POSEY, D.A. 1985. Indigenous management of tropical for- est ecosystems: the case of the Kayapo ´ Indians of the Brazilian Amazon. Agroforestry Systems 3:139-58. RAPPAPORT, R.A. 1968. Pigs for the ancestors: ritual in the ecology of a New Guinea people. New Haven: Yale University Press. REDFORD, K.H. 1991. The ecologically noble savage. Cultural Survival Quarterly 15:46-8. STEWARD, J.H. 1955. Theory of culture change: the meth- odology of multilinear evolution. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. WINTERHALDER, B. & E.A. SMITH. 2000. Analyzing adap- tive strategies: human behavioral ecology at twenty- five. Evolutionary Anthropology 9:51-71. Further Reading DEAN, R. (ed.) 2010. The archaeology of anthropogenic environments (Occasional Papers 37). Carbondale: Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University. DENEVAN, W.M. 2001. Cultivated landscapes of Native Amazonia and the Andes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOOLITTLE, W.E. 2002. Cultivated landscapes of Native North America. Oxford: Oxford University Press. LYMAN, R.L. 2006. Paleozoology in the service of conser- vation biology. Evolutionary Anthropology 15:11-9. LYMAN, R.L., & K.P. CANNON. (ed.) 2004. Zooarchaeology and conservation biology. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. VAYDA, A.P. & R.A. RAPPAPORT. 1967. Ecology, cultural and noncultural, in J.A. Clifton (ed.) Introduction to cultural anthropology: 477-97. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. WHITMORE, T.M. & B.L. TURNER. 2001. Cultivated land- scapes of Middle America on the eve of conquest. Oxford: Oxford University Press. WOLVERTON, S. & R.L. LYMAN. (ed.) 2012. Conservation biology and applied zooarchaeology. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Anthropogenic Sediments and Soils: Geoarchaeology Manuel Arroyo-Kalin Institute of Archaeology, University College London, London, UK Introduction Archaeology has gradually but consistently increased its interest in the study of soils and sediments over the last decades. As a result of this emphasis, the discipline has not only sought to characterize the terrigenous matrix within which the great majority of archaeological mate- rials are found but, increasingly, to also under- stand soils and sediments in their double dimension: as archives of archaeological and environmental data and as sui generis artifacts (Butzer 1982; Waters 1992; French 2003; Holliday 2004; Goldberg & Macphail 2006; Walkington 2010). This salience notwithstand- ing, a tendency to conflate the meaning of sediments and soils continues to exist within the discipline. In some cases, this owes much to the nature of archaeological findings and their context; artifacts are found in sediment deposits that have stratigraphy and which, generally speaking, are sufficiently close to the surface to be affected by soil-forming processes. Be that as it may, it is useful to draw a contrast between “anthropogenic sediments” and “anthropogenic soils” (and indeed between sediments and soils) because the distinction highlights different earthly processes that can affect the formation of this type of archaeological evidence. Put another way, both anthropogenic sediments and anthropogenic soils imply terrigenous material with distinctive characteristics resulting from the strong and enduring influence of past human activity. However, each concept emphasizes a different aspect of the life history of the landscape, that demands the separate attention of archaeological research, especially the subdiscipline of geoarchaeology. Definition Sediment is non-lithified material made up, most of the time, of mineral particles of different com- position, shape, and size. Sediment is subject to alteration through weathering and can be transported by different agents, which can select different particle sizes as a function of overall energy. Sediment is generally studied by archae- ology in deposits that have stratigraphy: the com- position of particles, their distribution in terms of size classes, and the sedimentary structures at Anthropogenic Sediments and Soils: Geoarchaeology 279 A A