The Use of Archaeological Methods in Animal Conservation and Preservation

Figure 1:  Huemels are a critically endangered camelid species found in South America (Source: Barberena et al., 2011)

A hot topic that has been popular over many decades has been environmental conservation and preservation.  There are countless governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, and individuals who are concerned with many different aspects of global environmental changes.  This includes concerns about the extinction of various plant and animal species, global warming, or other issues concerning our natural environments.  Researchers in the fields of natural resource management, biology, environmental sciences, and other hard sciences have dedicated a great deal of time, energy, and resources to understanding these issues and seeking resolutions to them.  One area of research that has received little attention in helping holistically understand and resolve these issues is archaeology.  Today’s blog post will address how archaeological research can be and is used to address issues concerning environmental protection, specifically animal conservation and preservation.

 

Environmental archaeologists have been addressing the issue of how their work can and should be used for environmental preservation for decades.  There have been some miscommunications in how specifically this can be done in a realistic manner, though.  Several environmental archaeologists have promoted ideas concerning returning to Indigenous means of working the land, which proved to be environmentally sustainable in the past.  While this is true it is not necessarily feasible due to the contemporary manipulation and changes to the lands that were previously worked through Indigenous methods.  This had led to pivoting directions and messaging. 

 

Presently, archaeologists argue that their work still matters but in different ways.  First, archaeological data can be used to understand the historical relationships between humans and their environments.  By having this understanding one can better assess the role humans have played in manipulating those environments, identifying how specific plant and animal species have changed or gone extinct due to human actions.  Another important consideration is using archaeological data to evaluate past environments, which provides a survey of what past environments exists and with which specific plant and animal species existed within them.  Lastly, there is the potential for using archaeological data to pinpoint when specific plant or animal species were introduced by human into an environment, thereby understanding which animals were natural versus invasive to the environment.  This point of information is already documented in the historical record, such as knowing when European songbirds, such as the sparrow, were released throughout North America and devastated indigenous song bird populations.  An archaeological survey of these data provides are greater temporal range, particularly if and where the historical data is lacking or nonexistent.

 

Several studies have already utilized archaeological data to provides insights into past environments, particularly for critically endangered animal species.  One study on Huemuls (Figure 1), a camelid species indigenous to the Chilean and Argentinian Andes, utilized isotopic analyses to understand the diets of zooarchaeological samples of these species.  This information provided insights into the specialized diets of these species, which can inform contemporary conservationists on the best practices for replenishing these species.  This enables them to reintroduce them into areas where they will be best able to not only survive but thrive as they have plenty of food resources to proliferate across their new home ranges. 

 

A second study on Asiatic cheetah species has great potential for preserving these species, of which there are less than 70 left in the wild.  Morphological, genetic, and radiometric analyses of seven mummified cheetahs and over 50 skeletonized samples have provided insights into the number and home range for these cheetahs.  The researchers determined that hybridization between African and Asiatic cheetah species was quite common in the past, as well as additional useful information that could be used by conservationists as they explore options for rewilding this cheetah species.

 

Ultimately, there is great potential in the use of archaeological data to better inform conservation efforts.  While this blog post focused on two case studies focused on animal species there are several other studies that showcase the use of these methods in floral (plant) and other species, including insects, bacteria, and more.  By using multiple lines of evidence and interdisciplinary studies a better understanding of conservation problems can be attained, leading to informed and potentially more viable solutions.

 

References Cited

Barberena, R., Méndez, C., Mena, F., & Reyes, O. (2011). Endangered species, archaeology, and stable isotopes: huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus) isotopic ecology in central-western Patagonia (South America). Journal of Archaeological Science, 38(9), 2313-2323.

 

Boug, A.A., Mir, Z.R., Jbour, S. et al. Mummified cave cheetahs inform rewilding actions in Saudi Arabia. Commun Earth Environ 7, 24 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-03021-6

 

Shriver-Rice, M., Schneider, M. J., & Pardo, C. (2022). Charismatic megafauna, regional identity, and invasive species: what role does environmental archaeology play in contemporary conservation efforts?. World Archaeology, 54(3), 429-446.

Anthropologist Profile: Ella Cara Deloria, Educator, Ethnographer, and Linguistic Anthropologist

 

Ella Cara Deloria

Not every scholar or researcher comes from a privileged background and has an easy time pursuing their studies or career.  These individuals often face unseen challenges that make it difficult to be as successful as others, which makes their accomplishments all the more special and important.  Today’s blog post will address the achievements of Ella Cara Deloria, a Dakota educator and scholar, who faced several serious hardships but is considered one of the most successful anthropological scholars to date.

 

Ella Cara Deloria was born on January 31, 1889 to a Euro-American mother and a Yankton Sioux father, who was also an Episcopal priest. Her paternal grandfather was a tribal leader.  She grew up with modest means, but her family instilled in her the importance of education and maintaining her Indigenous way of life.  She was taught both the Dakota and Lakota languages, maintaining fluency in both her entire life.  In 1910 she began her studies at Oberlin College, which she completed in 1913.  She immediately followed this up by earning her Bachelor’s of Science in Education at Columbia Teachers College, earning her degree in 1915. 

 

It was during her tenure at Columbia that she met Franz Boas, who is considered the father of modern anthropology.  She was impressed with the anthropological subject matter he was teaching his students, and he saw in Deloria an individual he could employ to help educate his students.  Given her interests in education Deloria jumped at the chance to teach Boas’s students Dakota and Lakota.  Upon graduating from Columbia she became a teacher.  She first taught language arts, followed by health education and later dance and physical education in various Indigenous school districts.  She was a celebrated educator, but she could not help but notice the challenges her students faced.  She documented these and advocated on behalf of her students, setting the foundations for what is today known as culturally relevant teaching practices.

 

In 1927 she reunited with Boas and began a 15 year career as an ethnographer and anthropological linguistics scholar.  These studies were first undertaken under the guidance of Boas but later by Ruth Benedict.  With Boas they studied American Indian languages and cultures, with Deloria serving as an instrumental cultural informant for Boas.  She also forayed into her own independent work.  She interviewed elders, composed several Indigenous language dictionaries and grammar books, and translated ceremonial texts.  This resulted in a series of publications, including “The Sun Dance of the Oglala Sioux,” in the Journal of American Folklore in 1929, the Dakota Texts (1932), Speaking of Indians (1944), and Waterlilly, which was published after her death in 1988.  Her book Dakota Way of Life won the 2023 Dwight L. Smith (ABC-CLIO) Award and a bronze medal for the 2023 Will Rogers Medallion Award, both of which were awarded posthumously.

 

In addition to her own research she was employed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for two projects.  One involved studying and reporting on the socioeconomic challenges of the residents of the Navajo Nation Reservation.  Her work with the Navajo garners far more attention than her work with the Lumbee of North Carolina, which was also commissioned by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.  For this project she was commissioned to write a pageant that chronicled the Lumbee’s successes over their history.  The purpose of this pageant was to combat the racial and ethnic prejudices the Lumbee faced by the neighboring White population.  Deloria knew nothing about the Lumbee, but she did not let that stop her from completing the work.  She started by reviewing the published literature on the Lumbee, which she quickly realized was largely incomplete and negatively biased.  She drew upon ethnographic methods, including participant observation and interviews, to learn more about the Lumbee.  This concluded in the composition of a pageant that highlighted the Lumbee’s cultural values, beliefs, and traditions.  The pageant employed only Lumbee actors and was a huge success.  The two day run was consistently sold out and drew audiences from across the United States who came to North Carolina to see the show.  The Lumbee were so impressed with her work that they requested she return the next year to help them put the play on again.  She did so without pay and while pausing her own research on the Dakota.

 

It is important to state that despite Deloria’s academic successes she found very little financial support or success. She was financially supported by her brother and father during the early parts of her career, but during the Great Depression she became the sole financial support for her family.  She had so little money that she lived out of her car for several years.  Despite this she continued to work and advocate tirelessly for American Indians, both in education and anthropological studies until her death in 1971. 

 

Her work in language preservation has set the foundational standards for how that work continues to this day.  As well, her advocacy in education and American Indian history and culture also set the standards for how those activities should be completed today.  Deloria was a trailblazer within the field of anthropology and a cherished advocate for American Indians.

 

Works Cited

Aktá Lakota Museum. "Ella Cara Deloria." 2026. Aktá Lakota Museum & Cultural Center. Electronic. 13 May 2026.

Bakken, Gordon Morris. "Ella Cara Deloria." n.d. Brittanica . Electronic. 13 May 2026.

Gardner, Sherri. "Meet the TC Alum Who Set the Standard for Indigenous Cultural Preservation." 25 June 2025. Teachers College, Columbia University. Electronic. 13 May 2026.

Locklear, Jessica. "“The Life Story of a People:” Ella Cara Deloria and the Lumbee ." 17 March 2025. The American Philosophical Society. Electronic. 13 May 2026.

The Dead Do Tell Tales: New Insights into the Abandonment of Neolithic Megalithic Tombs

 

Figure 1: Megalithic tomb known as Newgrange (Ireland) (Source: MNStudio/Shutterstock)

   

 

Throughout the European continent are large semi-subterranean tombs that were constructed by Neolithic populations between 4300–3100 BC.  These tombs are clustered in highest incidence in France, Germany, Denmark, and southern Scandinavia, but they are found elsewhere, including a very well known one in Ireland (Figure 1).  These tombs required a great deal of human labor to construct.  First, there was the removal of tons of dirt, followed by the movement and placement of large stone slabs to construct the tomb itself.  These tombs were used by Neolithic farmers until around 2900 BC, and their abandonment has puzzled archaeologists for decades. 

 

While various hypotheses derived from the archaeological data have been put forward it is a recent archaeogenetic study that seems to have provided some insights into what may have caused the cultural shifts that led to changing attitudes or trends with the use of the megalithic tombs.  It appears that there was a demographic shift in the populations that occupied Europe.  Genetic analyses of individuals interred in tombs in France, Scandinavia, and other locations demonstrated a distinct difference in populations placed in the tombs early in their use versus the populations interred much later.  These populations were identified as separate based on their locations within the tombs, as well as their mortuary treatment.  Each had distinctively different body positioning, which suggested some sort of cultural shift.  When these two groups’ genetics were tested scholars realized they were genetically different.  The individuals interred earlier in the tombs were Europeans, whereas the groups interred later came from the Eurasian Steppes (i.e., Hungary and the Middle East).  This demonstrates that there was a demographic shift in the population with populations from the south and Middle East replacing the European populations.

 

It is unclear what specifically led to this demographic shift.  The scholars who conducted the genetic analyses did note that they found bacterial signatures for the bacterium responsible for the Plague, but it is unclear if disease was the sole reason for the great loss of life among Neolithic European populations.  Demographic profiles of the Neolithic Europeans last interred in the tombs demonstrated a large proportion of infants and juveniles, suggestive of disease being a factor in their deaths.  Their deaths could have also easily been caused by famine or warfare, however.  It is likely that there was multiple causes for the massive loss of life among European Neolithic farmers, leading bioarchaeologists to future avenues of research to discover if this is the case.

 

References

Seersholm, F.V., Ramsøe, A., Cao, J. et al. Population discontinuity in the Paris Basin linked to evidence of the Neolithic decline. Nat Ecol Evol 10, 677–688 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-026-03027-z 

Taub, B. (2026, April 10). Neolithic Europeans Suddenly Stopped Building Megalithic Tombs 5,000 Years Ago - And Now We Know Why. IFLScience, p. 1.

 

   

Thutmose II, An Unremarkable King Who Created a Fantastic Dynasty

 

Figure 1: King Thutmose II as carved into the walls of the Karnak Temple (Source: Egypt Museum)

In 2022 archaeologists excavating in the Valley of the Kings, within the boundaries of Howard Carter’s discovery of King Tut, made a discovery that they did not think much of.  It was a collapsed tomb, which they initially believed was more than likely a royal consort or wife.  This led the team to not have any urgency in the excavation of the tomb, but they still took great care in their excavation process.  A royal is a royal, even if it is just a female consort or wife.  The pharaoh’s wives and consorts typically did not have any power (with a couple of exceptions, such as the case of Queen Hatshepsut, who seized control from her infant stepson and reigned in his place for several years).  They still were important and played a role in the dynastic rule of Egypt, meaning scholars could possibly learn more about a pharaoh’s rule through the interpretation of his wife’s or consort’s tomb.  What archaeologists initially wrote off turned out to be something more, even greater than they had initially considered.  Today’s blog post covers one of the monumental discoveries of 2025: the discovery of King Thutmose II’s tomb.

 

King Thutmose II (Figure 1) was a pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty (1550–1295 B.C.).  He ascended the throne in 1493 and married his half-sister, Hatshepsut (who gained notoriety after his death).  His reign was nothing remarkable.  He forayed into some minor military skirmishes, quelling rebellions in Nubia and elsewhere in his kingdom.  He fathered a couple of children, including his heir, Thutmose III, with a lesser wife.  His greatest claim to fame is being the ancestor to notable royals, including Akhenaton, the Heretic King, and King Tut. Thutmose II passed away from unknown causes in 1479 B.C., after 14 years in power, leaving the power vacuum that led to the first scandal in his royal lineage (as his wife, Hatshepsut, did not abdicate the throne when his infant heir reached the age of maturity).

 

Figure 2: Fragments of the painted ceiling in Thutmose II's tomb (Source: New Kingdom Research Foundation)

 

Archaeologists were not intending on discovering Thutmose II’s tomb.  A mummy presumed to be his was previously discovered, laying the “mystery” to rest as far as they were concerned.  As a team led by Piers Litherland of the New Kingdom Research Foundation Mission to the Western Wadis carefully excavated the unknown tomb they began to realize that they may have something more than a royal wife’s or consort’s tomb.  First, they discovered fragments of ceiling that had a night sky painted on it (Figure 2).  This was something reserved only for pharaohs of that period.  They then discovered portions of the Amduat text on the walls.  This excerpt provided guidance to the deceased pharaoh on how to navigate the afterlife, which, again, is reserved solely for the pharaoh’s tomb.  The last pieces of evidence that solidified the conclusion that this was Thutmose II’s tomb were two fragmentary vessels.  Each had inscriptions describing the love and affection for the pharaoh’s wife, Hatshepsut.  Since she only had one husband it was clear that this was Thutmose II’s tomb. 

 

But this is not where the story ends.  Archaeologists discovered evidence that demonstrated that this was Thutmose II’s tomb but not his only tomb.  There was evidence of intentional removal of artifacts/burial goods and the restructuring of the tomb.  It is believed that the tomb flooded shortly after Thutmose II was interred, leading mortuary technicians to remove his body and burial goods and place them in a more secure tomb.  The archaeological team believe they know where this second tomb is located, but they have not yet had access or the ability to excavate it.  They suspect that if their hypothesis is correct they may discover untouched and unbroken burial goods.  This also means that there may be a body within that tomb.  If so the mummy presumed to be Thutmose II is not his but someone else, which would require additional analysis of that burial to identify who that individual is.

 

Presently, none of the scholars associated with this discovery have published any formal reports on their discoveries.  They have engaged in several interviews, which is why this information is available to the public.  It is assumed that upon completion of the entire excavation a more formal report (through peer-reviewed publication) will be available.

 

References

Egypt-Museum. (2025, February 19). Discovery of Thutmose II’s tomb. Retrieved from Egypt Museum: https://egypt-museum.com/discovery-of-thutmose-iis-tomb/

Lewsey, F. (2025, February 24). The Tale of the Tomb of Thutmose II. Retrieved from University of Cambridge : https://www.cam.ac.uk/stories/tale-of-thutmose-tomb

Lobell, J. A. (2026, January/February 2026). The Case of the Missing Pharaoh. Archaeology Magazine.