BRIDGING THE THEORETICAL DIVIDE IN HOLOCENE LANDSCAPE STUDIES

In this paper I consider recent approaches to human-environment interaction in archaeology and related disciplines. I identify two broad approaches to human-environment interaction--ecological and political/symbolic--that have increasingly coalesced around the concept of landscape. Recent developments in landscape archaeology and materiality theory have provided promising conceptual tools to bridge the ecological and political/symbolic approaches. Using examples from ancient Mesoamerica, I argue that despite such theoretical advances, few case studies have effectively integrated the divide. I discuss several examples from my research in Oaxaca where ecological and political/symbolic perspectives could be more effectively bridged. Research problems that I consider include: (1) I explore the relationship between agriculture and the origins of sedentism at ca. 1600 B.C. I suggest that sedentism is not simply an ecological problem, but involved fundamental changes in the cultural construction of landscape that had profound social and political implications. (2) I consider the symbolic and ecological dimensions of initial urbanism in Oaxaca at ca. 400 B.C. In particular, I focus on the role of religion and warfare in the founding of early urban centers and consider the implications for changes in land use and human impact on the environment. I also consider the ecological implications of the dynamic political history of early urban centers. (3) I explore the social and ecological dimensions of the Classic-period collapse at ca. A.D. 800. I argue that despite the recent popularity of ecological explanations, that the most profound effects on the landscape may have been a result, rather than a cause of the collapse. I also suggest that researchers need to consider the social dimensions of environmental change, particularly how different segments of ancient societies (e.g., urban elites versus rural commoners) were differentially affected.