[Terrapreta] Terra Preta los Indios?
lou gold
lou.gold at gmail.com
Tue Apr 8 21:58:41 CDT 2008
The correct term for the Brazilian Amazon is Terra Preta de Indio (Indian
Black Earth). The language is Portuguese. I suspect that Terra Preta los
Indios maybe in Spanish and I don't know exactly what it refers to.
lou
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Larry Williams <lwilliams at nas.com> wrote:
> Kevin-------For Terra Preta nova, I understand that we need to
> produce a very large amount of charcoal in a short period of time to
> change the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere. The "nova" variation
> was suggested to market an old idea in a new context and to
> distinguish our individually created black earth from the process
> that created the Amazonian Black Earths (ABE).
>
> When you use the phrase, "Terra Preta los Indios", could you explain
> how you distinguish this phrase with Terra Preta de Indio? A literal
> translation is not what I am missing. What is the history of "Terra
> Preta los Indios"... the context? I am not sure who was the first to
> use this phrase so if you were not that person could the person who
> used it (coined it?) reply.
>
> We do have some new members to this list that may be confused by
> these variants --------Larry
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------
> On Apr 7, 2008, at 8:54 PM, Kevin Chisholm wrote:
>
> > Dear Lou
> >
> > Thanks for your additional inputs...
> >
> > lou gold wrote:
> >> Kevin, Sean, et al,
> >>
> >> Two considerations that might be important...
> >>
> >> 1) There are 2 different Terra Preta de Indios soils: Terra Preta
> >> (TP)
> >> and Terra Mulata (TM). TP is very black (lots of carbon) but it is
> >> found only in a small percentage of the region. TM with much less
> >> carbon is found across a much larger area.
> >
> > Is it possible that teh original "Black Earth" was much more
> > fertile and
> > amenable to cropping than teh TM, and that teh People settled at teh
> > Black Earth Sites, rather than at the TM sites? Then, if the
> > Sanitation
> > Hypothesis was at play, the Black Earth would be upgraded to Terra
> > Preta
> > los Indios? Jim Joyner was telling me that there are large areas of
> > "Black Earth" in Indiana that were useless for cropping, until they
> > were
> > treated with very large treatments of Calcium, and tehn they became
> > very
> > fertile. Is it perhaps possible that teh TM was a "disadvantaged Black
> > Earth that teh Indians could not unlock, as was done in Indiana?
> >>
> >> 2) There were possibly millions of people living in these regions for
> >> hundreds of years. That number of people could accumulate huge
> >> amounts
> >> of waste and pottery.
> >
> > Good point. Is iot possible that when teh content of pottery shards in
> > teh TP became excessive, they disposed of tehm elsewhere? For example,
> > if dumped in rivers, they could be swept away at flood time.
> >>
> >> This suggests to me that humans spread the soil from the dump areas
> >> close to the residential areas farther and farther away as population
> >> increased and the agricultural land expanded.
> >
> > OK.... if so, there should be pottery shard evidence in these more
> > distant areas.
> >>
> >> Furthermore, to say that the TP regions were perhaps the size of
> >> France does not necessarily imply that every square centimeter of
> >> ground was Terra Preta, just that TP and/or TM were prevalent.
> >
> > True, but the big thing is: How much of that "Black Earth Area" was
> > natural, and how much was Anthropogenic?
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > kevin
> >>
> >> lou
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Kevin Chisholm
> >> <kchisholm at ca.inter.net <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Sean
> >>
> >> The key question was:
> >> "In your opinion, are pottery shards a necessary component in
> >> "Old
> >> Terra
> >> Preta"?
> >>
> >> I would suggest that they ARE a necessary component of "Old Terra
> >> Preta", as we commonly talk about on the Terra Preta List. I
> >> use the
> >> term "Old Terra Preta" in the sense of "Terra Preta Los Indios."
> >>
> >> This is an Anthrosol. A key component in proving that "Terra
> >> Preta los
> >> Indios" was a man made soil is the presence of relevant
> >> artifacts made
> >> by man, of which pottery shards are the most notable.
> >>
> >> I would pose that there are two kinds of "Terra Preta"....
> >> 1: that which is made by Man (Anthrosols, including Terra Preta
> >> los Indios
> >> 2: that which is naturally occuring
> >>
> >> I would further pose that ONLY Black Earths that have the
> >> presence of
> >> relevant artifacts are Anthropogenic in origin. Clearly, any
> >> "Black
> >> earth" that had contained relevant artifacts made by Indians
> >> would
> >> be a
> >> "Terra Preta los Indios."
> >>
> >> I would suggest that an artifact such as a gold necklace, widely
> >> scattered stone tools, or funerary items are not relevant
> >> evidence to
> >> support a "Terra Preta los Indios" label.
> >>
> >> The presence of charcoal that is not present in a pattern more
> >> akin to a
> >> natural fire pattern would certainly constitute evidence of the
> >> activity
> >> of man in working the soil.
> >>
> >> I would pose that there are many deposits of "Black Earth" or
> >> "Terra
> >> Preta" around the World, but that only some are Anthrosols,
> >> and that
> >> fewer still of these deposits are "Terra Preta los Indios."
> >>
> >> You also state:
> >> "I'm not sure the Amazon population then could have shit
> >> enough into
> >> enough chamber pots, and then broken them, in shatters, to make
> >> all the
> >> pottery shards found in all of the Terra Preta found in South
> >> America.
> >> I suspect all of the broken fired pottery was used to hold all
> >> the
> >> soil
> >> from washing away."
> >>
> >> While I would have phrased it differently, it is indeed
> >> puzzling how
> >> they could make such a large area of Terra Preta. I would pose
> >> that some
> >> of the Terra Preta was naturally formed Black Earth, and that
> >> only
> >> some
> >> smaller fraction of it was of an anthropogenic nature. Given that
> >> pottery shards are rather durable, they could indeed have
> >> provided an
> >> erosion benefit. I would doubt that they would be added for
> >> the sole
> >> purpose of holding the soil from washing away, except possibly
> >> along the
> >> edges of water courses or irrigation channels.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >>
> >> Sean K. Barry wrote:
> >>> Hi Kevin,
> >>>
> >>> Lately, I've been thinking that pottery shards in Terra Preta soils
> >>> served mostly a mechanical purpose. I think they were used to both
> >>> drain the soil and prevent run off of nutrients. The inclusion of
> >>> pottery shards with charcoal in "Old Terra Preta" sites was either
> >>> done as a soil amendment, to do something there with that soil, or
> >>> maybe it was a coincidental, extraordinarily large pottery dump and
> >>> they just repeated it (thinking it was part of the TP effect
> >> observed
> >>> in that soil).
> >>>
> >>> The scope of the projects (an area the size of France) suggests
> >> to me
> >>> that it was really sort of an industrial soil remediation, involving
> >>> large numbers of the population to manage the soils and the land.
> >>> There is evidence of elevated roads (which also you do not want to
> >>> wash away) in Amazonia as well. Fired pottery was likely some
> >> of the
> >>> hardest, most water erosion resistant substances around. Draining
> >>> water or maintaining an elevated mound within an annual inundation
> >>> would be easier in clay mud with lots of pottery shards around. You
> >>> might even be able to make a pile of them in a flowing river and
> >> build
> >>> a bridge across that river.
> >>>
> >>> Initial development of the idea that the mixture of wastes and
> >>> charcoal made for better plant growth may have been inspired by
> >>> observation of plant growth over old dump sites. This seems
> >>> plausible. Maybe they just copied what they observed and
> >> pottery was
> >>> incidental to the dump sites, so they put it in when they tried to
> >>> build TP sites. It seems that they then tried to repeat this TP
> >>> phenomenon on a larger scale. No TP site is naturally
> >> occurring? All
> >>> Terra Preta sites are synthetic?
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure the Amazon population then could have shit enough into
> >>> enough chamber pots, and then broken them, in shatters, to make all
> >>> the pottery shards found in all of the Terra Preta found in South
> >>> America. I suspect all of the broken fired pottery was used to hold
> >>> all the soil from washing away.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> SKB
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> *From:* Kevin Chisholm <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net
> >> <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net>>
> >>> *To:* Sean K. Barry <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com
> >> <mailto:sean.barry at juno.com>>
> >>> *Cc:* terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> >> <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>
> >>> <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> >> <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>> ; Greg and April
> >>> <mailto:gregandapril at earthlink.net
> >> <mailto:gregandapril at earthlink.net>>
> >>> *Sent:* Monday, April 07, 2008 12:22 PM
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] Terrapreta Digest, Vol 15, Issue 14
> >>>
> >>> Dear Sean
> >>>
> >>> In your opinion, are pottery shards a necessary component in
> >> "Old
> >>> Terra
> >>> Preta"?
> >>>
> >>> Kevin
> >>>
> >>> Sean K. Barry wrote:
> >>>> Hi Greg,
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that it is only where charcoal-in-soil was put. If it
> >>>> spreads, why hasn't it in 4500 years? How can we find
> >> individual
> >>>> sites now, closely spaced?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> SKB
> >>>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Terrapreta mailing list
> > Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> > http://bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/
> > terrapreta_bioenergylists.org
> > http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> > http://info.bioenergylists.org
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Terrapreta mailing list
> Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/
> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org
> http://info.bioenergylists.org
>
--
http://lougold.blogspot.com
http://flickr.com/visionshare/sets
http://youtube.com/my_videos
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080408/900c4955/attachment.html
More information about the Terrapreta
mailing list