Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Archaeobotanical data are often employed to reconstruct a site’s or a region’s palaeoecology, human use of plants such as agricultural regimes, and the interplay between vegetation and anthropogenic factors in the palaeoenvironment. This paper aims to show that a context-specific integration of such data helps to guide the focus beyond the macroscale and may thus add significantly to the reconstruction of microscale activity areas. New archaeobotanical data from four different find spots in the Lower Citadel of Tiryns, Greece, dating to the Mycenaean Palatial and Post-Palatial periods highlight the importance of combining the analysis of the fruit/seed macroremains with anthracological and phytolith studies and integrating these results in their archaeological contextual study. Based on the data from botanical non-wood macroremains, wood charcoal, and phytoliths, the paper discusses methodological issues such as differential preservation of archaeobotanical remains that only becomes evident if more than one analytical method is employed. The paper additionally presents a contextual interpretation of archaeological finds and archaeobotanical remains that adds to a holistic picture of specific activity areas, production sequences, and the multifunctional use of installations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vetters et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: