# Interest of Naturalist Collections and Drawings for Archaeobotany: The Example of Sorghum Specimens of the Ethnobotanical Collections of the French National Museum of Natural History

Flora Pennec, Didier Geffard-Kuriyama, Marie Aimée Allard, Etienne Martiné, Simon Juraver, Juliettte Milon, Charlène Bouchaud

► To cite this version:

Flora Pennec, Didier Geffard-Kuriyama, Marie Aimée Allard, Etienne Martiné, Simon Juraver, et al.. Interest of Naturalist Collections and Drawings for Archaeobotany: The Example of Sorghum Specimens of the Ethnobotanical Collections of the French National Museum of Natural History. Interdisciplinaria archaeologica Natural Sciences in Archaeology, 2025, XVI (2), pp.187-195. 10.24916/iansa.2025.2.6. hal-05290037

HAL Id: hal-05290037

https://hal.science/hal-05290037v1

Submitted on 1 Dec 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Interest of Naturalist Collections and Drawings for Archaeobotany:
The Example of Sorghum Specimens of the Ethnobotanical Collections
of the French National Museum of Natural History

Flora Pennec<fnref n="1" />*, Didier Geffard-Kuriyama<fnref n="2" />, Marie Aimée Allard<fnref n="2" />, Etienne Martiné<fnref n="3" />, Simon Juraver<fnref n="3" />,
Juliette Milon<fnref n="4" />, Charlène Bouchaud<fnref n="4" />

## ARTICLE INFO

Article history:

Received: 29th October 2024

Accepted: 27th August 2025

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24916/iansa.2025.2.6

Key words:

herbaria

collection

ethnobotany

scientific drawing

sorghum

## ABSTRACT

The ethnobotanical collections of the French National Museum of Natural History shelter about 50,000 herbaria specimens collected from the early 20th century in all continents. Auguste Chevalier founded this collection in 1911 to study useful plants and their application for economic development. Then, as the direction of the laboratory changed, the research thematic evolved to ethnobotanical issues. Nowadays, recent projects aim to valorise the specimens by a digitisation process in order to offer access and visibility to these collections. Moreover, because of their origin and the diversity represented, the collections hold an important value for current research. For example, the sorghum collection (Sorghum spp.), containing about 1,000 specimens, is a precious resource to explore the taxonomy and morphological properties of sorghum varieties. To do this, we developed several scientific illustrations of the various morphotypes of sorghum, integrated to the determination tool Xper3. This material can have applications for other disciplines by supplying well identified, documented and accessible seed references. Exploring different illustration techniques, the use of scientific drawing supplied relevant tools to determine the morphotype of two sorghum seeds from the archaeological site of Mouweis in Sudan. The identification of the morphotype (caudatum) has enabled the completion of the puzzling history of sorghum.

# 1. Introduction

## 1.1 History of the MNHN ethnobotanical collections:
historical background, scientific use

The French National Museum of Natural History (MNHN) is an institution descended from the royal garden of medicinal plants, founded in 1626 under the reign of Louis XIII (Le Bras *et al.*, 2017). Since that time, it has been a place where scientists from all disciplines have explored, collected and preserved data and specimens from all living organisms and from all parts of the world. Plants have always been at

the heart of the royal garden, and today the MNHN houses one of the world's largest herbarium collections, with some eight million specimens. Amongst this diversity of conserved plants, more recent sub-collections have brought the emergence and development of a particular discipline that is interested not only in plants themselves but also in their associated knowledge – ethnobotany. Created in 1911 when Auguste Chevalier founded the Laboratory of Colonial Agronomy, the ethnobotanical collections now house some 55,000 specimens. These collections are first and foremost a repository for useful plants: the subject of the research of Auguste Chevalier, an agronomist and explorer interested in the various uses of plants. He accumulated some

<footnote n="1">¹UMR 7206 Eco-anthropologie (CNRS-MNHN-Université Paris Cité), Musée de l'Homme, Place du Trocadéro 17, 75016 Paris, France</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²UAR 2047 DoHNEE – Données de recherche pour l’Histoire Naturelle, l’Écologie et l’Environnement (CNRS-MNHN), Atelier Iconographie Scientifique.
Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle – CP 39–57, Rue Cuvier 75231 Paris, France</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³Ensemble Botanique – Direction Générale Déléguée aux Collections, Herbier national, Rue Cuvier CP 39–57, 75231 Paris, France</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴UMR 7209 BioArch – Bioarchéologie – Interactions Sociétés Environnements (CNRS-MNHN), Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle CP 5657 Rue Cuvier CP 56–57, 75231 Paris, France</footnote>

<footnote>*Corresponding author. E-mail: flora.pennec@mnhn.fr</footnote>
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

80,000 plant samples from all over the world, with significant representations of plants from West Africa and South-East Asia, which were then under the governance of the French colonial empire. The aim was to study the potential economic interests of these plants, the collections thus assembled being deposited in the general botanical herbarium and in the collections of the Laboratory of Colonial Agronomy (Bahuchet *et al.*, 2019). They can be described as Economic Botany when referring to this discipline as being at the heart of colonial issues (Bonneuil, 1997), and can be reconciled with the collections of other museums such as the Missouri Botanical Garden, the Royal Botanic Gardens of Kew or the Smithsonian collections (Salick *et al.*, 2014).

However, the nature of the samples preserved changed under the succession of different researchers at the head of the

Laboratory. Roland Portères, the agronomist who succeeded Auguste Chevalier, renamed the section the Laboratory of Tropical Agronomy in 1958, and the Laboratory of Ethnobotany in 1963. This change of name reflects the paradigm shift driving the laboratory's research. The focus was no longer simply on the associated uses of plants, but also the interrelationships between human societies and plants, with the view of understanding the evolution of civilisations (Portères 1961, pp.102–104). Roland Portères collected and studied mainly cultivated plants in order to document their varietal diversity and their links with human populations. Hence the ethnobotanical collections grew to include around 11,000 rice specimens, 8,000 coffee specimens and around 1,000 sorghum specimens, mainly from West Africa (Bahuchet *et al.*, 2019).

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** Examples of morphotypes diversity of sorghum specimens of the ethnobotanical collection.</figcaption></figure>
Subsequently, other researchers would further enrich the collections with plants collected in their respective research fields, bearing witness to the cultural knowledge associated with plants and the interactions between plants and human societies. These samples would then serve as material for the determination of the scientific names of plants and their use as references in research publications and other work.

## 1.2 Uses and valorisation of the collections: the case of archaeobotany

Today, the MNHN ethnobotanical collection house around 55,000 samples, half of which are cultivated plants collected since the beginning of the 20th century. This subset is now at the heart of a number of issues linked to their conservation and the dissemination of associated data. As a public institution, the MNHN is obliged to make scientific data available to the academic world and the general public.

The relatively recent history of these samples has aroused the interest of several disciplines, providing fertile ground for interdisciplinary research work by creating links between disciplines. The history of science, agronomy, anthropology, population genetics and archaeobotany, all shed light on the collections in their own way, revealing complementary aspects through the use of specific methods. We would therefore like to present here the contributions made by archaeobotany to the development of these ethnobotanical collections.

Indeed, to study biological specimens from archaeological excavations, it is necessary to compare them with other material, either from other excavations or more recent ones, in order to determine their specific features and infer particularities characteristic of the study site.

Naturalist collections, which form the basis of numerous studies and are used in a wide range of disciplines, fulfil

a number of functions (Spooner, 2014). For example, they conserve reference specimens for describing species and varieties (e.g. taxonomy, systematics); they bear witness to the presence of species at a given time and place (e.g. biogeography, ecology, conservation biology); and they serve as a reference for comparing other samples and assigning them a scientific name. In this way, plant collections, whether in the form of herbarium samples, wood samples or fruit and seed samples, provide reference samples against which archaeological remains can be compared. Despite the development of genetic analyses that allow DNA comparison between archaeobotanical and historical specimens (e.g. Lempiäinen-Avci et al., 2020), scientific illustration still has a place by offering a lower cost technique for studying archaeobotanical remains (Goddard and Nesbitt, 1997).

However, in order to make these comparisons, it is necessary to have a catalogued and accessible reference collection, and the tools to observe and carry out such comparisons. We will, therefore, detail the various stages involved in making such collections available, both the biological samples and the associated data, which then become invaluable resources for archaeobotanical research. We will then look at how collection documentation tools and methods can be adapted to facilitate the use of collections by archaeobotanists – in particular through the creation of scientific illustrations using the example of the ethnobotanical collections of sorghum present at the French National Museum of Natural History.

## 2. Making collections available: digital technology

Today's information technology tools offer a wealth of possibilities for making data accessible and consultable from

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** One of the digitisation devices of the MNHN herbarium.</figcaption></figure>
anywhere in the world. Thus, several museums offer the
possibility of consulting their naturalist collections online
(e.g. Missouri Botanical Garden – www.tropicos.org, Royal
Botanic Gardens Kew – https://data.kew.org etc.) or some
sites compile information from several sources to facilitate
their consultation (The Digital Plant Atlas – www.plantatlas.
eu). However, it is still necessary to digitise the samples
and all associated data. To achieve this, several steps are
necessary.

**2.1 Inventory and collation**

Each sample must be identified, and the information
associated with it grouped together. This may take the
form of a catalogue or field notebook, in which the sample
number inscribed on the biological specimen is recorded
with additional metadata, a label slipped on or attached to
the sample. Information concerning the collection or uses
of the plant may also be found in scientific articles, mission
reports or books written after the collection by the harvester.
In order to gather this information, it is sometimes necessary
to mobilise the skills of a detective in order to decipher
handwriting, or to find old documents and forgotten archives.
In the case of sorghum samples, a catalogue (https://science.
mnhn.fr/catalogue/ethno-c-p-riz-06/page/139) contains sample
numbers and some information about the variety and place
of collection. Additional information, such as vernacular
names and certain agronomic data (earliness, yield etc.), can
be found on the sample label.

**2.2 Computerisation**

The information associated with the sample must then be
entered into a database, so that it can be collated, stored and

searched if necessary. The Museum use the Sonnerat database,
designed for French herbaria, which enables the entry of all
information relating to the collection, identification and uses
of the plant.

**2.3 Digitisation**

The digitisation of specimens makes it possible to observe
the biological sample without having to visit the herbarium
consultation rooms. Several resources are available to
carry out this step, depending on the age, shape, fragility
and packaging of the samples. The herbarium has inverted
scanners (herbscan ©), adapted to herbarium plates, and
more versatile photographic benches for digitising all types
of specimens (Figure 2). For sorghum samples, we had to
develop a specific procedure to adapt to the thickness of
the panicles, which limited the quality of the shots. Indeed,
depending on the focal length used by the photographic
device, only part of the sample was in focus. It was,
therefore, necessary to use the *stacking* (“focus merging” or
“z-stacking”) technique which consists in the compilation
of several shots at different heights to obtain a composite
image providing a clear view of the entire thickness of the
specimen.

**2.4 Making information available**

Then, the images obtained and the information associated
with the specimens are linked in the database and made
accessible from the database consultation interface via
the science.mnhn.fr website. Today, about 350 sorghum
specimens are available online (Figure 3). With an Internet
connection and informatic tools, anyone can browse the
specimens and all associated data.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** A sorghum specimen (PAT008512) page online (https://science.mnhn.fr/institution/mnhn/collection/pat/item/pat008512).</figcaption></figure>
# 3. From ethnobotanical collection to archaeobotanical identification: a piece of the sorghum puzzle

## 3.1. The collection of Sorghum spp. at the MNHN

The sorghum collection held in the ethnobotanical collections of the French National Museum of Natural History comprises around 1,000 samples of Sorghum spp. This collection contains the different species and varieties (Figure 1). The specimens have been collected in Sahelian Africa, where the plant is cultivated (Benin, Burkina, Cameroon, Chad, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo), but also in South and East Africa (Djibouti and Somalia), as well as outside Africa (India, Vietnam, Yemen and USA), between 1899 and 1985. Studies on the diversity of African cereals used this material, notably on varietal diversity and local names, in order to better understand the mechanisms of domestication, diversification and diffusion of this plant (e.g. Portères, 1956; Portères, 1959).

## 3.2 Scientific drawing as a tool for collection valorisation in archaeobotany: the case of the sorghum collection

In the case of our sorghum collections, we have decided to enhance them using another method that is of great importance to the natural sciences: scientific drawing. An irreplaceable companion to scientific descriptions, drawings help to highlight details that are useful for understanding and describing the subject. Beyond this description, the observation required to produce the illustration can also lead to the discovery of new aspects or the creation of new tools for studying specimens. Several illustration techniques are particularly relevant for archaeobotanical remains (Goddard and Nesbitt, 1997). For example, we had originally planned to produce illustrations to describe the different morphotypes of domestic sorghum

(Sorghum bicolor bicolor): bicolor (with hulled grain) and caudatum, durra, guinea, kafir (free-threshing) (Harlan and de Wet, 1972; Fuller and Stevens, 2018). Indeed, despite several publications explaining morphological differences between the morphotypes, very few illustrations existed. Thus, several drawings were made with a *camera lucida* or “drawing tube” on low-magnification stereo-microscopes. So, in order to make available and more comprehensible some morphological specificities of sorghum, even for non-botanists, these drawings were ultimately used to create a determination key on the Xper3 platform (Vignes-Lebbe *et al.*, 2016; https://www.xper3.fr/xper3GeneratedFiles/publish/identification/6460775977337179635/mkey.html). The presence of text descriptions and illustrations help in understanding the different morphotype recognition criteria (panicle shape and size, peduncle shape, grain shape, size and colour, and glume size and aperture) (Figure 4).

After discussion with the MNHN archaeology team, the illustrator added three additional views, the ones produced (dorsal and apical, with and without envelope) being insufficient for comparison with the material used in archaeobotany. The added views (ventral, lateral and basal) maximise the use of tools developed by other disciplines such as archaeobotany.

The views were initially selected with the aim of copying the grain representations from an illustration that was used as a reference and taken from a manual on sorghum seed production (Vom Brocke *et al.*, 2008). However, additional information such as the scale or origin of the specimens was added as part of our project to make the representations scientifically usable. All grains were observed and represented on the same scale using a set of pencils consisting of F, 2B/3B and 5B/8B (responsible for lighter and darker shades of grey) and oriented in the same way.

For each variety, the wrapped representation (in spikelet) is based on the same grain positioned in dorsal and apical

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** An example of the Xper3 data – illustration of the *Sorghum bicolor bicolor* morphotype *bicolor*.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

view. The naked grain in dorsal position was used as a basis for the digital development of a silhouette highlighting the different shapes and sizes of the grains according to their morphotype. The three remaining views (ventral, lateral, basal) were created after the four illustrations and are based on a single grain, different from the one selected for the dorsal view. Thus, three distinct grains were used for each variety.

Two types of graphic treatments were applied. The first consists of illustrating the entire grain or spikelet by making circular pencil strokes to even out the rendering and detail the entire grain. The second treatment consists of partially illustrating the grain (basal part) by rendering the movement with strokes oriented according to the relief and accentuating the element of interest (attachment, hilum, germ, etc.). In accordance with conventional scientific drawing practice, the lighting was always placed at the top left, and all drawings were made with pencils of varying hardness under a stereo microscope (Leica Wild M3Z microscope) equipped with a drawing tube. Digital processing was carried out retrospectively on Apple computers running Mac OS Catalina equipped with a Wacom Cintiq 22HD screen tablet, using the Serif Affinity software suite (Serif Europe, 2022) to lay out the drawings, construct the silhouettes, enhance the contrasts and clean the drawings of any pencil smudges.

In general, archaeological sorghum grains are preserved by charring (Fuller and Stevens, 2018), which led us to

consider new ways of creating illustrations to identify and represent the grain. Furthermore, the carbonisation of the grain led to the idea of using a scratchboard, where the black background better reflects certain details useful for identifying the morphotype (Figure 5b). This technique allows us to show only the parts that have been preserved (in white) and to indicate any information that is missing or unusable (black surface). What is more, it is possible to play with the intensity of the white by superimposing the hatching and effectively marking the volume of the seeds. This visual “purification” of the specimen makes it easier to read its shape and its characteristics such as the shape of the hilum. The strong contrast easily produced here with the medium lends itself very well to this type of biological material. It is therefore worth looking at the multitude of graphic techniques available to select the one(s) best suited to the scientific context. Without supplanting the pencil technique, the use of scratchboard allows us to show a medium that is less used today in the field of scientific illustration, but which can shed a different light on a biological specimen. Once mastered, this technique can be very informative from a scientific point of view, but it can also highlight each person’s artistic interpretation: here, only the preserved grains are represented, yet the brain perceives the subject as a whole, filling in the black spaces and recreating the grain in its entirety.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5.** The archaeobotanical grain (MWS16-3106-S1) in dorsal view. a) graphically represented; b) with scratch card; c) in photograph; d) Dorsal view of Sorghum caudatum var. gibbum grain used to realize the comparison.</figcaption></figure>
## 3.3 One example of a comparison with archaeological material

The Meroitic site of Mouweis, located 50 km south of the ancient capital Meroe in central Sudan, was occupied from the fourth century BC to the fourth century AD. Positioned on the east bank of the Nile, the site benefitted from an arid climate influenced by the monsoon. Excavations were conducted by the Musée du Louvre under the direction of Michel Baud, then Marie Millet in collaboration with the Sudanese Antiquities (NCAM, Khartoum) from 2007 to 2016. Archaeological discoveries include a temple, a royal palace, residential areas, and zones for handicraft production (Baud, 2014; David *et al.*, submitted; Dieudonné-Glad *et al.*, 2021; Millet, 2013). In 2014 and 2016, archaeobotanical sediment samples were taken to study past agricultural practices and plant exploitation. Excavated layers revealed significant quantities of seeds, fruits, and wood remains preserved through charring. The study of these remains indicates that tropical cereals, such as sorghum and pearl millet (*Cenchrus americanus* (L.) Morrone), were prominent in summer agriculture, while winter cereals, such as barley (*Hordeum vulgare*) and wheat (*Triticum* sp.), were less common. Frequent finds of charred cotton seeds (*Gossypium* sp.) underscore the crucial role of this textile plant in the Meroitic economy (Bouchaud *et al.*, 2018).

Two grains of sorghum were selected for a graphic study of comparison, due to their sufficient state of preservation: specimens MWS16-3106-S1 and MWS16-3106-S2. Both come from an archaeological layer dated to the 1st–2nd centuries CE in the area 3 where mixed domestic and industrial activities took place.

Specimen MWS16-3106-S1 has a ventral side that is not very usable, probably as a result of heat-related deformation (like corn and popcorn). The dorsal surface (Figure 5a) shows a vestige of the germ, less visible in the photograph (Figure 5c) but the basal part has disappeared. At first glance, the grain appears wedge-shaped and measures 3.15 mm in diameter (Figure 5d).

Specimen MWS16-3106-S2 has very damaged ventral and dorsal surfaces, but leaves the hilum area clearly visible (Figure 6a). The germ is widely cracked (Figure 6b). The basal part is missing. However, as the hilum is well preserved, it can be compared with the illustrations of the ventral faces of current varieties (Figure 6c). It can be seen that the strongest resemblance is with individuals of the *caudatum* morphotype, which both have a slightly domed hilum, with a flat surface tapering at the attachment. This observation and illustration work enabled us to associate samples MWS16-3106-S1 and MWS16-3106-S2 with the *caudatum* morphotype.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** MWS16-3106-S2. a) dorsal view; b) ventral view; c) ventral view of two specimens of *Sorghum caudatum* and close-up of the hilum of the charred specimen.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7.** Specimen MWS16-3106-S2 represented using the scratchboard technique in a) dorsal view and b) ventral view.</figcaption></figure>

**3.4 Some historical implications**

The presence of the morphotype *caudatum* in Sudan during the 1st and 2nd centuries AD could be supported by comparing previous studies about sorghum diversification and dispersal. Thus, morphologically domesticated sorghum was present in eastern Sudanese populations, even if these types were not fully dominant before 3000 BC. The overall pattern suggests sorghum domestication and subsequent evolution of *caudatum* in the central/eastern Sudan region with dispersals east, west and southward (Fuller and Stevens, 2018). However, among the different studies implying archaeological sorghum identification in Sudan, several studies identified as *durra* and *bicolor* morphotypes from 100 BC to 600 AD (Clapham and Rowley-Conwy, 2007;

Shinnie and Anderson, 2004; Van der Veen and Lawrence, 1991) and only one study assigned the *caudatum* morphotype to sorghum remains on the Kawa site much older than those of Muweis (800–400 BC) (Fuller, 2004). Considering the complex history and evolution of sorghum morphotypes, the coexistence of several morphotypes was possible and still exist nowadays (e.g. Semere *et al.*, 2023).

**4. Conclusion**

The recent uses of historical collection are possible by providing access to the biological material and to the data associated, allowed by the numeric tools for computerising

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 8.** Comparative morphology of wheat, barley and millets. Scale: 1 cm. From left to right: *Triticum turgidum dicoccum* (©Marie Aimée Allard); *Triticum monococcum monococcum* (©Marie Aimée Allard); *Triticum aestivum tintoretto* (©Marie Aimée Allard); *Triticum aestivum spelta* (©Kanon Tanaka); *Triticum turgidum durum* (©Kanon Tanaka); *Triticum thimopheevii thimopheevii* (©Kanon Tanaka); *Hordeum vulgare distichum* (©Kanon Tanaka); *Hordeum vulgare hexastichum* (©Kanon Tanaka); *Setaria italica* (©Estelle Pocino) and *Panicum miliaceum* (©Estelle Pocino).</figcaption></figure>
and digitising. However, the exploratory step provided by the illustration methods offer opportunities to develop new tools or techniques. The use of tools and conventions allow existing bodies of graphic work to be compared, while still respecting standards of representation, and for several sources, drawn by different artists, to be associated with each other (Figure 8). Moreover, drawings can illustrate the characters of specimens in ethnobotanical collections, grouping them into a single figure of scientific interest that no photograph would allow.

It also enables comparisons between different specimens, and comparisons over time with representations of archaeobotanical specimens, and to be compared as well as could be expected with older representations of (ethno) botanical illustration, since the conventions of representation established since the 18th century are still respected today.

So, all the examples discussed above from the sorghum collection have helped to illustrate the aims that we pursue as the curator of a naturalist collection. Firstly, the aim is to conserve the plant collection and all the associated data such as cultural or historical information. Next, we want to improve accessibility and the visibility of the collections and archives. And finally, we hope that our efforts will lead to more collaborations (with scientist or artist for example) in order to valorise collections more fully.

## Acknowledgements

This project was supported by a grant from the Ile-de-France Region - DIM "Matériaux anciens et patrimoniaux" and the French National Museum of Natural History. The authors sincerely thank Serge Bahuchet, Vladimir Dabrowski, Grégoire Flament, Vanessa Invernon and Margareta Tengberg who have provided relevant advice to conduct this work.

## References

- BAHUCHET, S., BLANC, J., HOARE, C., JURAVER, S., KOURDOURLI, M., and PENNEC, F., 2019. Des hommes et des plantes. *Revue d'ethnoécologie*, 16, 5786. https://doi.org/10.4000/ethnoecologie.5786

- BAUD, M., 2014. Downtown Muweis – a progress report (2007–2011). In: D. Welsby, and J.R. Anderson, eds. *The fourth cataract and beyond. Proceedings of the 12th International conference for Nubian studies*. Leuven, Paris: Walpole, pp. 763–782.

- BONNEUIL, C., 1997. *Mettre en ordre et discipliner les tropiques : Les sciences du végétal dans l'empire français, 1870-1940*. Unpublished thesis (PhD), Université Paris – Diderot – Paris VII.

- BOUCHAUD, C., CLAPHAM, A., NEWTON, C., TALLET, G., and THANHEISER, U. 2018. Cottoning on to Cotton (*Gossypium* spp.) in Arabia and Africa during Antiquity. In: A.M. Mercuri, A.C. D'Andrea, R. Fornaciari, and A. Höhn, eds. *Plants and People in the African Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany*. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 380–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89839-1_18

- CLAPHAM, A.J., and ROWLEY-CONWY, P.A., 2007. New discoveries at Qasr Ibrim, Lower Nubia. In: R.T.J. Cappers, ed. *Fields of Change: Progress in African Archaeobotany*. Groningen: Barkhuis and Groningen University Library, pp. 157–164.

- DIEUDONNE-GLAD, N., BOUCHAUD, C., GEMEHL, D., GUERIN, S., MILLET, M., and ZAZZO, A., 2021. Iron craftsmanship in Muweis, a town of the Meroe Empire: metal production and smithing. *Sudan & Nubia* 24, 212–232.

- FULLER, D.Q., and STEVENS, C.J., 2018. Sorghum Domestication and Diversification: A Current Archaeobotanical Perspective. In: A.M. Mercuri, A.M., A.C. D'Andrea, R. Fornaciari, and A. Höhn, eds. *Plants and People in the African Past: Progress in African Archaeobotany*. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89839-1_19

- FULLER, D.Q., 2004. Early Kushite agriculture: archaeobotanical evidence from Kawa. *Sudan & Nubia*, 8, 70–74.

- GODDARD, J., and NESBITT, M., 1997. Why draw seeds? Illustrating archaeobotany. *Graphic Archaeology*, 1997, 13–21.

- HARLAN, J.R., and DE WET, J.M.J., 1972. A Simplified Classification of Cultivated Sorghum. *Crop Science*, 12(2), 172–176. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1972.0011183X001200020005x

- LEMPIÄINEN-AVCI, M., LUNDSTRÖM, M., HUTTUNEN, S., LEINO, M.W., and HAGENBLAD, J., 2020. Archaeological and Historical Materials as a Means to Explore Finnish Crop History. *Environmental Archaeology*, 25, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14614103.2018.1482598

- LE BRAS, G., PIGNAL, M., JEANSON, M., MULLER, S., AUPIC, C., CARRÉ, B., FLAMENT, G., GAUDEUL, M., GONÇALVES, C., INVERNÓN, V.R., JABBOUR, F., LERAT, E., LOWRY, P.P., OFFROY, B., PIMPARÉ, E.P., PONCY, O., ROUHAN, G., and HAEVERMANS, T., 2017. The French Muséum national d'histoire naturelle vascular plant herbarium collection dataset. *Scientific Data*, 4, 170016. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.16

- MILLET, M., 2013. Muweis : une ville de l'empire de Méroé. *Bulletin de la Société Française d'Égyptologie*, 186-187, 83-98.

- PORTÈRES, R., 1956. Taxonomie Agrobotanique des Riz cultivés, O. saliva Linné et O. glaberrima Steudel (suite). *Journal d'agriculture traditionnelle et de botanique appliquée*, 3, 627–700. https://doi.org/10.3406/jatba.1956.2341

- PORTÈRES, R., 1959. Les appellations des Céréales en Afrique. IX. Les Riz. *Journal d'agriculture traditionnelle et de botanique appliquée*, 6, 189-233. https://doi.org/10.3406/jatba.1959.2548

- PORTÈRES, R., 1961. L'ethnobotanique: Place – Objet – Méthode – Philosophie. *Journal d'agriculture traditionnelle et de botanique appliquée*, 8, 102–109. https://doi.org/10.3406/jatba.1961.6902

- SALICK, J., KONCHAR, K., and NESBITT, M., eds, 2014. *Curating Biocultural Collections. A Handbook*. London: Kew Publishing.

- SEMERE, T., FJELLHEIM, S., TSEHAYE, Y., and WESTENGEN, O.T., 2023. Inventory of on-farm sorghum landrace diversity and climate adaptation in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia: implications for sorghum breeding and conservation. *Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution*, 70(8), 2755–2772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-023-01604-w

- SHINNIE, P.L., and ANDERSON, J., 2004. *The Capital of Kush 2: Meroë Excavations, 1973–1984*. Meroitica 20. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

- SPOONER, D.M., 2014. Research using biocultural collections. In: J. Salick, K. Konchar, and M. Nesbitt, eds. *Curating Biocultural Collections. A Handbook*. London: Kew Publishing, pp. 295–311.

- VAN DER VEEN, M., and LAWRENCE, T., 1991. The plant remains. In: D.A. Welsby, and C.M. Daniels, eds. *Soba: Archaeological Research at a Medieval Capital on the Blue Nile*. London: British Institute in Eastern Africa, pp. 264–274.

- VIGNES-LEBBE, R., CHESELET, P., DIEP THI, M.H., RAKOTOARISOA, N.R., BLACKMORE, S., and RIERA, B., 2016. Xper3: new tools for collaborating, training and transmitting knowledge on botanical phenotypes. In: N.R. Rakotoarisoa, S. Blackmore, and B. Riera, eds. *Botanists of the twenty first century: roles, challenges and opportunities*. Paris: UNESCO, pp. 228–239.

- VOM BROCKE, K., TROUCHE, G., ZONGO, S., ABDRAMANE, B., BARRO-KONDOMBO, C.P., WELTZIEN, E., and CHANTEREAU, J., 2008. Création et amélioration de populations de sorgho à base large avec les agriculteurs au Burkina Faso. *Cahiers Agricultures*, 17(2), pp. 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1684/agr.2008.0174
<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>