Historical ecology is a new, interdisciplinary field exploring artistic and archaeological sources to record the state of biodiversity in the past. As such, paintings, such as those by Monet and Turner, in this way become an involuntary record of ecosystem evolution.
Paintings, engravings and sketches are a visual source increasingly used in historical ecology
Artworks are not the main source for historical ecology researchers, but they do serve as indirect evidence
Monet’s London Houses of Parliament series astonishes for its daring, anti-naturalistic colors, the dissolution of form, and reflections of the sky in the River Thames. Any art historian could explain the influence of this work on contemporary painting, but its relevance now seems to be spreading beyond the art world. Those hazy impressionist skies were really witness to the atmospheric pollution of the age.
In an article by Anna Lea Albright and Peter Huybers, published in 2023 in the review, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), the researchers analyzed the paintings of Claude Monet and J. M. W. Turner through their careers, measuring the extent of contrast, bleaching and blurring of the colors. They uncovered revealing patterns. As the Industrial Revolution advanced, and the level of particles in the air increased, the works of these artists became hazier and more diffuse. Pollution altered the dispersion of light and Monet and Turner found a way of depicting it on their canvases, creating a record of air quality at the time, before measuring instruments were developed to do this.
This is not an isolated example. Paintings, engravings and drawings are a visual source increasingly used in historical ecology, an essential discipline for understanding how people have molded ecosystems, which we can see in the famous snowy landscapes of Flemish painters of the 17th Century during the so-called Little Ice Age, a rare phenomenon we already discussed in this article.
Historical ecology studies interactions between humans and the environment over time, combining methods and perspectives of natural and social sciences, and humanities.
To do so, many varied sources are used, including natural elements such as mud, fossils, growth rings in trees, ice, geochemical records, historical documents such as chronicles, administrative registries and ancient scientific reports, visual archives such as maps, photos and paintings, and local ecological knowledge such as stories, traditional practises and oral history testimony.
This specialty is crucial for understanding present ecosystems and managing their conservation, as it allows environmental changes to be documented long term, debunking myths about virgin nature and contributing evidence about the historical consequences of human intervention. Also, by revealing how the ecosystem was before its recent degradation, it helps set realistic restoration goals.
Artworks are not the main source for historical ecology researchers, but they do serve as indirect evidence and only complement other data. They contribute relevant indications about the atmosphere, landscape and visible species that surrounded artists.
The paintings of the Dutch Golden Age, for example, can give clues about the aquatic biodiversity of the time. Several researchers from Leiden University used crowdsourcing to create a platform identifying fish species represented in still life painting and market and fish scenes in Dutch 16th and 17th C. paintings. The conclusion? The groups of species represented gradually diminished over time, probably due to changes in the climate, over-exploitation, and habitat alterations, as well as sociocultural changes.
A similar study published last year in the review npj Biodiversity analyzed 331 Italian still life works from the 16th to the 18th C. in order to reconstruct past aquatic biodiversity in the Mediterranean region.
When rigorous methodologies are applied, artworks can serve as exceptionally reliable historical archives in reconstructing past biodiversity
Another significant example is the work of tree archaeologist Isabella Dalla Ragione, who studies renaissance paintings in order to reconstruct varieties of extinct fruit trees. Her work on the Muso di Bue apple demonstrates the ecological importance of such analysis. The pear-like variety, abundant during the Renaissance (and often represented in Italian painting), survives today in Italy in only a few gardens. It is thought that it prospered for 500 years by possessing a greater adaptive resilience to changes in the climate, a discovery that could be interesting in the current context.
Such studies show that, when rigorous methodologies are applied, artworks can serve as exceptionally reliable historical archives in reconstructing past biodiversity. Yet its limitations are notable. Precision depends on careful selection of the works. Realist paintings are, for example, much more useful than more abstract art.
As we have seen, though, art, including impressionism (which prioritizes subjective perception over naturalist detail), can help us know how the planet is changing. The paintings of Monet don’t only capture atmospheric pollution, but also a meticulously designed nature, for example in the ponds and water lilies of his garden in Giverny, created via hydraulic engineering, and in imported exotic species. The works of Camille Pissarro document farming practises in the 19th C. and the progressive industrialization of French rural life. In Van Gogh’s fields, we can see which crops dominated agricultural landscapes. And so on.
Art is a marvel in its own right, but, as a reflection of its time, it can also deliver a practical legacy: footprints that historical ecologists can follow to reconstruct how human activities altered ecosystems and transformed landscapes.