Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Claire Smith

Archaeobotany

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_2273

Introduction and Definition

Archaeobotany is a composite discipline, combining botanical knowledge with archaeological materials. Archaeobotany is also known as palaeoethnobotany (or paleoethnobotany). It focuses on the study of preserved plant evidence from archaeological sites and the reconstruction and interpretation of past human-plant relationships. The term “archaeobotany” emphasizes the archaeological nature of the evidence, with its recognition of site formation processes and sampling issues. The term paleoethnobotany, especially prominent in North America, recognizes the importance of modern ethnobotanical studies in contributing to interpretations of the past. This needs to be kept distinct from the term palaeobotany, which is the study of past plants, their adaptations, evolutionary relationships, and communities, from the fragmented remains that are preserved in old sediments. While palaeobotany takes in the whole history of plant life on land (approximately 415 Ma),...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Asouti, E. & P. Austin. 2005. Reconstructing woodland vegetation and its relation to human societies, based on analysis and interpretation of archaeological wood charcoal macro-remains. Environmental Archaeology 10: 1-18.Google Scholar
  2. Castillo, C. & D.Q. Fuller. 2010. Still too fragmentary and dependent upon chance? Advances in the study of early Southeast Asian archaeobotany, in B. Bellina, E.A. Bacus, O. Pryce & C.J. Weissman (ed.) 50 years of archaeology in Southeast Asia: essays in honour of Ian Glover: 91-111. Bangkok/London: River Books.Google Scholar
  3. D’Andrea, A.C. & P. Wadge. 2011. T’ef (Eragrostis tef): a legacy of pastoralism?, in A.G. Fahmy, S. Kahlheber & A. C. D’Andrea. Windows on the African past. current approaches to African archaeobotany: 225-41. Frankfurt: Africa Magna Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Dimbleby, G.W. 1985. The palynology of archaeological sites. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  5. Fuller, D.Q. 2007. Contrasting patterns in crop domestication and domestication rates: recent archaeobotanical insights from the Old World. Annals of Botany 100 (5): 903-24.Google Scholar
  6. - 2008. Archaeological science in field training, in P.J. Ucko, L. Qing & J. Hubert (ed.) From concepts of the past to practical strategies: the teaching of archaeological field techniques: 183-205. London: Saffron Press.Google Scholar
  7. Fuller, D.Q. & C.J. Stevens. 2009. Agriculture and the development of complex societies, in A. Fairbairn & E. Weiss (ed.) From foragers to farmers. Papers in honour of Gordon C. Hillman: 37-57. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  8. Gumerman, G. 1997. Food and complex societies. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 4 (2): 105-39.Google Scholar
  9. Hastorf, C. 1999. Recent research in paleoethnobotany. Journal of Archaeological Research 7: 55-103.Google Scholar
  10. Hather, J.G. 2000. Archaeological parenchyma. London: Archetype Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hillman, G.C. 1984. Traditional husbandry and processing of archaic cereals in recent times: the operations, products and equipment which might feature in Sumerian texts, part I. the glume wheats. Bulletin of Sumarian Agriculture 1: 114-52.Google Scholar
  12. - 1986. Plant foods in ancient diet: the archaeological role of palaeofaeces in general and Lindow Man’s gut contents in particular, in I.M. Stead, J. B. Bourke & D. R. Borthwell (ed.). Lindow Man: the body in the bog: 99-115. London: British Museum Press.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, G. 1987. A statistical approach to the archaeological identification of crop-processing. Journal of Archaeological Science 14: 311-23.Google Scholar
  14. Jones, M.K. 1985. Archaeobotany beyond subsistence reconstruction, in G. W. Barker & C. Gamble (ed.). Beyond domestication in prehistoric Europe: 107-28. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. Lopez, L. M., A. Capparelli & A. E. Nielsen. 2011. Traditional post-harvest processing to make quinoa grains (Chenopodium quinoa var. quinoa) apt for consumption in Northern Lipez (Potosí, Bolivia): ethnoarchaeological and archaeobotanical analyses. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 3: 49-70.Google Scholar
  16. Madella, M. & M.K. Jones. 2002. The exploitation of plant resources by Neanderthals in Amud Cave (Israel): the evidence from phytolith studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 29: 703-19.Google Scholar
  17. Marston, J.M. 2009. Modeling wood acquisition strategies from archaeological charcoal remains. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2192-2200.Google Scholar
  18. Mason, S. L. R. & J. G. Hather. (ed.) 2002. Hunter-gatherer archaeobotany. Perspectives from the northern temperate zone. London: Institute of Archaeology, UCL.Google Scholar
  19. Manning, K., R. Pelling, T. Higham, J.-L. Schwenniger & D.Q. Fuller. 2011. 4500-year old domesticated pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) from the Tilemsi Valley, Mali: new insights into an alternative cereal domestication pathway. Journal of Archaeological Science 38 (2): 312-22.Google Scholar
  20. Mercader J, H. Barton, J. Gillespie, J. Harris, S.Kuhn, R. Tyler & C. Boesch. 2007. 4300-year-old chimpanzee sites and the origins of percussive stone technology. Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences 104 (9): 3043-8.Google Scholar
  21. Palmer, S.A., O. Smith & R.G. Allaby. 2012. The blossoming of plant archaeogenetics. Annals of Anatomy 194: 146 – 56.Google Scholar
  22. Pearsall, D.M. 2000. Paleoethnobotany, 2nd edn. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Piperno, D.R. 2011. The origins of plant cultivation and domestication in the New World tropics. Current Anthropology 52 (S4): S453-70.Google Scholar
  24. Reddy, S.N. 1997. If the threshing floor could talk: integration of agriculture and pastoralism during the late Harappan in Gujarat, India. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16: 162-87.Google Scholar
  25. Thompson, G.B. 1996. The excavation of Khok Phanom Di: a prehistoric site in Central Thailand, Volume 4: subsistence and environment: the botanical evidence (The Botanical Remains 53). London: Society of Antiquaries of London.Google Scholar
  26. Torrence, R. & H. Barton. (ed.) 2006. Ancient starch research. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast Press Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Wollstonecroft, M.M. 2011. Investigating the role of food processing in human evolution: a niche construction approach. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 3: 141-50.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of ArchaeologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK