Crossing the Borders: New Methods and Techniques in the Study of Archaeological Materials from the Caribbean

Caribbean Paleoethnobotany / 191
appeared, and perhaps that assignments have overreached. So accurate and comprehensive
comparison is critical and must proceed with considerable caution and
recognition of all taxonomic “realities.” We must continue to build on comparative
databases, and routinely sample background soils for indications of the natural
seed/ pollen/ starch rain. 7
Finally, the archaeobotanical record is more than just a reflection of the plant
resources used by people of the past. It IS, quite literally, those plants. Caribbean
species extinctions resulting from natural catastrophes and human pressures have
occurred on a massive scale (Brooks and M. L. Smith 2001). As a reservoir of ancient
taxa, the archaeobotanical record bears directly on past and present biodiversity
issues. Although long dead in the life history sense, and generally existing only
as fragments of or a particle from the original plant, archaeobotanical remains
nevertheless exist to the present in their various states of preservation. In a very
real sense the archaeobotanical record is a repository of ancient taxa and their genetic
material, including in some cases the last traces of heirloom cultivars, of the
ancestral forms of plants present today, and of others now extinct (consider here
again the pitfalls of direct comparison with extant forms).
We know from the ethnohistoric accounts (Tables 13.1 and 13.2) and archaeological
kernel morphologies that at least two races of maize were present in the
Caribbean by the time of European contact, one of which may be related to the
modern race Early Caribbean (Newsom 2006; Newsom and Deagan 1994), but can
DNA be used to clarify that assignment, to discern more? We have suggestions of
several tropical root crops from the ethnohistoric documents, carbonized tubers,
and plant microremains, but suppose DNA or some chemical residue analysis revealed
that other taxa, varieties, or landraces were present? This would be important
to the overall understanding of subsistence patterns and the evolution of crop
systems in the region. And whereas ancient DNA analysis might be difficult or impossible
with carbonized remains, the chemical signatures still may be attainable.
Furthermore, certainly there are numerous caves and wetlands in the Caribbean—
thus very arid or perpetually waterlogged environments— in which uncarbonized
material may be recovered and become available for study. Archaeobotany can inform
on the past record of biodiversity, as well as clarify the history of cultivars,
cultivation, and cultivators. It is essential to continue to work to clarify whether
some of the taxa documented archaeologically in fact represent plants introduced
by humans (vs. natural dispersal, wild pepper and wild avocado being two possibilities),
and whether they indeed represent domesticates, semidomesticates, or
wild taxa, including whether some cultivars were developed in situ from native
or introduced sources. This has important cultural implications and is central to
understanding the indigenous ethnobotanical heritage. DNA analysis can be one
source of information in this regard, including comparisons of modern taxa in the
region, to detect genetic distances between wild and domesticated forms.
You are reading copyrighted material published by the University of Alabama Press.
Any posting, copying, or distributing of this work beyond fair use as defined under U.S. Copyright law is illegal and
injures the author and publisher. For permission to reuse this work, contact the University of Alabama Press.