Ashley E. Sharpe and John Krigbaum assemble a set of pertinent articles on the application of isotopes to zooarchaeological assemblages. The chapters showcase important perspectives about ecological systems, husbandry and domestication, emerging methods, and future directions. In their opening piece, Sharpe and Krigbaum emphasize that isotope analyses in zooarchaeology are no longer novel and that the discipline needs instead to consider the role of isotopes thoughtfully as a key tool in archaeological inquiry in conjunction with the traditional methods of zooarchaeological practice.

This volume begins with chapters by Atilio J. Francisco Zangrando and colleagues on the ecological parameters within which hunter-gatherer-fisher societies live in southernmost South America. This section is further complemented by the work of Andrew D. Somerville and colleagues on social-environmental change in northwest Mesoamerica. Both contributions focus on the lived experiences of relevant taxa, in which Zangrando and colleagues trace the declining abundance of pinnipeds with increasing exploitation of seabirds and fish, whereas Somerville and colleagues compare different lagomorph species. Employing both bulk isotope amino-acid analyses, authors in both studies examine the impact of climate and the environment on people’s subsistence strategies and social interactions through different isotope systems rather than using zooarchaeology alone. Incorporating isotope methodologies into these research endeavors reveals diverse insights into past climates that can, in instances, support or complicate insights from zooarchaeological evidence.

Gypsy Price and colleagues, Holly Miller and colleagues, and Anneke Janzen focus their respective chapters on the role of isotope analyses in the study of human–animal interactions. Price and colleagues rightfully point out improvements needed in isotope studies in archaeology as they relate to incorporating effective theoretical frameworks. Although I disagree that isotope studies are inherently processual and theory-free, I commend the authors for examining the use of faunal commodities in Mycenae by engaging with compelling theoretical discussions about how animal lived experiences mediated their incorporation in feasts and other consumption events. Miller and colleagues complement this section by incorporating a more explicit discussion about multispecies and multi-isotope studies on Roman-era human-animal-environmental relationships. Advantages of zooarchaeology rest in the broad coverage of analyses recording the presence of various species within an assemblage. Miller and colleagues design a widely encompassing approach to examine the faunal assemblage from the Fishbourne Roman Palace site through δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N isotope analyses of ungulates, lagomorphs, canids, fowl, and humans. Their δ¹⁸O and ⁸⁷Sr/⁸⁶Sr analyses reinforce some of the dietary patterns that emerged in the use of these other isotopes. Together, a multi-isotope approach on a large dataset from a well-studied archaeological context demonstrates the interpretive power of place-based and contextual knowledge. Finally, Janzen’s summary of the main uses of isotope analyses to investigate the timing and nature of pastoralism on the African continent ties this section together nicely. She not only highlights the major advances that have been made employing stable and radiogenic isotopes but also emphasizes the need for further studies that use both bulk and serial sampling methodologies.

In the volume’s third section, novel and emerging methods are showcased in the contributions by Sharpe and colleagues, by Keith A. Hobson, and by Michelle S. Eusebio and colleagues. The importance of multispecies and multi-isotopic approaches is reinforced by Sharpe et alia’s chapter, in which they demonstrate the need to be cautious in applying strontium (Sr) and lead (Pb) isotopes for estimating the origin of local and nonlocal fauna. Despite issues with diagenesis, they implore further exploration in Pb’s utility in certain contexts—such as karstic landscapes, for taxa with thicker enamel, and improvement of pretreatment protocols. Hobson also encourages the use of combined δ²H and δ¹⁸O to trace environmental, climatic, and trophic changes over time. Although issues still remain, in particular with δ²H and laboratory ambient moisture, a multi-isotope approach can be expanded in developing regionally focused isoscapes for areas of interest. By employing innovative methodologies on compound-specific isotopes, Eusebio and colleagues highlight the local and regional variation in the way animal resources are prepared in Southeast Asia. Interesting differences in the way that domestic pigs are cooked in that region compared to European areas attest to heterogenous cultural practices influencing the chemical preservation of these isotopic signatures. Together, these chapters reinforce the need for expanded research on the application of these methods and improvement of extraction and purification procedures.

Both Suzanne E. Pilaar Birch and Matthew H. Veres’s chapter and Paul Szpak’s contribution effectively tie this volume together by returning the gaze to the “big picture.” Showcasing the development of and additions to the NSF-supported Neotoma Paleoecology Database, Birch and Veres emphasize that the way to secure data quality for isotope research in zooarchaeology is by connecting isotope data points with their zooarchaeological details, such as skeletal element, side, and portion. This expansion was facilitated by the efforts of the Stable Isotopes in Zooarchaeology Working Group (SIZWG) of the International Council for Archaeozoology (ICAZ) in creating the Faunal Isotopes Database. This chapter emphasizes the necessity to carry out zooarchaeological analyses before isotope work. Prefacing Szpak’s contribution, these final chapters reinforce that the research pursuits of zooarchaeology and isotope analyses are interconnected. I agree with Szpak that zooarchaeology “needs” isotope analyses, but I would emphasize that even more important is isotope research “needs” zooarchaeology.

Sharpe and Krigbaum should be commended for their impactful volume, which must be incorporated into both introductory and advanced courses on zooarchaeology and isotope analyses. More importantly, it should be incorporated into foundational training courses in archaeological practice and research design. Contributions to this book showcase the power of isotopes to complement zooarchaeology and archaeology more generally. A consistent tension exists among chapters relating to the scale of analysis, ranging from local to “big” datasets. It demands that readers think carefully about their own research design. Isotope Research in Zooarchaeology skillfully demonstrates the “need” not only for zooarchaeology to consider and incorporate isotope analyses but also for isotope studies to reflect on specific place-based environmental and archaeological contexts, expanding local baseline and research scale. In the end, zooarchaeologists would benefit from becoming better trained in isotope methodologies and interpretive paradigms, but isotope specialists must include the expertise of zooarchaeologists to shape their research designs and objectives collaboratively.