PCI Archaeology

328

Title

Sorghum and finger millet cultivation during the Aksumite period: insights from ethnoarchaeological modelling and microbotanical analysisuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors

Abel Ruiz-Giralt, Alemseged Beldados, Stefano Biagetti, Francesca D’Agostini, A. Catherine D’Andrea, Yemane Meresa, Carla LancelottiPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year

2023

Picture

Abstract

For centuries, finger millet (Eleusine coracana Gaertn.) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) have been two of the most economically important staple crops in the northern Horn of Africa. Nonetheless, their agricultural history is poorly documented due to preservation issues faced by macrobotanical remains and the small number of systematic archaeobotanical research programs in the region. In this paper, we explore the potential extent of finger millet and sorghum agriculture in the northern Horn of Africa region during the Aksumite Kingdom (ca. 50 BCE-CE 800), that is, the period when finger millet and sorghum are first documented in the macrobotanical record. To do so, we employ a methodology that combines cross-cultural modelling, ethnoarchaeology and phytolith analysis. Together, these proxies allow us to propose and test hypotheses about past agricultural practices in the northern Horn. According to our models, the agriculture of finger millet and sorghum was possible around the main Aksumite sites in the region, likely under extensive-rainfed cultivation regimes. These results are supported by the phytolith assemblage from Ona Adi, which records the presence of water-stressed Panicoideae and Chloridoideae grasses since the beginning of the site’s occupation during the Late Pre-Aksumite period (ca. 600-400 BCE).

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw data are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7859673You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw scripts are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7859673You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw codes are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint.

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7859673You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords

C4 agriculture, cross-cultural modelling, ethnoarchaeology, phytoliths, Kingdom of Aksum, Horn of Africa.

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields

Africa, Archaeobotany, Computational archaeology, Protohistory, Spatial analysis

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

Dr Phillippa Ryan (p.ryan@kew.org), Dr Matthew C. Curtis (matthew.curtis@csuci.edu), Dr Kathryn Weedman Arthur (kjarthur@usf.edu), Dr Federica Sulas (fs286@cam.ac.uk), Dr Paul Lane (pjl29@am.ac.uk) No need for them to be recommenders of PCIArchaeology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe [john@doe.com]

Submission date

2023-04-29 16:24:54

Recommender

Emma Loftus

Reviewers

or Register
Submit a preprint