A View from the East: An Interdisciplinary ‘Historical Ecology’ Approach to a Contemporary Agricultural Landscape in Northwest Kenya

Abstract

This article draws on the author's own research into an agricultural landscape in Pokot, north-west Kenya, to suggest new directions for interdisciplinary historical and archaeological research in southern Africa. In particular the author identifies a landscape-based historical ecology approach as potentially useful and demonstrates its application with reference to the Pokot study.

Keywords:

• historical ecology
• eastern Africa
• landscape
• archaeology
• Pokot

Notes

The research presented was supported by a doctoral award from the United Kingdom Arts and Humanities Research Council. Financial and logistical support was also kindly provided by the Tweedie Exploration Fund, University of Edinburgh, the Meyerstien Fund, University of Oxford, and the British Institute in eastern Africa. I am also indebted to the Kenyan Ministry of Education, Science and Technology for research clearance (MOEST 13/001/35C 592/2) and to the support of the National Museums of Kenya. My deepest gratitude is also due to Emanuel, Joel, William, Abel, Josphat and Irene, and of course, Laura, without whom this research would have been impossible.

Also see Lane http://www.heeal.eu/ retrieved 9 January 2010.

In very simplistic terms, given that archaeological traditions may extend indefinitely in space it can be problematic if one aims to sample that entire spatial extent. By restricting the area to be covered one changes the focus from spatial variability to temporal variability, but gains a much more manageable unit within which to work. For very practical reasons of time and cost this might be preferred to conducting very extensive surveys, over large areas.

The agricultural Pokot are related to, but also somewhat distinct from their neighbours the pastoral Pokot, though there are regular exchanges of goods and people between the two (Davies 2009a; Peristiany 1951).

All radiocarbon dates cited were calibrated using OxCal v4.0.5 (Bronk Ramsey 2007) and the northern hemisphere IntCal04 atmospheric curve (Reimer et al. 2004). The preferred range for this date is derived from intercept ranges to 2σ of 1658–1686 (20%), 1731–1809 (55%), and 1927–1954 (20%). The 1731–1809 range is preferred on the basis that the 1658–1686 range seems too early given the dating of other sites in the region, while the 1927–1954 range overlaps with historical sources.

This date is preferred on the basis of intercept ranges to 2σ of 1630–1680 (60%) and 1760–1800 (30%) and based on overlapping dates with other sites in the region.

For a fuller discussion of the calibration of these radiocarbon dates see Davies (2009a), further discussion will also be presented in a forthcoming article.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Matthew Davies

1