Understanding the history of corn’s domestication is key to the possible usages of the maize crop today. The search to understand the domestication of corn is an ongoing process, and a major challenge to the story of modern corn’s evolution was discovered as recently as 2018.

The accepted history was that maize began as the wild grain teosinte 9,000 years ago in what is now considered southern Mexico and that 6,500 years ago the grain was brought to southwest Amazon and Peru (Smithsonian Institution 2018). From these two facts it was deduced that teosinte came from Mexico, was domesticated over a span of 2,500 years and then was transported southward to stay in a similar form until its adoption by European colonists (Smithsonian Institution 2018). However, the discovery of 5,000 year old proto-corn in Mexico destroyed the linear timeline of corn’s domestication in Central America down into South America.

Figure 1. Image of teosinte plant compared to maize. Image by T. Ryan Gregory

One of the main ways to determine the evolution of maize is by finding fossil evidence of corn pollen which is typically “wind dispersed” and like all pollen grains has a “durable outer wall (exine)” (Bryant, Vaughn M. 2007). The issue with using pollen is that proving that a given grain belongs to human cultivated maize rather than a wild crop is complicated by the fact that the pollen found near a settlement could have traveled from a wild type neighboring the site. Adding in the genetic information found in phytoliths, silica “derived” from plant cells (“plant opal”), can confirm that genetic material belongs to corn evolving under human influence rather than wild teosinte (Renfrew 2018: 183).

Using the knowledge that in Mexico domestication was ongoing from 9,000 to 5,000 years ago lends to the conclusion that maize was domesticated separately at several times in different locations to have full kernels and soft kernel casings (Smithsonian Institution 2018). The distinct domesticated species of maize then “diffused” together over thousands of years to form the maize that Columbus would have encountered (Smithsonian Institution 2018). 

Figure 2. Corncobs found in mounds from Paredones and Huaca Prieta, Peru

The historical convergence of maize varieties tells a different and less static story than that of corn coming from Mexico domesticated down to the Amazon. In fact, the peoples of the southwest Amazon developed their own variety of domesticated corn earlier than what has been found in Southern Mexico (Smithsonian Institution 2018). One reason for this may be found in the fact that the modern wild teosinte of Mexico is so genetically similar to maize; perhaps there was more breeding (intentional or unintentional) of proto-corn during domestication back with wild teosinte in order to help the grain adapt to the climate. Because maize as a crop will never stop evolving, whether it be to better fit human consumption or to thrive in the changing climate, learning the history of corn through archeology is central to how corn will be in the future.

Bryant, Vaughn M. “Microscopic Evidence for the Domestication and Spread of Maize.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, no. 50 (December 11, 2007): 19659–60. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710327105.

Piperno, D. R., and K. V. Flannery. “The Earliest Archaeological Maize (Zea Mays L.)  from Highland Mexico: New Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Dates and  Their Implications.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98, no. 4 (February 13, 2001): 2101–3.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2018. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Fourth edition. Thames & Hudson.

Smithsonian Institution. “Scientists Overhaul Corn Domestication Story With Multidisciplinary Analysis.” Accessed September 22, 2022. https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/scientists-overhaul-corn-domestication-story-multidisciplinary-analysis.

Gregory, T. Ryan. “Artificial Selection and Domestication: Modern Lessons from Darwin’s Enduring Analogy.” Evolution: Education and Outreach 2, no. 1 (March 2009): 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0114-z.

Further Readings: 

Chapter “Archeology of Maize” 

Article on the Genetic Differences Between Teosinte and Corn

Archaeological sites are typically discovered in either extremely cold or dry climates. In cold environments, natural refrigeration allows for the preservation of organic material (Renfrew and Bahn 2018). In dry climates, the lack of water preserves artifacts and ecofacts since micro-organisms aren’t able to survive. Wet environments also preserve organic materials as long as the organic materials are preserved in an airless environment. In tropical climates, however, organic materials are more susceptible to decomposition due to the high precipitation levels, high temperatures, erosion, and biological life. For an archaeological site to survive such a climate, it must withstand forces of both nature and humans. 

The Amazon rainforest is known for being an extremely hot, humid, rainy, and dense environment. Because of this, it has been difficult for archaeologists to uncover civilizations or any sign of life. Recent technological advancements such as LIDAR, a type of aerial survey where landscapes are captured through a series of laser beams from a drone, is especially useful because the dense tree cover can be removed (Renfrew and Bahn 2018). Two months ago, in Bolivia, archaeologists discovered a settlement called Llanos de Moxos (Handwerk 2022). LIDAR revealed that this settlement was heavily populated, with a central urban area and causeways, or raised, that connected to suburban settlements.

Figure 1. Newly discovered settlement near Llanos de Moxos. Shows the complexity of ancient civilization (Krier 2022).

Archaeologists previously believed that the Amazon was sparsely populated, due to the poor quality of the soil and the climate. However, the discovery of this settlement leads them to believe that the Amazon was actually home to many civilizations, including cities and smaller towns. One of the main questions that archaeologists were looking to answer was how cities were able to sustain themselves, since the soil quality was extremely poor. In some areas, Amazonians were able to cultivate the soil themselves into a soil that contained over two to three times as many nutrients as the original soil, known as terra preta (Wade 2014). The discovery of terra preta is vital for understanding how ancient civilizations were able to adapt to their environment, but it is only one of the ways to identify civilizations in the Amazon.

Figure 2. Terra preta (left) and soil in Amazon (right) (Zimmer 2018).

The archaeology of Amazonian settlements is constantly changing as new technologies and discoveries about their way of life are uncovered. The story of the Amazon has yet to be finished.

Links of Interest

1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04780-4
2. https://www.livescience.com/clock-face-shaped-villages-amazon-rainforest.html

References

Handwerk, Brian. “Lost Cities of the Amazon Discovered from the Air.” Smithsonian Magazine, May 25, 2022. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/lost-cities-of-the-amazon-discovered-from-the-air-180980142/.

Kreier, Freda. “‘Mind blowing’ ancient settlements uncovered in the Amazon.” Nature.com, May 26, 2022. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01458-9. 

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G Bahn. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, Practice. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd. 2018.

Wade, Lizzie. “Searching for the Amazon’s Hidden Civilizations.” Science.com, January 7, 2014. https://www.science.org/content/article/searching-amazons-hidden-civilizations.‌

Zimmer, Katarina. “Soil and Satellites Are Telling a New Story About Ancient Civilizations in the Amazon.” Atlas Obscura, March 20, 2018. https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/amazon-terra-preta-to-find-ancient-civilizations.

Tree-ring dating, often referred to as dendrochronology is one of two main methods of dating. A dendrochronologist is a scientist that specializes in tree rings in order to form conclusions about the natural world and human behavior. The technique was developed by A.E. Douglass, an American astronomer in the early decades of the last century (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 108-140). Now used in modern archeology along with radiocarbon dating, Douglass pioneering technique cemented a ground foundation for dating artifacts found today.

In order to perform the process of tree-ring dating, dendrochronologists first measure and plot tree rings and produce a diagram that indicates the thickness of successive rings in an individual tree (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 108-140). After this, it’s all about figuring out the age of each tree and organizing them by chronological order. This chronological sequence of timber can present a story of the past till now.

Figure 1. Dendrochronologists analyze sequences of tree timber in order to match its pattern rings to older timbers. This will give a chronological idea of the area/site.

The technique is now a crucial tool for archaeologists, who can use tree ring chronologies for more than 4,000 sites on six continents to trace up to 13,000 years of history. Although trees add a new ring every growing season, trees don’t develop their trunks consistently. Trunk growth is closely linked to climate conditions. Under ideal conditions, trees grow quickly, leaving wide annual rings behind. During droughts, unseasonable cold, and other unusual conditions, growth slows, leaving behind narrow rings (Blakemore 2019). With these findings, dendrochronologists are able to determine the age of the tree and the type of condition the tree lived under. Tree rings can tell us so much!

Figure 2. The conifer wood displays much variation in its rings. There is a contrast in color and width size due to the different variety of environmental conditions the tree was exposed to.

However, like previously mentioned, unfavorable conditions can leave the tree-ring method to be last in the pecking order. The big reason is being that the trees must be under ideal conditions. That being said, dendrochronology can’t be used as a worldwide technique given that climate is different and constantly changing. As a result, tree-ring dating “applies only to trees in regions outside the tropics where pronounced differences between the seasons produce clearly defined annual rings” (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 108-140). Taking it a step further, the method can’t be used if the tree ring is from wood that’s been used by humans, have allowed a sequence that’s in the present, or if the sample is too complex to match with other samples. Nonetheless, dendrochronology will continue to be a pivotal tool for future generations, especially as warmer climates become more and more prevalent.

Further Readings: 

About Tree Rings

The History of the World is Written in Tree Rings 

References: 

Blakemore, Erin. 2019. “How are tree rings used to help date an archeological site?” National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/how-tree-rings-date-archaeological-site

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2018. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Fourth edition. Thames & Hudson. 108-140.

Cabinets of curiosities were a phenomenon of the European elite throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries that sought to understand and summarize the expanding world. This craze involved the aristocracy dedicating a space in their interior towards the collection of rare items. These rooms were heavily decorated and filled with drawers and sections containing objects that often didn’t contain a unifying link beyond their ability to produce awe and intrigue (“What is a…” n.d.). Collections greatly differed and were known under different names, often being called wunderkammer, meaning wonders or miracles of the world (“What is a…” n.d.).

Image 1. A painting of objects contained in a cabinet of curiosity

The origin of these rooms of collection is due to the nature of both the time period and the European elite. Collection is a human trait and has become embedded in current culture through the presence of modern museums. What specifically stemmed this desire towards collection during the era of the Renaissance was the emphasis on exploration and discovery. This period of time included a vast increase in travel and a shift of focus away from the Mediterranean. When exploring the uncertainty of the corners of the world, there was a need to classify, organize, and familiarize the influx of knowledge and materials that were being discovered (Yaya 2008). The cabinets acted as a way to frame the unfamiliar information in a comfortable and digestible way. This behavior was able to satisfy the Europeans’ object of wonder and curiosity for the “exotic”. The possession of the rare and exotic allowed someone to reconstruct the understanding of the world by assembling their own “microcosm” of the universe (Yaya 2008). 

Image 2. An illustration of a group of elite admiring and discussing a collection of animal artifacts.

A central feature of the cabinet of curiosities was the social aspect as they were designed for the accessibility of visitors. The intention of the collections was for others to be able to come and discuss what the owner had curated. While the collections were partly for personal intrigue and classification of knowledge, they were also a show of social prestige. The collections showed that one was an intellectual and educated man of taste (Arnold 2012). The grand size of collections and the exotic nature of the exhibits were signs that the owner was both wealthy and well traveled. The philosophical speculation acted as entertainment for the nobility that was intellectually stimulating (Arnold 2012). Somebody who could engage in knowledgeable conversation was well informed and by association, those who were invited to come witness the attractions were also considered men of taste. Scholars and nobility sought to amuse themselves with discussion and debate above gossip and cards, hobbies of the less educated. The curation of collections was for the socially ambitious and the most prestigious of collections could even entice visitors from all across Europe, even including royalty. The cabinets of curiosities are a representation of our desire to understand the past through what has been left behind.

References

Further Readings

https://www.sothebysinstitute.com/news-and-events/news/cabinets-of-curiosities-and-the-origin-of-collecting

What Is a Wunderkammer? Best Cabinets of Curiosities

Relative dating is a crucial tool in roughly ordering artifacts or sites into sequences. Archaeologists utilize many different sequencing techniques, depending on the site or the questions they want answered. These include stratigraphy, typological sequences, and environmental sequences.

Environmental sequences can include deep-sea cores, ice cores, and pollen dating. Deep-sea cores are used to mark climatic change most accurately for the last 2,000-3,000 years (Renfrew 2007, 115). When dealing with time periods farther back, pollen dating is most useful. Pollen grains are incredibly durable, lasting for millions of years, and aid in our comprehension of ancient environments.

Northern Europe, specifically Neumark-Nord near Halle, Germany (Aridi 2021), and Western and Central Asia (Figure 1) were home to Neanderthals (Monnier 2012). Neanderthals lived “from about 400,000 to 30,000 years ago” (Renfrew 2007, 135 ). During that time period, those regions saw some of the coldest conditions ever experienced, evidenced by the shorter limbs and broader chests of Neanderthals (Figure 2) specifically adapted to withstand colder temperatures (Monnier 2012). Neanderthals survived several ice ages, and their effects on Neanderthals can be studied using relative dating.   

Figure 1. Range of Neanderthal populations

Figure 2. Model of what Neanderthals were thought to look like

A research team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology conducted a study on how shifting environmental conditions affected human presence, focusing on a former lakeshore in Lichtenburg, Northern Germany (Max Planck Society 2022). The team used several archaeological methods, including pollen dating to uncover the aforementioned relationship. Stone tools were discovered at the campsite and their evolution was aligned with changing environmental conditions. The study resulted in accurate dating of an interglacial period (Brörup Interstadial), and connecting a cooling period to climate change in the Greenland ice and North Atlantic, a relationship that had previously only been speculated. 

The Neanderthals of Northern Europe not only evolved and adapted their tools to suit their surrounding environment, but directly altered their environment. In Lichtenberg, research aiming to answer if Neanderthals were well adapted to colder temperatures, showed that the Neanderthals repeatedly visited Northern Central Europe, even during the last Ice Age. This region developed from a heavily forested area, to sparser forests, to cold tundra (Max Planck Society 2022). A different team, led by archaeologist Wil Roebroeks, sought to explain how the region changed from forest to a relatively open space. The study involved pollen dating and charcoal sampling to piece together how fire was utilized, with the wood and seeds found. This connection allowed researchers to speculate that the phenomenon of humans clearing land for fields occurred much earlier than once thought. This revolutionary discovery shows the oldest known evidence of “hominids reshaping their environment” (Aridi 2021).

Environmental sequences have provided a way of looking into the past when radiocarbon dating fails. Although it is not as accurate or widely used as radiocarbon, it is crucial in our understanding of early time periods.

References:

Aridi, Rasha

  12/17/21  Scientists Find the Oldest Evidence of Neanderthals Altering the Natural Landscape. Smithsonianmag.com.                     https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-find-the-oldest-evidence-of-ancient-humans-altering-the-natural-landscape-180979251/ 

Max Planck Society

  4/26/22  Neanderthals of the North reveal tolerance of humans to changing environmental conditions. Phys.org.                                      https://phys.org/news/2022-04-neanderthals-north-reveal-tolerance-humans.html

Monnier, Gilliane

  2012  Neanderthal Behavior. Nature.com. https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/neanderthal-behavior-59267999/

Renfrew, Colin

  2018  When? Dating Methods and Chronology. In Archaeology Essentials: Theories/Methods/Practice. 4th edition. pp. 115-135. Thames & Hudson, London, England 

Links of interest:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0920544608700773

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/01/07/462132043/itchy-eyes-sneezing-maybe-blame-that-allergy-on-neanderthals

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379122001500?via%3Dihub

Radiocarbon dating is an archeological dating technique based on the radioactive decay of carbon-14 atoms (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 108-140).  Ireland is a country where radiocarbon dating has been vital because of its climate, harsh weather patterns, and features.  Without this technique, key parts of Ireland’s history would continue to be murky or undetermined.

A recent find that involved the use of radiocarbon dating was that of a pagan deity statue (Figure 1), which gave insight into the religious and spiritual practices of the Irish people before St. Patrick made his way to the island (Gershon 2021).  Given that the excavation team found the statue in a bog, it was in excellent condition due to the natural preservation of the matrix.  

Figure 1. Archaeologist Cathy Morre standing next to the pagan deity statue found in a bog in Gortnacrannagh, Ireland. Photograph by Archaeological Management Solutions.

The process of radiocarbon dating involves finding an uncontaminated sample, running tests to determine the carbon-14 atoms’ decay level, and finally calibrating the found date to the modern time system (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 108-140).  Once the samples from the statue went through this process, it was determined to be sculpted between 200 and 400 C.E. (Gershon 2021).  With this given time range, archaeologists could link together multiple ritualistic ruins and artifacts in the local area, allowing for a better understanding of the religious practices of the ancient Irish peoples.  Without radiocarbon dating, this would have been much more difficult to determine, and the time period of this site and others would be unclear.

Radiocarbon dating also helped immensely with dating ancient architecture in Ireland.  What has been learned from these sites has been essential for putting together a more accurate timeline of Irish civilization.  In 1992, Rainer Berger selected architecture, and then targeted the mortar within the infrastructures.  Specifically, he wanted to perform radiocarbon dating on the charcoal within the mortar to better understand when the buildings were constructed.  To isolate the carbon-14 atoms within the charcoal, the mortar was “treated with cold dilute hydrochloric acid until all inorganic carbonate [has] been destroyed” (Berger 1992, 882).  Once that step was complete, further cleansing commenced, eventually leaving just the desired atoms.  

The decay of the atoms obtained by Berger revealed that the small chapels, churches, and towers (Figure 2) he was analyzing were all constructed after the arrival of St. Patrick, meaning that they were made to withstand Viking attacks and raids during an era of violence and uncertainty.  This hints at cultural and societal values of the time, as well as the ‘why’ behind the unique architecture.  The accuracy of the radiocarbon dating also made it easier for archaeologists to individually order the buildings based on the time of construction, which was challenging to do in the past.

Figure 2. The Clonmacnoise Round Tower, one of the many sites throughout Ireland where   Carbon-14 isotopes were extracted from mortar. Photograph by Sarah Murphy.

All-in-all, this is just a glimpse into the vast array of archaeological progress that radiocarbon dating has catalyzed in Ireland.  As time goes on, radiocarbon dating will thicken Irish culture with layers of complexity and change how the history of Ireland is written.  

Further Readings:

Radical New History of Britain and Ireland Enabled by Precise Radiocarbon Dating

What Ancient Secrets Lie Beneath this Little-Known Irish Bog?

References:

Berger, Rainer. 1992. “14C Dating Mortar in Ireland.” Radiocarbon 34 (3): 880–89.

Gershon, Livia. 2021. “Eight-Foot-Tall, 1,600-Year-Old Statue of Pagan Deity Found in Ireland.” Smithsonian Magazine, 2021, sec. Cool Finds. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/1600-year-old-wooden-idol-found-ireland-180978453/.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2018. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Fourth edition. Thames & Hudson. 108-140.

History is written in blood and almost every conflict throughout time has been inadequately documented, creating mysteries and gray areas in battles that forged nations. A specific sub-area of archaeology, battlefield archaeology, studies the material remains of these conflicts in order to evoke a greater understanding of the violence and strategy of these historic battles.

Troop formations, military tactics, and the exact positions soldiers were standing can be determined by the martial debris left behind: buttons, coats, straps, shrapnel, etc. (American Battlefield Trust 2021). The concentration of martial debris is equally important as well, where a higher concentration of artifacts in a specific area can better track movement and positions on the battlefield. These artifacts are carefully excavated, flagged, and categorized in order to map out the battle. Furthermore, the location of these artifacts is often more important than the artifact itself because it helps archaeologists visualize the entirety of the battle in the surrounding area. 

Archaeologists excavate and flag the locations of artifacts using cameras and photo scales at Minute Man National Historical Park (American Battlefield Trust 2021).

Military data and records have been a historical gray area for years, as militaries rarely recorded detailed information and after-action reports in previous centuries. More specifically, many aspects of battles throughout American history have remained mysteries, as records have been few and far between. One of the most important conflicts in American history, the Revolutionary War, had many sporadic and scattered skirmishes, and accurately dating and identifying these battles has been difficult for historians. With the help of battlefield archaeology, historians have been able to paint a clearer picture of the movement, positions, and artillery formation of these battles that define vital moments of American history.

One battle of the Revolutionary War, Parker’s Revenge, in which Captain John Parker rallied his troops in Lexington and Concord after the “shot heard round the world” has recently been brought to light after ten musket balls and a cluster of other artifacts were uncovered by battlefield archaeologists (American Battlefield Trust 2021). The shape and disfigurement of these musket balls accurately show the troop formation in which they were shot, the target they were aimed at, and the firing range of the muskets (Zorich 2022). Battlefield archaeologists were able to conclude which musket balls hit soldiers, missed, or were mistakenly dropped on the ground, allowing them to map out specific locations of the battle, and how these soldiers moved in reaction to the environment and conflict itself. 

Archaeologists flagging and excavating artifacts found on the site of Parker’s Revenge in Minute Man National Historical Park (Archaeology 2016).

Battlefield archaeology brings gray areas of history to light, solving mysteries of past battles. Visualizing the movement, positions, and actions of these soldiers as they fought for their lives depicts the bravery, sacrifice, and violence of the history of each nation. Battlefield archaeology reveals the untold stories of past conflicts and provides an in-depth comprehension of important moments of history.

Additional Content for Further Discovery

Battlefield Archaeology

Archaeology at Antietam

References

American Battlefield Trust. “Archaeology Pinpoints Site of Parker’s Revenge near Lexington.” American Battlefield Trust. American Battlefield Trust, March 25, 2021. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/archaeology-pinpoints-site-parkers-revenge-near-lexington. 

American Battlefield Trust. “The Importance of Battlefield Archaeology.” American Battlefield Trust. American Battlefield Trust, March 25, 2021. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/importance-battlefield-archaeology.

Carman, John. “Battlefield Archaeology.” SpringerLink. Springer New York, January 1, 1970. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1330.  

National Parks Service. “Archeology at Antietam (U.S. National Park Service).” National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, April 16, 2020. https://www.nps.gov/articles/archeology-at-antietam.htm. 

Urbanus, Jason. “Finding Parker’s Revenge.” Archaeology Magazine. Archaeological Institute of America, 2016. https://www.archaeology.org/issues/202-1601/trenches/3933-trenches-massachusetts-revolutionary-war-parker-s-revenge. 

Zorich, Zach. “A Battlefield from 1777 Yields a Dozen Mercenaries’ Remains.” The New York Times. The New York Times, August 3, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/02/science/archaeology-revolutionary-war-red-bank.html. 

Most archaeological excavations do not find golden statues or treasure troves, like what is portrayed in films, but rather ceramic shards. To the general public, this might not seem like an important find but these fragments offer a lot of information. Organic residues found on or in ceramic matrices or plasters (see Figure 1) are one feature, in particular, that contain valuable archaeological data. These residues represent precious history and the analysis of such residues can recover many aspects of ancient ways of life including diet, cooking, food storage, etc. (Pecci 2014).

Figure 1. Analyzed pottery fragment with an attached food residue. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2016.07.004.

So what exactly is organic residue analysis? It is a method that utilizes “analytical organic chemical techniques to identify the nature and origins of organic remains that cannot be characterized by using traditional techniques of archaeological investigation” (Evershed 2008). There are two main approaches used when performing residue analyses. The first is the analysis of lipids through identification of fatty acids by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), often coupled with the analysis of carbon stable isotopes (Pavelka 2016). The second is identifying source-specific proteins by either mass spectrometry or by more traditional immunological methods and using peptide mapping (Pavelka 2016). Both approaches have their advantages which should be taken into account. Lipids are less susceptible to “leaching” and “diagenetic degradation” than proteins but peptide mapping for proteins is very analogous and can detect distinct differences in amino acids for individual species (Pavelka 2016).

Many studies have been done on recovered ceramics using organic residue analysis to further study the diets of past societies and also show connections between them. A study conducted by Boyd et al. (2006), focused on the consumption of maize in North America through the analysis of food residue for starch and phytolith content. Their results showed that maize consumption was more widespread than believed. They examined small-scale societies living at the northern edge of the Great Plains (see Figure 2), where the role of domesticated plants in their diets was hidden due to little to no archaeological evidence using traditional methods. However, residue analysis from ceramic pieces in this area demonstrated that maize was evidently present and even became an important dietary. This then raised questions as to whether the maize presence was reflecting local production, trade, or both. Boyd et al. observed that one sample obtained from a large loop-handled pot, which was the only one recovered at that site, was similar to another location’s traditional style pot where maize was known to be grown locally; so it is reasonable to suspect that it was acquired through trade.

Figure 2. Location of study sites, and Middle Missouri region within the Great Plains (shaded in gray). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2008.04.008.

As the organic residue field further expands and develops, it can propose evidence to challenge many long-standing archaeological hypotheses (Evershed 2008). A critical step forward will be treating recovered ceramics as biological material that is susceptible to irreparable damage and contamination so that no potential information is lost (Pavelka 2016).

Further Readings

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.04.015

https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abb9314

References

Boyd, M.,  T. Varney, C. Surette, and J. Surette. 2008. “Reassessing the Northern Limit of Maize Consumption in North America: Stable Isotope, Plant Microfossil, and Trace Element Content of Carbonized Food Residue.” Journal of Archaeological Science, 35: 2545-2556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2008.04.008.

Evershed, Richard P. 2008. “Organic Residue Analysis in Archaeology: The Archaeological Biomarker Revolution*.” Archaeometry, 50: 895-924. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4754.2008.00446.x.  

Pavelka, Jaroslav, Ladislav Smejda, Radovan Hynek, and Stepanka Hrdlickova Kuckova. 2016. “Immunological Detection of Denatured Proteins as a Method for Rapid Identification of Food Residues on Archaeological Pottery.” Journal of Archaeological Science, 73: 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2016.07.004. 

Pecci, A. 2014. “Organic Residue Analysis in Archaeology.” In: Smith, C. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_334.

The archaeology of prisoner of war camps during the American Civil War reveals much about the culture of the war, all the way down to the beginning of why POW camps were created. While there was originally a POW exchange system, when the Union army deployed African American troops into battle, the Confederate army refused to continue the trade system, instead enslaving all captured African American troops, and POW camps needed to be built to  hold the growing numbers of captives (Partridge 19).

Johnson’s Island Prison- from http://johnsonsisland.org/

The interest in the archaeological field in these and similar sites is that they were sites of heavy and consistent use for a relatively very short period of time. Additionally, since they were sites of wartime behavior, it is possible to see the behavior of prisoners while in violent and oppressive situations, as well as captors, in an environment where violent and oppressive actions are accepted (McNutt 690).

One such site is that of the Johnson’s Island Civil War Military Prison, where archaeologists investigated the sinks (latrines) as a great source of information about the growth of the camp, as well as the treatment of prisoners. Using maps from different years, archaeologists were able to see when new latrines were created to replace old ones, sometimes to the exact day, and find that latrines were replaced roughly every five months, and then covered with soil from the new latrine and capped with clay. Not only were the latrines used for discarding of human waste, but also for disposal of contraband materials and secondary refuse, including use as a site to burn things like clothing before being capped off and ceased to be used (Bush 69).

Map of the prison compound– latrines marked as “sinks” (Bush 66)

Prisoners used these sinks as well to plan escapes, showing resistance from the confederate soldiers held there. Tunnels were found, as well as Union buttons that may have been used as a disguise for escaped prisoners (Bush 71). In terms of survival, many prisoners turned to finding their own meat, including rats, fish, birds, and one dog, evidenced by the faunal remains (remains of animals) found in the latrines (Bush 72), as the retrieval of supplemental rations was technically contraband.

The takeaways from these findings in the latrine, which are far more vast than this blog post can cover, is that archaeology is a fantastic source of information for research of Prisoners of War and their treatment, resistance, and survival in prison camps. 

For more information about POW camps in the civil war, please visit:

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/civil-war-prison-camps

https://www.britannica.com/video/195089/lot-military-prisoners-American-Civil-War-Andersonville

https://www.nps.gov/ande/learn/historyculture/npsprisons.htm

http://johnsonsisland.org/

Reference List

Bush, David R.

  2000  Interpreting the Latrines of the Johnson’s Island Civil War Military Prison. Historical Archaeology. Volume 34 (No. 1): 62-78

McNutt, Ryan K.

  2019  The archaeology of military prisons from the American Civil War: globalization, resistance and masculinity. World Archaeology. Volume 51 (No. 5): 689-708

Partridge, Colin H.

  Fall 2019  Preserving the Memory of those Perilous Times: Archaeology of a Civil War Prison in Blackshear, Georgia. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2027.

Image 1: Illustration of the overwhelming amounts of trash in landfills

Trash is our most widespread artifact and one of our most identifiable landmarks. In an average life span, Americans toss 102 tons of trash from clothing to broken pieces of technology and even plastic water bottles. These objects are important in framing how we think about the world. When a new model of the object comes out and the one we have doesn’t serve us any purpose, we throw it away. It’s the height of capitalism driving consumerism, ultimately filling up landfills with artifacts. Artifacts can be defined as an object made or altered by humans at any time and place (Renfrew 2018). Often found secreted under sediments, they provide essential clues about life by allowing a glimpse into a society’s culture and era. We make sense of people’s beliefs and practices by studying the treasures and objects that serve a function in humans’ daily lives.

Recently, scientists like William Rathje have studied how the materials in landfills decompose in various environments, identify how waste shifts over time, and then draw conclusions about artifacts and behavior through landfill excavation (Ian McTaggart 2015). When studying trends of human behavior, trash is an important physical data point. It looks at consumerism in aspects such as diet, clothing trends, and planned obsolescence in tech.  Most of Rathje’s studies have taken place in moderately modern landfills dating from the early 1970s to the early 2000s which constantly leads to the connotation that garbology is about more present-day artifacts (Jeff Harrison 2012). However, the notion of garbology, studying the waste of a specific society, has been present for some time within the boundaries of archaeology. From lithic debitage to middens, waste or byproducts have been studied to give context to the specific diet and practices of a society.

Image 2: William Rathje and his team work through a landfill sifting and identifying artifacts

Middens are archives of lifeways and environments. Archeologists have studied middens through the shell refuse and soil which builds up at these trash sites, resulting in the formation of mounds on what was once level ground. These middens preserve a record of occupation by providing a record of ancient inhabitants. These archeological studies have included food processing methods, seasonality, and even other purposes for the shell mounds.

Image 3: An excavation of a shell midden showing the different layers of artifacts such as bone, ash, and shell

More specifically,  in shell middens, bone artifacts, shell artifacts, food remains, and oftentimes, even ceramics are preserved. They are found throughout the world, on coastlines, near lagoons, and tidewater flats, along major rivers, and even in small streams. Most shell middens have been dated to the Late Archaic or Late Mesolithic periods(around 4,000-10000 years ago) thanks to the use of radiocarbon dating (K. Kris Hirst 2019). Middens are flourishing with waste and they help give archaeologists an enhanced perspective of ancient livelihoods.

Although garbology remains a term more often used in the modern sense, the study of human waste has had a large presence within the field of archeology. Artifacts range from an array of subjects but human waste is abundant in this world and it’s what allows us to keep learning information about human behavior. 

References:

McTaggart, Ian. 2015. “A Tale of Garbage.” Earth Common Journal 5 (1), http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/a?id=1331

Harrison, Jeff. 2012. “William L. Rathje: 1945-2012.” The University of Arizona News.https://news.arizona.edu/story/william-l-rathje-1945-2012 

Hirst, K. Kris. 2019. “The Archaeological Study of Shell Middens.” ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/archaeological-study-of-shell-middens-170122 

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2018. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. Fourth edition. Thames & Hudson.

Further Readings:

https://galapagosconservation.org.uk/garbology-new-perspectives-on-waste/

https://www.musingsofahistorygal.com/2015/04/garbology-it-is-more-than-just-trash.html 

https://science.jrank.org/pages/6122/Shell-Midden-Analysis.html

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1040618220302251