[ad_1]
Nature, Published online: 12 March 2024; doi:10.1038/d41586-024-00682-9
Snippets from Nature’s past.
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]
Nature, Published online: 27 February 2024; doi:10.1038/d41586-024-00429-6
Snippets from Nature’s past.
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]

Indigenous peoples of the Americas saw all animals, including humans, as interconnected.Credit: Rapp Halour/Alamy
The Tame and the Wild: People and Animals after 1492 Marcy Norton Harvard Univ. Press (2024)
It’s an enduring myth that the development of livestock husbandry is an essential step on the path of human progress. Many books have emphasized its importance, including historian Alfred W. Crosby’s Columbian Exchange (1972) and geographer Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel (1997). But not all cultures have seen animals as creatures to be penned and farmed. Indigenous peoples in the Americas, for example, recognized that humans and animals have much in common. The clash between differing views of human–animal relationships still resonates today.
In The Tame and the Wild, historian Marcy Norton explores the history and lasting importance of this clash, which began in the late fifteenth century when Europeans arrived on the shores of the Americas, including in the Caribbean. Norton draws on a rich array of sources, including treatises on hunting and natural history, Indigenous books (known as amoxtli), accounts from soldiers and missionaries, trial records from the Spanish Inquisition, dictionaries and paintings. Her fascinating and scholarly account reveals how these encounters transformed Europe and the Americas.
Relationships between humans and animals that emerged from these meetings of different peoples planted the seeds of many of today’s ethical and environmental challenges — from colonial wealth and the dispossession of Indigenous peoples to the modern meat industry. They even explain people’s bonds with their pets.
Norton analyses human–animal relationships in Europe, Greater Amazonia (the Caribbean and lowland South America) and Mesoamerica. Many Indigenous peoples of the Americas consider all beings to be interconnected and permeable. By attempting to think like the animals they hunted, and by wearing the creatures’ pelts and consuming the meat, Indigenous people could take on some of the “beauty and power” of these living beings. By contrast, in Judeo-Christian thought, humans are distinct from and superior to animals.
Norton identifies four ways in which people interacted with animals. In Europe, through hunting and husbandry, and in the Americas, through predation and ‘familiarization’ — a process of feeding and taming individual animals that came and went freely. Familiarized animals were never eaten in Greater Amazonia, but were sometimes consumed during Mesoamerican rituals. Each way of life shaped how people categorized animals and the extent to which animals were considered “fellow subjects with desires, emotions, and even reason”.
In Europe, hunters distinguished vassal animals, such as hunting dogs, horses and falcons, from prey animals, particularly deer and boar. Nonetheless, for a hunt to be successful, hunters had to recognize that their prey had minds with needs, feelings, experiences and motives. Killing prey animals did not require their objectification. But the Christian view of a human–animal divide did provide a basis for livestock husbandry, a practice that requires animals to be seen merely as objects.

Animal features, such as horns, were associated with the Devil in the fifteenth century.Credit: Alamy
The importance of husbandry went beyond nutrition, livelihoods and products, such as clothing. By objectifying animals, people created a “distance between those who owned and managed living animals and those who taxed and consumed their corpses”. With the rise of slaughterhouses — separate from butcher’s shops and required to be outside city limits — consumers in the fifteenth century were disconnected from animal rearing and killing.
But Europeans weren’t able to distance themselves entirely from livestock husbandry during the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. The suspicion that animals might have thoughts and feelings beyond those of hunger or sleep found an outlet in fears about devils and witchcraft. Theologians and inquisitors associated animal features, such as horns, hooves, claws and tails, with the Devil and his human servants, witches. Paintings of Hell depicted the carnage associated with livestock husbandry: reptilian demons led people to slaughter or cut their victims up before roasting them on a spit or boiling them in a cauldron.

It’s time to admit that genes are not the blueprint for life
Witches were considered to have unnaturally close relationships with animals, to engage in bestiality and to have powers — such as the ability to fly — associated with animals. Well into the seventeenth century, people who had caring relationships with animals that did not have a ‘job’ raised suspicions of witchcraft. Such suspicions led to the execution of some 50,000 people in Europe between the late fifteenth and late eighteenth century.
Missionaries, some of whom had persecuted alleged witches in Spain, carried “their predisposition to see idolaters as shape-shifting sorcerers” to Mesoamerica. Faced with what they saw as an idolatrous culture that “did not uphold a species divide”, they interpreted ritual specialists or “knowledge manipulators” as witches. In so doing, they invented the colonial concept of the nahual, or animal double, out of the Indigenous concept of the nahualli, or knowledge manipulator. Colonial inquisitors tried Indigenous people suspected of having an animal form as sorcerers.
In contrast to Christians, the peoples of Greater Amazonia understood personhood as something that everything from rocks to humans possessed. Predation transformed prey and predator: people’s bodies were changed by assimilating what they ate, or by what they absorbed from the skins they prepared and wore. Even poison on arrow tips had “vegetative agency”. People had emotional bonds with animals that didn’t require those animals to perform a service. Individual animals were tamed from the wild, not produced through breeding regimes.
Norton argues that “the emergence of the modern pet was, at least in part, a result of this entanglement of European and Indigenous modes of interaction”. In the sixteenth century, most animals shipped to Europe were those that Indigenous people had familiarized. For example, the peoples of the Caribbean Islands and lowland Brazil offered parrots and monkeys to Europeans as gifts and trades — in an attempt to “familiarize” these strangers.

Ancient DNA reveals the living descendants of enslaved people through 23andMe
Aristocrats in Europe initially acquired these animals as status symbols. These tame animals transferred the nurturing they had received to their new human companions, who were surprised to find that such relationships were meaningful and desirable.
Norton’s findings contribute to work in the history of science that reveals how modern science — popularly assumed to be Western in origin — has global roots. It was not just discussions with Indigenous peoples of the Americas that European naturalists absorbed into their zoological treatises, but also concepts and practices derived from Indigenous modes of relating to non-human animals.
Norton’s analysis also re-configures histories of conquest. Scholars of Atlantic-Ocean-facing regions of Africa, the Americas and Europe have revealed how Spanish conquistadors joined inter-ethnic conflicts rather than defeating empires such as that of the Aztecs with their bugs, bullets and bigotry alone. As Norton highlights, conquistadors’ expansive use of livestock husbandry “deprived Indigenous people of their labor, their land, and, not infrequently, their lives”. Mines required workers and livestock, and animal husbandry became an alternative industry when mines were exhausted. On the island of Hispaniola, ranchers exported livestock — raised by people held in slavery and Indigenous labourers dispossessed of their lands and coerced into the work — to other colonies in exchange for enslaved people and commodities.
The Tame and the Wild is a meticulous and profound reckoning with human–animal relationships. Illuminating for anthropologists, ecologists, biologists and historians alike, it should be read as widely as The Raw and the Cooked (1964), French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss’s classic study of the myths and world views of peoples of eastern Brazil — whose culinary habits are alluded to in the title.
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]

Particles from plastic waste find their way into sediments that settle at the bottom of lakes.Credit: Piero Cruciatti/Anadolu via Getty
The presence of microplastics in layers of material that settle at the bottom of lakes might be an unreliable way to determine the onset of the Anthropocene — the geological age marking the consequences of human activity on the environment. That is the conclusion of researchers who have shown that tiny plastic particles can infiltrate deep into old sediments.
The date when the Anthropocene began is still being debated. But the presence of microplastics is one of the measures that geologists look at when analysing material from lakes and seas to see whether human activity has made an impact. And microplastic content has also been suggested as a way to date geological sediments.
In a study published today in Science Advances1, researchers looked for plastics in sediment from three lakes in Latvia: Seksu, Pinku and Usmas.
They found 14 types of plastic in sediment samples. In all three of the lakes, the most recent, uppermost sediment layers contained the most plastic particles. But the team also found that smaller, narrower particles had travelled down into much older sediments that formed long before plastic production began in the 1950s. For example, particles of the biodegradable plastics polylactic acid (PLA) and polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) were found in sediment that is more than 200 years old. The researchers used established techniques to date sediment samples, measuring the amounts of lead isotopes and spheroidal carbon-containing particles that the samples contained.

This quiet lake could mark the start of a new Anthropocene epoch
“It is clear geologists cannot use microplastics as precise markers,” says co-author Inta Dimante-Deimantovica, an ecologist at the Latvian Institute of Aquatic Ecology in Riga. “The beginning of the Anthropocene cannot be defined at 1950 based on microplastic remains in lake sediments.”
Other lakes show different trends, says Felipe García-Rodríguez, a geoscientist at the University of the Republic of Uruguay in Montevideo who has previously studied the Patos-Mirim lagoon system in South America and concluded that microplastics can be used as accurate markers for the onset of the Anthropocene. He agrees that these plastics can migrate downwards in sediment, but says that the extent to which this happens depends on the sedimentary system being studied.
Dimante-Deimantovica says that her team’s findings indicate that caution is needed if microplastics are going to be used to work out when the Anthropocene began. “There are great number of aspects in determining the onset of Anthropocene,” she says. “Microplastics won’t provide a clear solution.”
[ad_2]
Source link

[ad_1]

Vittrup Man’s skull was shattered by at least eight blows.Credit: Stephen Freiheit via Fischer A., et al./PLoS ONE
Before he was bludgeoned to death and left in a Danish bog, an ancient individual now known as Vittrup Man was an emblem of past and future ways of living.
He was born more than 5,000 years ago into a community of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers who probably lived in northern Scandinavia as their ancestors had for millennia. But Vittrup Man spent his adult life across the sea in Denmark among farming communities, whose ancestors came from the Middle East.
It’s impossible to know the lives that Vittrup Man touched during his lifetime, but it was his death that caught people’s imagination thousands of years later. His remains — ankle and shin bones, a jawbone and a skull fractured by at least eight heavy blows — were discovered in the early twentieth century in a peat bog near a town called Vittrup in northern Denmark, alongside a wooden club that was probably the murder weapon.
His “unusually violent” death distinguished Vittrup Man from other similarly aged remains found in bogs, says Karl-Göran Sjögren, an archaeologist at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, who co-led a team that charted Vittrup Man’s life in a study1 published last week.
But nothing else about Vittrup Man stood out until researchers examined his ancestry for a study that came out earlier this year2. Vittrup Man, they learnt, was related to hunter-gatherers from what is now Norway and Sweden, and not to the farming communities with Middle Eastern roots that had arrived in Denmark hundreds of years before his death.
“This is an indication that his origin may be a bit further north,” says Sjögren, possibly near the Arctic Circle where people still lived by fishing, hunting and gathering. Carbon and nitrogen isotope levels in bones and teeth, which can reveal aspects of diet, suggest that Vittrup Man got his calories from the ocean as a child, before transitioning to freshwater fish and wild game as a teenager and a diet including cereals, dairy and meat typical of farming communities starting as a young adult. Incorporated into his teeth, the researchers found protein fragments from seals, whales and fish as well as sheep or goats.
A childhood among northern Scandinavian hunter-fisher-gatherers might have prepared Vittrup Man for a long open-sea voyage to Denmark. What’s not clear is why he left the familiar to live among farmers. Some archaeologists, including some of Sjögren’s co-authors, surmise that Vittrup Man was taken captive and enslaved before being killed — a fate not uncommon in early Neolithic Scandinavia, when numerous social groups coexisted.
Sjögren favours the idea that Vittrup Man lived like a foreign merchant, mediating the exchange of goods between farmers and hunter-gatherers. Flint axes made of high-quality Danish stone, which have been identified along the Norwegian coast, could have been traded for materials from northern Scandinavia such as basalt.
“Maybe once he came of age, his role in society was to establish connections with farmer that lived across the sea,” says Thomas Booth, a bioarchaeologist at the Francis Crick Institute in London. He lived with the farmers for the last decades of his life, but it’s not inconceivable that he voyaged back and forth between homes old and new, adds Sjögren.
What, then, of Vittrup’s Man violent death, probably in his early thirties? Dozens, of Neolithic human remains — many of them young males, like Vittrup Man — have been discovered in bogs, and archaeologists think ritual sacrifice explains many of these deaths. Many of these people had bone malformations that would have marked them out among their peers, but not Vittrup Man, says Sjorgen.
Genome analysis suggests that Vittrup Man was blue-eyed and his skin may have been darker than typical Neolithic farmers, while his dark hair colour and height wouldn’t have stood out. “Why they chose to sacrifice some people it’s really hard to say,” says Sjorgen.
Vittrup’s Man’s hunter-gatherer ancestry more or less vanished from all of Scandinavian in the centuries after his death, and it’s not clear if any close relatives survived him. Researchers sequencing ancient human genomes by the hundreds have begun to build genealogies of ancient families, and it’s not inconceivable that a relative could one day be found.
The life — and death — of Vittrup Man goes to the heart of one Europe’s biggest transitions, says Booth, when hunter-gathering communities like his sat on the edge of a new way of life. “It gives you a sense of the worlds that these people are inhabiting.”
[ad_2]
Source link