Hayward and Kelley 2010). Examples of such ethnobotanical work include the study of bi-directional domestication of humans and wheat (Barnes 2016), people-plant kin relationships (Miller 2019), and communication between people and plants being mediated by chemosensory queues (Daly and Shepard 2019). These journeys take place through a reciprocal process of sensation forged by shared relationships across time that shape all species' genetics and behavior (Hayward 2010).It is through sensation that many interspecies relationships are built. Sensation is bound to the properties of the sensory organs; organisms living in the same place and time may perceive completely different worlds (Stevens 2013), yet sensation acts as the practical medium for cohabitant relationships. Exploring the sensory is key to addressing human-environment inter-
From the “Norwegian Flora” (eighteenth Century) to “Plants and Tradition” (twentieth Century): 200 Years of Norwegian Knowledge about Wild Plants. Much ethnobotanical knowledge is documented through history in books of various kinds, which allow diachronic studies of plant use. These texts can also contribute to investigate plant knowledge transmission. Here we evaluate the influence of the first Norwegian Flora, Flora Norvegica (J. E. Gunnerus 1766–1776), a major Enlightenment natural history work in Norway, by comparing it to Planter og Tradisjon (“Plants and Tradition,” O. A. Høeg 1974), Norway’s most important ethnobotanical compilation. We systematized information from these two key historical sources of plant knowledge in Use Reports per category of use. In total, 2449 Use Reports for 552 taxa were collected, including vascular plants, ferns, mosses, algae, lichens, and fungi. We find over 100 unchanged traditions (i.e., plant-use combinations recorded in both books): only 270 Use Reports and 185 taxa are recorded in both sources. Plant knowledge may have changed, been lost or newly developed in Norway, but it is also possible that it has largely been under-documented. We argue that differences are explained to a great extent by the differing aims and socio-economic contexts of the two texts. Ultimately, perceptions of what nature is and what it is for determine what ethnobotanical knowledge is documented in historical sources. Norwegian Abstract Fra Flora Norvegica (18th århundre) til Planter og Tradisjon (20th århundre): Norsk kunnskap om ville planter gjennom 200 år. Etnobotanisk kunnskap, kunnskap om menneskers plantebruk, finnes bevart i forskjellige typer bøker fra flere århundrer. Diakrone sammenlikninger av. plantebruk er mulig ved å analysere slike bøker. Tekstene gir også innsikt i hvordan plantekunnskap er blitt formidlet. Her undersøker vi hvilken innflytelse den første norske flora, opplysningstidens Flora Norvegica (J. E. Gunnerus 1766–1776) har hatt på senere utbredelse og formidling av. plantekunnskap. Det gjør vived å sammenlikne den med Norges viktigste etnobotaniske oppslagsverk, Planter og Tradisjon (O. A. Høeg 1974). I artikkelen har vi systematisert og deretter sammenliknet plantekunnskap fra disse to verkene i kategorier av. angitte bruksområder (UR). Vi har samlet 2449 bruksområder for 552 ulike planter, inkludert bregner, moser, alger, lav og sopp. Selv om intensjonen bak de to verkene og de sosio-økonomiske kontekstene er svært ulike, finner vi over 100 uendrede tradisjoner (bruksområder angitt i begge verk), mens bare 270 bruksområder og 185 taxa er angitt i begge verk. Kunnskapen kan ha blitt endret, gått tapt, eller er ny i Norge, men det er også mulig at plantekunnskapen ikke har vært godt nok dokumentert over tid. Vi argumenterer for at det skyldes at intensjonen bak de to verkene og de sosio-økonomiske kontekstene er svært ulike. Vi diskuterer hvordan en grunnleggende forståelse av. naturen og bruken av. naturen har påvirket formidlingen av. plantekunnskap i de historiske kildene.
In this paper, past plant knowledge serves as a case study to highlight the promise and challenges of interdisciplinary data collection and interpretation in cultural evolution. Plants are central to human life and yet, apart from the role of major crops, people–plant relations have been marginal to the study of culture. Archaeological, linguistic, and historical evidence are often limited when it comes to studying the past role of plants. This is the case in the Nordic countries, where extensive collections of various plant use records are absent until the 1700s. Here, we test if relatively recent ethnobotanical data can be used to trace back ancient plant knowledge in the Nordic countries. Phylogenetic inferences of ancestral states are evaluated against historical, linguistic, and archaeobotanical evidence. The exercise allows us to discuss the opportunities and shortcomings of using phylogenetic comparative methods to study past botanical knowledge. We propose a ‘triangulation method’ that not only combines multiple lines of evidence, but also quantitative and qualitative approaches. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Foundations of cultural evolution’.
The iril at Øverby in Vingulmark This article presents the first interpretation of a 5th century proto-Norse runic inscription discovered in 2017 at Øverby, Østfold, Norway: "Cut runes in, skilled iril, for Isni”. The meaning of the word iril is discussed in light of the ten other proto-Norse inscriptions in Scandinavia where irils are mentioned. Through analysis of the language, history, archaeology and landscape context of all the iril inscriptions, we argue that the iril in the Roman and Migration period was a military leader, an earl, subordinate to a King. The iril at Øverby was Earl in the medieval shire of Vingulmark. The Earls in this period were located in strategic places in the outskirts of larger habitation areas close to the shire borders. The findings are set in context with among other Danish bog offering sites. We consider the iril a military leader for major warrior groups that fought in Scandinavia and on the continent 1500–1800 years ago.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.