Environmentally transformative human use of land accelerated with the emergence of agriculture, but the extent, trajectory, and implications of these early changes are not well understood. An empirical global assessment of land use from 10,000 BP to 1850 CE reveals a planet largely transformed by hunter-gatherers, farmers and pastoralists by 3,000 years ago, significantly earlier than land-use reconstructions commonly used by Earth scientists. Synthesis of knowledge contributed by over 250 archaeologists highlighted gaps in archaeological expertise and data quality, which peaked at 2000 BP and in traditionally studied and wealthier regions. Archaeological reconstruction of global land-use history illuminates the deep roots of Earth's transformation and challenges the emerging Anthropocene paradigm that large-scale anthropogenic global environmental change is mostly a recent phenomenon.One Sentence Summary: A map of synthesized archaeological knowledge on land use reveals a planet largely transformed by hunter-gatherers, farmers and pastoralists by 3,000 years ago.

No abstract

While some researchers continue to focus fruitfully on traditional issues, in recent years new perspectives, some strongly revisionist, have developed within European Iron Age archaeology, moving it from a long-static state into a rapidly changing milieu. Studies of colonialism, imperialism, and interaction have undergone sequential shifts into new territory, while topics related to sacred activity, political apparatuses, and the ruler-subject relationship have undergone substantial reworking. Perspectives absent from earlier literature have emerged: gender, age, ethnicity, and identity, and interpretations employing theories of practice, agency, landscape, and embodiment have emerged, mirroring broader disciplinary shifts. An overarching trend sees Iron Age Europe as a series of interactive societies with both broad similarities and sharp regional, even local, differences, moving through time and ever-changing relationships, influences, and trajectories. The collision of traditional and revisionist scholarship has produced debate, some heated, but has improved and invigorated the field.

Sander Van Der Leeuw, in his recent plenary address at the 1998 Society for American Archaeology Meetings, suggested that archaeology as a discipline has moved its emphasis from site to settlement pattern, and now to the landscape. Though a landscape focus is not new, especially for the social sciences (Coones 1994; Cosgrove 1984; Glacken 1967; Jackson 1994}, the landscape approach in archaeology (Wagstaff 1987) is still in its infancy.

No abstract