Al mismo tiempo que aumentan las evidencias de monumentalidad y manejo de recursos naturales, se devela una enorme diversidad de contextos culturales y patrones de transformación del paisaje. Aunque los procesos históricos y sociales de cómo se generaron estas manifestaciones en el paisaje cultural amazónico se encuentran todavía en discusión, la mayoría de estas transformaciones son atribuidas por lo general a la dispersión de la familia lingüística Arawak. En esta ponencia, se coteja el registro arqueológico de dos áreas culturalmente distintas de los Llanos de Mojos, con algunos de los modelos planteados que intentan explicar el proceso de “arawakización” en la Amazonía. Comprobándose que en Mojos y de manera coetánea, se desarrollaron diferentes procesos culturales locales, en escenarios multiétnicos y posiblemente plurilingües, que desembocaron en la creación de sociedades con características inalienables a las supuestas influencias Arawak. Dejando al descubierto, que únicamente mediante el estudio de los desarrollos culturales locales durante el holoceno medio, podremos entender el surgimiento de estos complejos procesos ocupacionales.



Philip Riris - Archaeologist: Dates and Dispersions: examining the spatio-temporal boundaries of the Guaraní expansion into the La Plata basin with Monte Carlo methods (In English)


Abstract:

he direction and timing of the Guaraní expansion into the La Plata basin from an Amazonian origin is a matter of no small debate in the study of South American indigenous cultures. The short timeframe of the Guaraní expansion (2000 – 500 BP) during the late Holocene, as well as the distances involved, are both used to explain it as the result of the migration of significant numbers of people in a classic “wave of advance”. The process is further broken down into “pulses” punctuated by periods of relative stasis in which colonization through the valleys of major rivers was halted or slowed. These factors, combined with a broad base of empirical data from decades of research, provide the impetus for refining established chronologies of the Guaraní dispersal. 
We use a published database of georeferenced dates to model the its spread at the beginning of the Common Era from a presumed entry point until the time of European contact at its known limits at the La Plata delta and Atlantic coast of Brazil. Using Monte Carlo methods, we examine the dispersal as a function of time and distance in order to constrain the probable start dates for entry into different zones. Additionally, we investigate the notion that Guaraní groups enveloped large sectors of terrain contiguously as the result of demographic pressures that were interspersed, as noted, with hiatuses of comparatively little movement. We place our findings in the context of preceding archaeological, ethnographic, and ethnohistorical knowledge on this uniquely South American process of indigenous dispersal. Suggestions for further work to improve the scenarios we present are offered, following the note by Brochado (1984) that in the study of Guaraní archaeology, “computer modelling is probably the only way to achieve refined estimates of population growth” in the La Plata basin. 




Friday, 17 January 2014

“Predicting pre-Columbian anthropogenic soils in Amazonia”

ResearchBlogging.org “Predicting pre-Columbian anthropogenic soils in Amazonia” is the title of a recent paper by McMichael et al. published in Proceeding of the Royal Society B. It is not open access but you can read the abstract here. In this paper McMichael et al. present a predictive model for the presence of Terra Preta in Amazonia.  The model predicts the likelihood of finding Terra Preta sites in any given spot within Amazonia.  In general, I liked the idea behind the paper. These models give us an objective basis for further research and discussions. It is thanks to this kind of work that we can go beyond subjective views about the extent of human impact in pre-Columbian Amazonia and start to formulate hypothesis that, through survey and measurement, can be later tested. The first important result of this paper is that, given the data available, we can now estimate that terra preta is likely to be found only in a 3.2% of the forested areas of Amazonia. This is far less than other previous estimates (Erickson, 2008).

However, I find the discussion of McMichael et al. a bit disappointing with regards to two points. The first is the meaning they give to the presence of terra preta; the second is the reasons they give to explain the absence terra preta outside of Brazil.
What is terra preta? Is it the result of permanent settlement where people cooked and dumped food remains for centuries, eventually causing the enrichment of the soil in with charcoal, phosphorous, organic matter and the rest of elements used to define terra preta? Or is it the result of soil management techniques aimed at improving fertility and agricultural potential? McMichael et al. seem to imply that terra preta is the latter: the result of soil fertility enhancement. They say: “The lack of terra pretas in western Amazonia may be because the Andean-derived soils of western Amazonia did not require nutrient enrichment… [the bold is mine]”. However, this kind of interpretation of terra preta being the result of Pre-Columbian agricultural intensification has been challenged by many authors. Neves & Petersen (2006) discovered that at the Hatahara occupation site (close to Manaus) pre-Columbians actually used terra preta to build burial mounds, which is a strange use for an agricultural soil that took centuries to form. Of course, we cannot exclude that pre-Columbians took advantage of the fertile terra preta for their gardens associated to their homes; in the same way that they could have taken advantage of the fertility of pre-existing middens (see Arroyo-Kalin, 2012 for a discussion on this).But this does not mean that people intentionally created terra preta for agriculture!
Recently, Glaser & Birck (2012) concluded their review about the state of the scientific knowledge about the properties and genesis of Anthropogenic Dark Earths in Central Amazonia saying: “there is no scientific evidence indicating that forgotten agricultural techniques for large scale soil fertility improvement are responsible for terra preta genesis”. 

This leads us to my second concern: what does it mean when no terra preta is found? Here, McMichael et al. suggest that the lack of terra preta indicates that people decided to produce food in some other way, due to cultural and/or environmental reasons. They say: “[In the Llanos de Moxos] instead of terra preta formation, large societies sustained themselves by using techniques such as fish weirs and raised-field agriculture”. But, is it cultivating little gardens that large societies sustained themselves? I think the answer is no. In fact, pre-Columbians living in terra preta sites performed agriculture in the surrounding area, eventually forming terra mulata sites. Terra mulata sites are far larger than terra preta ones. Terra mulata sites do not contain pottery and are far less fertile than terra preta ones, but still, they are richer in organic matter than the normal Amazonian oxisols (more on this here). It is terra mulata that formed because of ancient agricultural use, not terra preta.
The main problem we face when tackling the question of terra preta is its definition. The definition that is generally given to terra preta coincides with the description of the geochemistry of a midden (From Wikipedia: an old dump for domestic waste which may consist of animal bone, human excrement, botanical material, vermin, shells, sherds, lithics, and other artifacts and ecofacts associated with past human occupation) and there are middens everywhere in the world! As a consequence of this, terra preta sites are now appearing everywhere... We should also keep in mind that the whole terra preta concept is rooted in the context of the big surprise that the first researchers had when they found black organic sediments in the middle of Amazonian heavily weathered soils. In fact, terra preta is often defined (and mapped in the field) in relation to the surrounding soil (Fig. 1). In my view, there is not much that actually differentiates terra preta from other occupation horizons elsewhere. I have seen several places in the Bolivian Amazon that, because of the colour of the soil, concentrations of P, Ca, charcoal etc., would fit quite well into the definition of terra preta (see for example this). It is just that they are not called terra preta, yet :- ). It could be that the absence of terra preta sites outside Brazil is merely the result of researchers giving these kinds of soils/deposits different names in different regions, such as “middens” or “occupation horizons”.

Figure 1: oxisol left, terra preta right (from Wikipedia)
I think that the, otherwise excellent, paper by McMichael at al. could have benefited from incorporating into their model a database of terra mulata sites, instead of terra preta sites. Or, even better, if they had used a database of pre-columbian occupations, including the archaeological sites known outside of Brazil. This would have provided a more reliable tool for modelling pre-Columbian agriculture (if a terra mulata database had been used) or settlements patterns (if a database of archaeological sites had been used) within the Amazon basin; and for modelling pre-Columbian disturbance of the natural environment.

References
 McMichael CH, Palace MW, Bush MB, Braswell B, Hagen S, Neves EG, Silman MR, Tamanaha EK, & Czarnecki C (2014). Predicting pre-Columbian anthropogenic soils in Amazonia. Proceedings. Biological sciences / The Royal Society, 281 (1777) PMID: 24403329

Erickson, C.L. (2008). Amazonia: the historical ecology of a domesticated landscape In: H. Silverman, W.H. Isbell (Eds.), Handbook of South American archaeology. Springer, Berlin, pp. 157-183 DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-74907-5_11

Neves, E.G., & Petersen, J.B. (2006). Political economy and pre-Columbian landscape transformations in Central Amazonia In: W. Balée & C.L. Ericksonl (Eds.),Time and complexity in historical ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 279-309

Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2012). Slash-burn-and-churn: Landscape history and crop cultivation in pre-Columbian Amazonia Quaternary International, 249, 4-18 DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2011.08.004

Glaser, B., & Birk, J.J. (2012). State of the scientific knowledge on properties and genesis of Anthropogenic Dark Earths in Central Amazonia (terra preta de Índio) Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 82, 39-51 DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2010.11.029

Saturday, 31 August 2013

Amazing media response to our latest paper in PloS ONE

Our paper “Early and Middle Holocene Hunter-Gatherer Occupations in Western Amazonia: The Hidden Shell Middens” has been published less that 3 days ago in PLoS ONE. It was included in the press release of PLoS ONE and, once the embargo expired, we produced two other press releases (see previous post).
I am amazed by the interest that media from all around the world have shown! Till now I have counted more than 50 articles from USA, Spain, Germany, Brazil, Bolivia, Russia, Australia etc. Plus, several people posted about our research in their blogs.
Samples from the internet press of the last 2 days:
Germany:
Brazil:
UK:
USA:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/30/10000-year-old-bolivian-settlements-amazon_n_3844189.html

A blog post I liked:

Monday, 7 January 2013

The diffusion of unsuccessful innovations: the myth of raised field agriculture

ResearchBlogging.org
Pre-Columbian raised field agriculture is an extremely interesting topic that we have discussed in this blog before, here, here and here. We call raised fields “any prepared land involving the transfer and elevation of soil above the natural surface of the earth in order to improve cultivating conditions” (Denevan and Turner, 1974). Raised fields have received a lot of attention in studies related to pre-Columbian demography. They have been considered key in allowing dense populations of complex societies to inhabit seasonally flooded regions of South America in pre-Columbian times. Beyond their academic interest, raised field agriculture has also become popular among rural development workers and aid agencies working with small farmers in South America. For more than 30 years now, some archaeologists and NGOs have favoured the “re-introduction” of this pre-Columbian agricultural technique among modern day farmers. In their view, raised fields (which are considered analogous to the Chinampa system in Mexico) represent a promising pro-poor agricultural innovation which is more productive and sustainable than traditional agriculture (which, in the neo tropics is, basically, slash and burn).
A few days ago, Philippe C. Baveye published on-line a thorough debunk of such proposals  (Baveye in press) . It is a comment to a paper by Renard et al (Renard et al., 2012) where the authors advocate for the adoption of raised fields agriculture among modern farmers. The main points that Baveye puts forwards are: 1) There is no evidence that raised fields have supported dense populations in the past; 2) the pre-Columbian Chinampa system is unique. Therefore, it cannot be assumed that the productivity of the South-American raised fields, which are very different from the Mexican Chinampas, was comparable to that of the Chinampas; and 3) the purpose of raised fields was limited to water management:  soil drainage and/or irrigation. We reach very similar conclusions in (Lombardo et al., 2011). It is important to highlight that none of the projects designed to reintroduce raised field agriculture among small farmers in Bolivia and Peru have ever worked (actually, I am not aware of any successful rehabilitation anywhere in the Americas). Local farmers have no idea or knowledge about this ancient practice: this kind of indigenous knowledge was lost hundreds of years ago when the Spaniards got to America. Therefore, besides the technical problems described above, another reason behind this large scale failure is that raised field agriculture has been entirely “invented” by archaeologists and NGOs: the latest example I know of raised field rehabilitation project failures comes from an Oxfam project in the Beni - Bolivian Lowlands. The picture below shows the current state of the raised fields built by Oxfam in 2009, amid an important media coverage and support (for example, see this BBC article).


In 2011 raised fields were also built in the northern Beni.You see the state of the fields during the summer 2012 (photo below).



Hopefully, Baveye’s comment will contribute to make researchers more cautious before proposing the ‘reintroduction’ of raised field agriculture in rural communities.

References
Baveye, Philippe C. (2013). Comment on “Ecological engineers ahead of their time: The functioning of pre-Columbian raised-field agriculture and its potential contributions to sustainability today” by Dephine Renard et al Ecological Engineering

Denevan, W. M., and Turner, B. L., 1974, Forms, functions and associations of raised fields in the old world tropics: Journal of tropical geography, v. 39, p. 24-33.

Lombardo, U., Canal-Beeby, E., Fehr, S., & Veit, H. (2011). Raised fields in the Bolivian Amazonia: a prehistoric green revolution or a flood risk mitigation strategy? Journal of Archaeological Science, 38 (3), 502-512 DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2010.09.022

Renard, D., Iriarte, J., Birk, J., Rostain, S., Glaser, B., & McKey, D. (2012). Ecological engineers ahead of their time: The functioning of pre-Columbian raised-field agriculture and its potential contributions to sustainability today Ecological Engineering, 45, 30-44 DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2011.03.007

Wednesday, 20 June 2012

People and environment in pre-Columbian Amazonia: two new proxies

ResearchBlogging.org
What was the extent of human occupation and environmental impact in the pre-Columbian Amazonia?
This question has been at the center of much of the research on pre-Columbian Amazonia since Betty Meggers published her paper ‘Environmental Limitation on the Development of Culture’ (1). The reconstruction of the Amazon’s past is based on evidence obtained from the study of the present landscape, sediments and archaeological remains. These ‘evidences’ are called proxies. Pollen is a proxy for past vegetation, tree rings are proxies for past climate variability, CO2 stored in the ice cores is a proxy for past levels of atmospheric CO2 and so on.
Paleo-ecologists, geographers, archaeologists etc. trying to understand the region’s past have first to look for proxies (this means going to the field and taking samples of lacustrine sediments and/or soils, or going into the mountains after morains and other glacial deposits); then they have to interpret the data gathered and assess their significance (to what extent does this data represent a local or regional event?): we can say that past values of CO2 inferred from ice cores are proxies for past global concentrations of CO2 because the atmosphere is well mixed, but we cannot say that the extent of a moraine in a particular valley indicates past global temperature or precipitations, because local conditions in that valley could have been (and very likely were) different from the conditions of a similar valley in the other hemisphere. As the process involves different stages, datasets and interpretations, it is not uncommon for researchers to disagree on the conclusions. This has often been the case with regards to Amazonia.
In this post, I will try to provide a brief overview of the proxies (and their interpretations and significance) that have been used to infer the extent of the impact pre-Columbian populations had on Amazonia and the contribution of a recent paper published in Science (2) to our understanding of the region’s past.
The first proxies
When Betty Meggers wrote ‘Environmental Limitation on the Development of Culture’ in the fifties (1), there was not much data on Amazonia. At that time scientists relied considerably on anthropological studies of modern indigenous communities and on written documentation left by the first explorers. The fact that the ‘modern’ indigenous population in Amazonia was limited to small nomadic and semi-nomadic groups was attributed to environmental constraints: unfertile soils and frequent floods. As Amazonian soils cannot support large and stable populations in modern times, it was thought that, also in the past, Amazonia was inhabited by small groups of hunters and gatherers. In contrast, written reports from the first explorers described large and rich societies with plenty of food and gold. Myths such as El Dorado arose on the basis of these reports. However, as the written reports contained some statements that were clearly false, such as the existence of blond women warriors with only one breast (the “Amazonas” from whom the river and the region took their names), these historical documents were often disregarded and the consensus within the scientific community was that Amazonia in the past only hosted small nomadic groups that did not have a significant impact on the environment. 
The discovery of the “lost cities”
In the last 30 years, when more funding, interest and technology became available to spur archaeological research, scholars started to find new evidence of pre-Columbian complex societies in those very places where Megger’s model of environmental determinism predicted that they shouldn’t be. The discovery of raised fields and monumental mounds in the Bolivian Amazon (3,4), the geometric ditches in the Acre (5), the terra preta sites, the earthworks in the upper Xingù (6), the mounds in the Marajo islands, were far more reliable proxies than ‘modern indigenous communities’ and ‘old written reports’. More importantly, these discoveries suggested that Betty Meggers’ model was wrong. Archaeologists (actually, in most cases, North American Anthropologists) started speculating about the significance of these discoveries and how they challenged the theory of environmental determinism. Archaeological evidence showed that environmental constrains did not limited cultural evolution in Amazonia because human intelligence overcame them. People built highly productive raised fields that were able to produce tons of Maize per hectare on a continuous basis (without fallow periods); people transformed infertile oxisols in extremely rich terra preta allowing the production of food surpluses that permitted the rise of large and complex societies all over Amazonia. Pre-Columbian Amazonia was now seen by many as a “cultural parkland” (6) and an “anthropogenic cornucopia” (7). Pre-Columbians practiced agroforestry to such an extent that they contributed to the modern patterns of Amazonian biodiversity. Some geographers, paleoecologists and climatologists speculated about the large impact that pre-Columbians had on world climate: As Amazonia was densely populated, then it was also extensively de-forested. Following the discovery of the Americas in 1492, 95% of the original population died because of the spread of the diseases brought by the Europeans. The sharp decrease in population meant the abandonment of the agricultural fields and the re-growth of the rainforest. The forest absorbed huge amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere and, because of this, contributed to trigger the Little Ice Age…
The latest paradigm shift
The above reconstructions, although exciting, have been considered too extreme by some scholars, including myself (4,8); because there is insufficient paleoecological data or archaeological evidence to support them. The main problems with the reconstructions of pre-Columbian Amazonia as an “anthropogenic cornucopia” are related to the interpretation and significance of the proxies taken into account. Although it is a fact that there are thousand of hectares of raised fields in the Bolivian Amazon (the proxy) it is not clear how they were used and how productive they were (the interpretation). Moreover, there is no basis for assuming that similar levels of landscape modification took place elsewhere in Amazonia (the significance or scope). The same is true for other proxies. For instance, terra preta. On what basis do we interpret terra preta as an improved agricultural soil? We all agree that within the Amazon basin there is evidence of past complex society, but can we extrapolate from a few sites to the whole of Amazonia? Till now, the most important argument against the “anthropogenic cornucopia” theory has been the lack of data supporting it. As Betty Meggers said, it is all about wishful thinking. But, a few days ago, a new paper by McMichael et al. (2) added two new proxies to the debate: charcoal and phytoliths. They are actually not new at all, but, for the first time, extensive parts of the Amazonian rain forest have been sampled for the presence of these two proxies. Charcoal is a proxy for fire and phytoliths are a proxy similar to pollen, phytoliths tell us which kinds of plants were cultivated (if any). Both of them have local significance because you can find them only in the very place were the fire or the plants were. But, as McMichael et al. sampled many spots in the Amazon rain forest (247 soil cores collected from 55 locations) , their results are now of regional significance. This is the first time that we have a dataset obtained from the random sampling of an extensive part of Amazonia, rather than mere generalizations of data obtained from small and selected archaeological sites. Based on the analysis of charcoal and phytoliths, McMichael et al. concluded that most of Amazonia was “predominantly occupied by relatively small and shifting human populations during the pre-Columbian era”. This opens up a great and fascinating perspective for future studies. If, as Meggers said more than half a century ago, environment matters: what are the environmental opportunities that allowed the rise of complex societies in some sites such as the Llanos de Moxos in the Bolivian Amazon?
There is still much to be learnt about human-environment interactions in pre-Columbian Amazonia. The Llanos de Moxos, with its great amount, diversity and spatial variability of earthworks, is a promising site for future research.

1) B. J. Meggers (1954). Environmental Limitation on the Development of Culture American Anthropologist  
2) McMichael CH, Piperno DR, Bush MB, Silman MR, Zimmerman AR, Raczka MF, & Lobato LC (2012). Sparse pre-Columbian human habitation in western Amazonia. Science (New York, N.Y.), 336 (6087), 1429-31 PMID: 22700926  
3) Lombardo, U., Prümers, H. (2010). Pre-Columbian human occupation patterns in the eastern plains of the Llanos de Moxos, Bolivian Amazonia Journal of Archaeological Science, 37 (8), 1875-1885  
4) Lombardo, U., Canal-Beeby, E., Fehr, S. and Veit (2011). Raised fields in the Bolivian Amazonia: a prehistoric green revolution or a flood risk mitigation strategy? Journal of Archaeological Science, 38 (3) 5) Pärssinen, M., Schaan, D., and Ranzi (2009). Pre-Columbian geometric earthworks in the upper Purús: a complex society in western Amazonia Antiquity, 83  
6) Heckenberger MJ, Kuikuro A, Kuikuro UT, Russell JC, Schmidt M, Fausto C, & Franchetto B (2003). Amazonia 1492: pristine forest or cultural parkland? Science (New York, N.Y.), 301 (5640), 1710-4 PMID: 14500979  
7) Erickson, C. L (2008). Amazonia: the historical ecology of a domesticated landscape in Handbook of South American archaeology, edited by H. Silverman and W. H. Isbell  
8) Lombardo, U., May, J-H. and Veit, H. (2012). Mid- to late Holocene fluvial activity behind pre-Columbian social complexity in the south-western Amazon basin The Holocene

Wednesday, 14 March 2012

A story of people and rivers in the Amazon of 5000 years ago

ResearchBlogging.org
This time I will tell you about a story that began in the Mid-Holocene (5000 years ago) and is set in the Bolivian Amazon. More precisely in the south-eastern part of the Llanos de Moxos seasonally flooded savannah, in what we call the Monumental Mounds Region MMR (Fig. 1).  Here, between 400 and 1400 AD, pre-Columbians built hundreds of monumental earth mounds, known locally as “lomas”. These earth mounds are planned, complex buildings made by one or more pyramids built on top of elevated platforms (Fig. 3-3).  Monumental mounds can be up to 20 meters high and can cover up to 30 hectares. In the MMR there are more than 350 of these pre-Columbian buildings.
Figure 1 The Llanos de Moxos, the MMR (yellow
box) and the paleo-courses of Río Grande (pink lines). 
During the early Holocene (between 11.000 and 5.000 years ago) this portion of Amazonia was relatively dryer than today, inundations were less frequent and rivers transported few sediments. During these stable climatic conditions there was no deposition of fluvial sediments in the savannahs and soils were forming all over the Llanos de Moxos. 

Mid- Holocene: Río Grande built the landscape

But things changed a lot during the Mid-Holocene, between 5 and 4Ky BP. The Rio Grande (pink lines in Fig. 1) entered in a period of frequent avulsions and high sedimentation, probably triggered by a climate change towards wetter conditions. As a result, in the South-eastern LM, it formed a ­fluvial distributary system (FDS) (Fig. 2-1). Suddenly, the landscape was transformed into a large swamp, dominated by something similar to an interior delta. This FDS deposited several levees, crating relief at a local scale (Fig. 2-2), and a sedimentary lobe, creating relief at a regional scale (Fig. 2-3). The former soils were buried and the landscape became a mosaic of patches of savannahs closely interwoven and sometimes enclosed by forested paleo-levees.


Late Holocene: pre-Columbians transformed the landscape


In the MMR, the lobe deposition favoured the development of a complex pre-Columbian society by increasing the region’s agricultural potential. Firstly, it created a convex-up topography, which greatly reduced its susceptibility to ­flooding; secondly, the construction of the elevated ­fluvial levees significantly improved drainage conditions at the local scale. Furthermore, the Río Grande also provided relatively younger sediments derived from its Andean catchment that are rich in nutrients. Thus, the Río Grande removed the two biggest obstacles faced by tropical agriculture in the rest of Amazonia: severe waterlogging and poor soils. But the Río Grande’s job was not perfect: fl­uvial levees enclosed patches of ­floodplain, resulting in ponding and pronounced waterlogging. Thus pre-Columbian people had to transform the landscape through the construction of a drainage system in order to further improve agricultural conditions (Fig. 3-1).





The network of canals had a significant impact on the edaphology of the MMR: it pushed the forest-savannah boundary towards the savannah, eventually increasing the area of well-drained, usable land. The inhabitants of the MMR were very lucky because they also had several lakes placed on the top of the sedimentary lobe. Building canals that transported the water from the lakes to the agricultural fields (Fig. 4), they were able to perform agriculture even during the dry season.
The spatial overlap (Fig. 3-2) between the monumental mounds and the area of deposition of the sedimentary lobe created by the Río Grande during the mid- to late Holocene  suggests that good edaphic conditions favoured the emergence of the monumental mounds culture (Fig. 3-3).



The ­fluvial landscape created by Río Grande was probably an important factor behind the emergence of the monumental mounds culture in the South-eastern LM, as it provided favourable environmental preconditions in terms of soils, nutrients and drainage characteristics. Pre-Columbians additionally modified and improved their environment by building a network of drainage canals.
Figure 4 (a) Drainage canal (A–B) and irrigation canal (C–D) 
built along topographic slopes. (b)The C–D canal in detail;
 the irrigation canal linking Lake San José to the Cotoca mound 
joins pre-existing natural channels. Coring in the middle of 
the canal shows that the bed of the canal is only 50cm below 
the present bed (which is about 50 cm below the modern savannah). 
Therefore, this canal was at most 1 meter deep but went through a slope 
of 3 meters. The only possible function of such a canal was irrigation.

You can find more on this story in my latest paper published on-line in the journal “The Holocene”. It is entitled “Mid- to late-Holocene fluvial activity behind pre-Columbian social complexity in the southwestern Amazon basin” and can be found here. 



Lombardo, U., & Prümers, H. (2010). Pre-Columbian human occupation patterns in the eastern plains of the Llanos de Moxos, Bolivian Amazonia Journal of Archaeological Science, 37 (8), 1875-1885 DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2010.02.011


Umberto Lombardo, Jan-Hendrik May, & Heinz Veit (2012). Mid- to late-Holocene fluvial activity behind pre-Columbian social complexity in the southwestern Amazon basin The Holocene