The Neolithic Revolution narrative associates early-mid Holocene domestications with the development of agriculture that fueled the rise of late Holocene civilizations. This narrative continues to be influential, even though it has been deconstructed by archaeologists and geneticists in its homeland. To further disentangle domestication from reliance on food production systems, such as agriculture, we revisit definitions of domestication and food production systems, review the late Pleistocene–early Holocene archaeobotanical record, and quantify the use, management and domestication of Neotropical plants to provide insights about the past. Neotropical plant domestication relies on common human behaviors (selection, accumulation and caring) within agroecological systems that focus on individual plants, rather than populations—as is typical of agriculture. The early archaeobotanical record includes numerous perennial and annual species, many of which later became domesticated. Some of this evidence identifies dispersal with probable cultivation, suggesting incipient domestication by 10,000 years ago. Since the Pleistocene, more than 6500, 1206 and 6261 native plant species have been used in Mesoamerica, the Central Andes and lowland South America, respectively. At least 1555, 428 and 742 are managed outside and inside food production systems, and at least 1148, 428 and 600 are cultivated, respectively, suggesting at least incipient domestication. Full native domesticates are more numerous in Mesoamerica (251) than the Andes (124) and the lowlands (45). This synthesis reveals that domestication is more common in the Neotropics than previously recognized and started much earlier than reliance on food production systems. Hundreds of ethnic groups had, and some still have, alternative strategies that do involve domestication, although they do not rely principally on food production systems, such as agriculture.

Indigenous knowledges are being increasingly recognized as fundamental for environmental governance, ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation. However, they tend to be recognized by Western science only when they converge with Western scientific knowledge, while ontological differences are generally treated as irrelevant or unreasonable beliefs. Given this scenario, embracing difference as a productive and fundamental aspect to truly understand these epistemologies is crucial to advance fair and symmetrical epistemological dialogues. Current domestication models are key to interpreting human‐plant‐animal‐landscape entanglements. However, they have been criticized in the Amazonian context for remaining steeped in the Western logic of human control over nature and for neglecting local worldviews, which do not assume a dichotomy between nature and culture. In light of this, we propose a thought‐provoking exercise that aims to broaden ideas on domestication as inspired by Indigenous worldviews. We integrate insights derived from Amazonian Indigenous knowledge systems to construct a conceptual model of domestication. We then engage the synthesis resulting from this approach with concepts and theories from ecology and anthropology. In our model, plants, animals, supernatural beings and humans care for, manage and cultivate their domains. Since, according to Indigenous ontologies, all these beings have agency, intentionality, and human qualities, they all share the status of domesticators in our model. The outcome of the combined actions of these beings is an entirely socialized forest, formed by a mosaic of domūs of both humans and non‐humans. Thus, in our model, the forest is fully domesticated by the action of a multiplicity of beings, who possess symmetrical agencies and are constantly interacting socially. By following the reflective path constructed in our approach, we invite the reader to ‘think with’ Indigenous Peoples. Instigated by this framework, we suggest directions to broaden conventional ecological approaches used for studying socio‐ecological systems and promote conservation. We hope to inspire the creativity of current ecological research dynamics to design investigations that go beyond the anthropocentric perspective and the nature/culture dichotomy. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

In the popular imagination, Amazonia is a natural biome, which denies the existence and agency of Indigenous Peoples who arrived at least 13,000 years ago. This essay will demonstrate that Amazonia is a web of socio-ecological interactions, as a result of the domestication of landscapes and populations of species. The practices involved in the domestication of landscapes are simple, yet based on deep knowledge, and respectful of non-humans. Indigenous Peoples combine horticulture and landscape domestication, as well as sedentary lifestyles and mobility. The Mebêngôkre (Kayapó) and Baniwa practice more horticulture, while the Nukak and Zo’é are more mobile, and the domestication of their landscapes reflects these differences. Domesticated forests produce as much food as swiddens and fallows, all leading to forest maintenance or regeneration. These practices suggest that national and global societies can learn to produce food in the standing forest, which would contribute to mitigating the effects of the Anthropocene.

Resumo As relações das pessoas com as coisas e os sítios arqueológicos no contexto amazônico é extremamente plural e contextual. A cada comunidade, pesquisadores e pesquisadoras aprendem outras formas de pensar as intrínsecas relações entre passado e presente. O Laboratório de Arqueologia do Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá tem primado por uma atuação interdisciplinar para o desenvolvimento de ações e pesquisas com as comunidades ribeirinhas nas áreas de proteção. Neste artigo, abordamos as práticas arqueológicas e a salvaguarda do patrimônio em contextos comunitários. Por meio da arqueologia, da conservação arqueológica e da educação, refletimos sobre nosso papel como profissionais que atuam a partir de diferentes saberes e grupos de interesse, onde valores, significados e resultados são revisitados a todo momento em que novas colaborações são estabelecidas, seja entre pesquisas acadêmicas, seja entre agentes da comunidade. Para isso, discute-se os trabalhos desenvolvidos em Boa Esperança, localizada na Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável (RDS) Amanã, que recebe arqueólogos e arqueólogas desde 2006. Consideramos que a pesquisa se transformou pelo contexto comunitário e pela ampliação do envolvimento de diferentes agentes, reorientando nossas ações em busca de alternativas de médio e longo prazo para a gestão colaborativa e sustentável do patrimônio arqueológico amazônico.

A dispersão de ocupações associadas às cerâmicas da Tradição Polícroma da Amazônia (TPA), tema clássico da Arqueologia Amazônica, vem sendo repensada por meio de estudos regionais. Na bacia do Médio Solimões (AM), evidências de ocupações antigas e de misturas tecnológicas e estilísticas entre produções cerâmicas indicaram relações mais complexas entre produtores de cerâmica Polícroma e ocupações contemporâneas que parecem se transformar ao longo do tempo. A fim de contribuir para esse debate abordamos o cenário do Médio Solimões por meio dos contextos de três sítios arqueológicos: São João, Ponta da Castanha e Tauary. São apresentadas as intervenções arqueológicas que realizamos nos sítios e seus resultados em relação aos vestígios arqueobotânicos, líticos, de contextos funerários, e da produção cerâmica. Em relação a essa última, identificamos três períodos para a presença de ocupações da TPA com transformações na produção cerâmica. Propomos, então, uma periodização e interpretação da história das ocupações Polícromas no Médio Solimões, buscando relacionar esse processo com outros contemporâneos ao redor da Amazônia e apontar direções para futuros trabalhos. AbstractThe dispersion of occupations associated with the ceramics of the Polychrome Tradition of Amazonia, a classic theme of Amazonian Archaeology, has been discussed based on regional studies. In the Middle Solimões basin (AM), evidence of ancient occupations and techno-stylistic flows between ceramic productions indicated more complex relationships between Polychrome ceramic producers and their contemporaries, which seem to change over time. In this article we approach this particular scenario through the archaeological contexts and their materialities, focusing on the ceramic ensembles of three archaeological sites in the region: São João, Ponta da Castanha and Tauary. We provide a summary of the regional research followed by an overview of the current debates. We then present the archaeological interventions and their results, as well as the Polychrome ceramic sets identified in the sites. We propose a periodization of Polychrome occupations in the Middle Solimões and seek to relate this process to other contemporary ones around the Amazon River and point out directions for future work.ResumenLa dispersión de las ocupaciones asociadas a la cerámica de la Tradición Policromía de la Amazonía, tema clásico de la Arqueología Amazónica, ha sido repensada a partir de estudios regionales. En la cuenca del Medio Solimões (AM), las evidencias de ocupaciones antiguas y flujos tecnoestilísticos entre las producciones cerámicas indicaron relaciones más complejas entre los productores de cerámica Polícroma y sus contemporáneos, que parecen cambiar con el tiempo. En este artículo abordamos este escenario particular a través de los contextos arqueológicos y sus materialidades, centrándonos en los conjuntos cerámicos de tres sitios arqueológicos de la región: São João, Ponta da Castanha y Tauary. Presentamos una historia de la investigación regional, seguida de un panorama general de los debates actuales. Luego, presentamos las intervenciones arqueológicas y sus resultados, así como los conjuntos cerámicos Polícromos identificados en los sitios. Proponemos una periodización de las ocupaciones Polícromas en el Medio Solimões y buscamos relacionar este proceso con la Expansión Polícroma y señalar direcciones para trabajos futuros.