3 Environmental Archaeology

K. Polley

1. Introduction

Environmental archaeology is the study of the relationship between humans and their natural environment through time (Jones, 2005, cited in Renfrew and Bahn, 2005:.64). In another way it can be stated that it is the study of past environments with the help of the data coming out from the archaeological excavations, sections, bore holes but increasingly from the written sources (Evans, 2003:1). Environmental archaeology brought in the physical environment of climate and biology which conventional archaeology often ignored. It is often observed that environmental change led to the economic change and often cultural development influenced the changes in the local environment and ecology. So a proper understanding of the man-land relationship or man-ecology relationship is necessary to understand bio-cultural evolution of man and influence of environmental change on it.

Researchers of environment archaeology apply information and techniques from the earth and biological sciences to study relationships among peoples and their environments using organic and inorganic evidence from archaeological sites. Environmental archaeology encompasses many interests, such as those subsumed by the terms paleoecology, paleoenvironment, paleoeconomy, and paleogeography; in practice it often eludes such intellectual boundaries. Although most of the researchers of environmental archaeology traces ecological relationships at a site or within a region, at its best environmental archaeology interprets human behavior set in an environmental framework that includes broad social, spatial, temporal, physical, and biotic parameters (Reitz et al, 2008:3).

The study of organic and inorganic remains from archaeological sites has a long tradition. In its early years, the field was a collection of biological, physical, and chemical techniques applied with little theoretical framework. At that time aim of most of the researches were perhaps environmental reconstructions or the study of the evolution of domestic plants and animals. Very recently environmental archaeologists have adopted evolutionary, ecological, and interdisciplinary frameworks and transformed into a holistic and diverse field. Most current practitioners endeavor to apply insights obtained from the environmental sciences to questions concerning relationships among people, cultural systems, and ecosystems. In addition, they explore the biases of the archaeological record, evaluate the methods used to get environmental data, and interpret the data themselves (Reitz et al., 2008).

Environmental archaeology is divided for convenience, if not in practice, into four subfields: the earth sciences, archaeobotany, zooarchaeology, and bioarchaeology. These are roughly defined by methods and data appropriate to one subfield or another. The field’s multi-disciplinary nature is reflected in the backgrounds of environmental archaeologists, who may be zoologists, veterinarians, botanists, paleontologists, human biologists, agricultural scientists, chemists, geographers, geneticists, ecologists, anatomists, forest managers, geologists, and nutritionists, as well as anthropologists and archaeologists (Reitz et al., 2008:5).

2. A Brief History of Development

As a sub-discipline of archaeology environmental archaeology has grown dramatically since the late 1960s largely through the stimulus of the ‘New Archaeology’ drawing upon systems theory and ecological archaeology. However, its roots go back to those years that followed Darwin’s seminal publication. Many of the principal lines of enquiry within the sub-discipline were already underway by the end of the nineteenth century, including the studies of vertebrate remains, insects, molluscs, plant macrofossils, peat stratigraphy and glacial geomorphology. In this context works of J. Venetz, J. de Charpentier and L. Agassiz (1822-1847) on the ‘Ice Age’ on Swiss Alps, works of O. Torell (1985) and finally works of A. Penck and E. Bruckner (1909) on the glaciations on Alps are note worthy. All these works ultimately mark the beginning of the modern era on Quaternary geology. In 1916, these were finally complemented by one of the most pivotal methodologies within environmental archaeology, pollen analysis. Comprehensive studies of C. A. Weber and L. Von Post in 1906 and 1916 made the development of pollen analysis as an essential tool of environmental reconstruction made possible. With the developments of earth sciences and paleo-botany a major advancement is seen in the field of paleontology also. In this context studies of L. Ruetimeyer (1862) on the animal remains of Swiss lake dwellings began an era of ecology oriented paleontological research (Butzer, 1966:5).

The later stage of development in this field is marked by the joint geological and paleontological investigations in the Grimaldi caves in Europe by Boule et al. (1906-1919). Following the same tradition Gardner and Caton-Thompson (1929, 1932) worked in the Fayum and Khagra oases of Egypt, Garrod and Bate (1937) explored and excavated Mt. Carmel caves of Palestine. Gradually a worldwide development of multidisciplinary research in the field of paleoenvironment studies and archaeological studies has emerged. In this context works of de Terra and Paterson in India (1939), H. L. Movius (1943) in Burma is mentionable (Butzer, 1966:6).

The later phase of paleoenvironment research in archaeology is marked by the development of the concept of ‘New Archaelogy’. It was that time when various modern subfields of archaeological studies including ‘Environmental Archaeology’ made their appearance. This time is marked by the works of Grahame Clark. Significant works of Grahame Clark like ‘Prehistoric Europe: the Economic Basis’ (1952) and ‘Excavations in Star Carr’ (1954) made development in the field of ‘Paleo-Ecology’ research in archaeology possible. Later works of several environmental archaeologists like K. W. Butzer (1964), Lowe and Walker (1982, 1984), Cowman and Watson (1992), Watson (1997) etc are important. Today, environmental archaeology encompasses the study of a wide range of materials that have in common that they are not predominantly shaped by human action. They are not artifacts but ecofacts. Their form reflects the human engagement with nature, rather than culture, with climate, weather, biology and landform. The boundary is far less clear than was once thought, as all archaeological materials bear witness to their natural origin and cultural modification. Recently archaeologists have found it interesting to look upon pottery as harvested mud, and meals as artifacts, blurring and subverting these boundaries. Nonetheless, as environmental evidence in broad terms presents different challenges to artifactual evidence, environmental archaeology has a range of its own concepts, which not surprisingly have close parallels with concepts relating to artifact study (Jones, 2005, cited in Renfrew and Bahn, 2005:64).

3. Goals of Environmental Archaeology

Human is unique among various organisms in the sense that he can live in any kind of habitat available on the earth. To do this human has invented personal and social environment that they carry about with them, permitting today almost any style of life to be lived anywhere on the globe. Paleoenvironmental studies, by no means esoteric historical exercises, are essential for elucidating the process by which this came about. Because of the interrelationships of organisms and their environments, past conditions continue to shape the present and future. Paleoenvironmental studies in archaeology have three kinds of goals: historical, philosophical, and policy-making goals (Dincauze, 2006:17).

3.1  Historical Goals:

The first task of paleo-environmental study is the description and understanding of environments in the human past. As has been shown above, the traditional contrast between natural and social environments is no longer analytically acceptable; the two are mutually dependent and inseparable. Any adequate understanding must acknowledge the polydimensional character of environment, its physical, biological, and social aspects. Historical research can reveal how these characteristics developed and interacted to define our species as we find ourselves today (Dincauze, 2006:17).

3.2  Theoretical and Philosophical Goals:

One of the major aims of the study of human evolution is to understand the inherent potentials and limitations of the species Homo sapiens. Other significant issues related to this are to find out the uniqueness of us among various groups of mammals, the interdependence of individuals and societies, the biological distinctions among populations, the social equivalence of our diverse societies. Paleoenvironmental studies do not readily resolve these issues; however it is true that, proper understanding of the aforesaid aims of human evolutionary study can be gained with a proper understanding of environmental context and the evolutionary process (Dincauze, 2006:17-18).

3.3 Policy Goals:

Insights and understandings of the aforesaid goals will help us to make intelligent planning for the future. The reciprocal relations between a creature and its environment are a bona fide fact of survival and evolution. Interaction between human and their ecology is not out of the above mentioned truth. Since it is true that past shows us our pathway for the future; it can be said that Knowledge of past life ways and food ways can illuminate dysfunctional aspects of contemporary lives, directly in the case of traditional people whose ancestry can be traced to archaeological sites, and indirectly in the case of urban and ghettoized populations. Significant policy implications can be developed from Paleoenvironmental and paleonutritional research, to support improved living conditions for contemporary people (Dincauze, 2006:18).

4.     Scope of Environmental Analysis in Archaeology

According to K. W. Butzer (1966) scope of the environmental analysis should be three folded and it should include contributions and understandings of earth and biological sciences as well as that of ethnology. The major scopes of environmental archaeology are-

i.Understanding of the regional environment, including the climate, vegetation, soil and geomorphic agencies. This class of information can be extracted from the study of geomorphology and palynology (Butzer, 1966:337).

ii. Understanding of regional food source bases or economic areas (Butzer, 1966:337). In case of people with hunting-gathering economy this would include:

a)    Analysis of fossil fauna of the region.

b)   Estimation of biomass (based on paleontological and ecological data).

c)    Identification of preserved vegetable foods.

d)   Understanding the nutritional pattern of modern day indigenous people of the region.

e)    Overall assessment of the human resource bases in terms of potential population strength.

In case of people with Agricultural economy this would include:

a)  Assessment of human diet (based upon agricultural and domesticated resources and native food sources).

b)  Assessment of the area on the basis of productive, un-productive lands, vegetational cover and soil depth.

c) Assessments of native vegetation, soils (on the basis of fertility), grazing land, games and fishing resources.

iii. Understanding of the local setting of an archaeological site (this includes the location of the site with respect to the terrain, hydrology, ground water resources and other local features). According to Butzer (1966) other factors that can be included in this are –

a) Factors other than food supply influencing settlement pattern of ancient people on a seasonal and perennial basis.

b)   Factors influencing human movement.

c)    Factors affecting game movement.

d)   Factors providing aquatic or marine food resources.

Butzer (1966) further states that with the help of the aforesaid information and other detail data regarding complexity of regional geographic environment it is possible to make a total environmental analysis of past people.

5. Methodological Issues

One of the major aims of environmental archaeological research is to understand relations between cultural behaviors of human with that of human habitat or ecology. The concept of human ecology is gradually expanding today, even now a days it is not merely restricted on the ecological niches of planet earth. So, a comprehensive knowledge and technique of different disciplines like anthropology, biology, ecology, zoology, botany, geology, oceanography, climatology, and pedology (soils) etc. are required to fulfill basic aims of environmental archaeological research. Since no one can be expert to the methods and techniques of all these disciplines, borrowing of technology of these disciplines and even consultation of the experts are sometimes required. In this context it is mentionable that borrowed techniques and methods should not be isolated from the concepts and theories with which they were developed. Failure to do so may develop misapplication of methods, oversimplification of interpretation, and error. So, first of all aim should be made to develop fundamental concepts, theories and vocabularies, which can cross the borders of the domains of different disciplines (Dincauze, 2006).

The discipline of archaeology has recently been through a period of methodological self consciousness during which it tried to achieve scientific standards comparable to those of the quantitative physical sciences, while keeping its social science credentials. As a result of this change a multi-disciplinary approach of research has been developed in the field of archaeology, especially in Paleoenvironmental reconstruction. Recent approach of Paleoenvironmental study in archaeology is actually backed by the cyclic action of inductive and deductive approach of research. In this context following Thorne (1983:326) it can be said that “Paleoenvironmental studies initially proceeds by the inductive approach. Data from faunal, floral and sedimentological residues in bogs, lakes, river terraces and valley fills are used to reconstruct past environmental conditions such as plant cover and hillslope and fluvial processes. These in turn are used to infer climatic parameters which may then form the basis of archaeological explanations. This may eventually produce a recursive ignorance as successive approximations move backwards and forwards, to and from the original inductive activity and may even prove circular as they are applied to explain the data from which they were derived. Despite the intrinsic shortcomings which are widely understood, this approach continues to be widely practiced in archaeology and geomorphology” (Thrones, 1983:326, cited in Dincauze, 2006:26).

Finally it can be said that science of Paleoenvironmental research brings forward a vast range methods as well as data sets coming out of the research on the environmental science of contemporary world. The study of past environment grows in its size and effectiveness with the developments in the study of present atmospheric science and related disciplines. It is noteworthy that archaeologists in collaboration with other paleoenvironmental scientists can learn about a past that was unlike the present, illuminating both the present and the future (Dincauze, 2006:35).

6. Summery

• Environmental archaeology is a sub-branch of archaeology directed towards study of the ecological evolution of human communities.
• Environment archaeology applies information and techniques from the earth and biological sciences to study relationships among peoples and their environments.
• Environmental archaeology is divided into four subfields: the earth sciences, archaeobotany, zooarchaeology, and bioarchaeology.
• As a branch of archaeology environmental archaeology has grown significantly from the 1960s due to the influence of ‘New Archaeology’.
• However, earlier researches of environmental archaeology can be traced back to the end of nineteenth century.
• Studies of environmental archaeology have three types of goals: Historical goals, Theoretical and Philosophical Goals and Policy Making Goals.
• Scope of environmental archaeology includes- understanding of the regional environment, including the climate, vegetation, soil and geomorphic agencies.
• Understanding of regional food source bases or economic areas.
• Understanding of the local setting of an archaeological site.
• Environmental archaeologists have adopted evolutionary, ecological, and interdisciplinary frameworks in the field of research very recently they have adopted holistic and multidisciplinary approach of research to cope with various research problems.

References Cited

• Butzer, K. W. (1966). Environment and archeology: an introduction to Pleistocene geography.Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
• Reitz, E., Scarry, C. M., & Scudder, S. J. (Eds.). (2008). Case studies in environmental archaeology. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Renfrew, C., & Bahn, P. (Eds.). (2005). Archaeology: the key concepts. Routledge.
• Dincauze, D. F. (2006). Environmental archaeology: principles and practice. Cambridge University Press.
• Wilkinson, K., & Stevens, C. (2003). Environmental archaeology: approaches, techniques & applications. Tempus Pub Limited.