In our view, the Holocene has always been something of an anomaly, one of several interglacial cycles within the Pleistocene, none of the earlier examples of which warranted similar designations (Smith and Zeder, 2014), if not for the actions of humans (Erlandson, 2014). After the submission of a proposal to formally designate the Anthropocene by the Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London (Zalasiewicz et al., 2008), an Anthropocene Working Group was created to evaluate

its merits. Posted on the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy’s 2009 Working Group on the ‘Anthropocene’ webpage, the outline of activities detailed that the group was to be: ideally…composed MK-8776 in vivo of Earth scientists with worldwide representation and familiar with deep time stratigraphy history (Cenozoic and older), with Quaternary (including Holocene) stratigraphy, and with relevant aspects of contemporary environmental change (including its projection by modeling selleck screening library into the future).

It should critically compare the current degree and rate of environmental change, caused by anthropogenic processes, with the environmental perturbations of the geological past. Factors to be considered here include the suggested pre-industrial modification of climate by early human agrarian activity (Outline of Working Group Activities, 2009). This 22-person working group is dominated by geoscientists and paleoclimatologists, but included an environmental historian and a journalist. Despite the specific call to deal with the environmental Oxaprozin impacts of pre-industrial societies, archaeologists trained to investigate the complex dynamics of human–environmental interactions and evaluate when humans first significantly shaped local, regional, and global climatic regimes, were not included. As a result of our symposium at the April 2013 Society for American Archaeology annual meetings in Honolulu, however, archaeologist Bruce Smith was added to the working group. Since designations of geologic timescales and a potential Anthropocene boundary, determined by physical stratigraphic markers (Global Stratigraphic Section and Point, often called a “golden

spike”) or a numerical age (Global Standard Stratigraphic Age), are the domain of geoscientists, perhaps this is not surprising. What makes this designation different from all previous geologic time markers is that it is directly tied to human influences. Logically, therefore, it should involve collaboration with archaeologists, anthropologists, and other social scientists. The papers in this special issue are the result of discussions, debates, and dialogue from a 2013 Society for American Archaeology symposium centred around archaeological perspectives on the Anthropocene. We brought together a diverse group of archaeologists to explore how and when humans began to have significant and measurable impacts on Earth’s ecosystems (Fig. 1).