Methodological Challenges to Tracking Zea mays (Maize) Historical Pathways Through Macrobotanical, Microbotanical, and Stable Isotope Evidence: Maize’s Adoption and Consumption by Precontact Populations in the North American Midcontinent

IF 3.2 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Thomas E. Emerson, Kristin M. Hedman, Mary L. Simon
{"title":"Methodological Challenges to Tracking Zea mays (Maize) Historical Pathways Through Macrobotanical, Microbotanical, and Stable Isotope Evidence: Maize’s Adoption and Consumption by Precontact Populations in the North American Midcontinent","authors":"Thomas E. Emerson, Kristin M. Hedman, Mary L. Simon","doi":"10.1007/s10816-025-09699-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The process of plant domestication and subsequent adoption of agriculture have long been viewed by archaeologists as key factors in the emergence of social and political complexity. Ongoing research by botanists, archaeobotanists, and archaeologists, with ever-improving methodologies and technologies, reveal that the adoption of agriculture varies significantly in terms of chronologies, dietary intensity, and social impacts. It has become clear that broad-sweeping theories of agricultural adoption obscure meaningful micro-historical variations. Nowhere is this more true than in the Western Hemisphere, where the dates of the adoption of maize may differ in even geographically adjacent regions — thus the importance of focused regional studies of the history of maize consumption. In this review, we examine in detail the various methodological approaches employed in micro- and macro-botanical and isotopic studies and, importantly, appraise ongoing challenges to interpreting the findings of such research. We undertake this evaluation in the context of the northern midcontinent USA where these methodologies have produced regional maize histories that differ by as much as a thousand years in terms of both the presence of maize and the ultimate adoption of maize agriculture. We conclude that incorporating multiple refined methodological approaches is a key to understanding this variability.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-025-09699-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The process of plant domestication and subsequent adoption of agriculture have long been viewed by archaeologists as key factors in the emergence of social and political complexity. Ongoing research by botanists, archaeobotanists, and archaeologists, with ever-improving methodologies and technologies, reveal that the adoption of agriculture varies significantly in terms of chronologies, dietary intensity, and social impacts. It has become clear that broad-sweeping theories of agricultural adoption obscure meaningful micro-historical variations. Nowhere is this more true than in the Western Hemisphere, where the dates of the adoption of maize may differ in even geographically adjacent regions — thus the importance of focused regional studies of the history of maize consumption. In this review, we examine in detail the various methodological approaches employed in micro- and macro-botanical and isotopic studies and, importantly, appraise ongoing challenges to interpreting the findings of such research. We undertake this evaluation in the context of the northern midcontinent USA where these methodologies have produced regional maize histories that differ by as much as a thousand years in terms of both the presence of maize and the ultimate adoption of maize agriculture. We conclude that incorporating multiple refined methodological approaches is a key to understanding this variability.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field,  presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline.   The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology.    Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines.  Specific topics covered in recent issues include:  the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology,  new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing.  The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues.  Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List.  For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信