- Email: [email protected]
Prehistoric Europe
92
BOOK
REVIEWS
of skulls were reminiscent of a low-budget horror movie, with glimpses of eye-sockets leering sinisterly at the reader against a background of some sepulchral fog. So what are the highlights of this volume? There are three that I would single out. The first is Clark Howell’s expectedly magisterial introduction, and the second, Wolpoff, Zhi and Thorne’s paper on E Asia, a region that will inevitably become even more important in the next few years. The third was Brauer’s paper on the African data. This author’s views on an Afro-European origin of H. sapiens are contentious and thought-provoking, but probably less familiar to readers than other viewpoints expressed in this volume. Overall, therefore, we have here a blockbuster, priced beyond the means of most individuals and many universities; containing many good overviews but few surprises; and focused on an unduly narrow range of issues. The volume would have been stronger if it had addressed a wider audience than physical anthropologists. I somehow doubt that this book will have the same impact on Upper Pleistocene research as did the multi-disciplinary and often innovative After the Australopithecines volume (Butzer and Isaac, 1975) on the Middle Pleistocene.
References Butzer, K. W. & Isaac, G. (Eds) (1975). After the Australopithecines. The Hague: Mouton Koenigswald, G. H. R. von (Ed.) (1958) Hundert Jahre Neanderthaler 1856-1956. Utrecht: Kemink en Zoon. Smith, F. (1982). Upper Pleistocene hominid evolution in South-Central Europe: a review of the evidence and analysis of trends. Current Anthropology 23,667-703. Spencer, F. & Smith, F. (1981). The significance of AleS HrdliEka’s “Neanderthal phase of man”: a historical and current assessment. American Journal of Anthropology 56,435459. Trinkhaus, E. (Ed.) (1983). The Mousterian Legacy: Human Biocultural Change in the Upper Pleistocene. British Archaeology Reports (International Series) 164. R. W. Dennell, University of Sheffield Prehistoric Europe. vii + 359 pp., tables, 0 12 1675505.
By T. Champion, figures. London:
C. Gamble, S. Shennan and A. Whittle. Academic Press. E28.50 (paperback L14.50).
1984. ISBN
This substantial volume has been prepared, according to the preface, as an elementary textbook for archaeology students. The four authors (whose contributions are not acknowledged individually in the chapter headings) have provided a text of 10 chapters, a series of “boxes” of explanations, and nearly 200 figures and tables. The design of the chapters, with a two-column text interspersed with the boxes and figures, is on the whole an attractive one. There is an adequate bibliography at the end, and shorter ones at the end of each chapter listing the most relevant sources; the index is also useful. The 10 chapters proceed from an introduction on the study of European prehistory, to two chapters on the earliest humans in Europe, their subsistence, technology and social organization. Postglacial (i.e. mesolithic) developments are covered in chapter 4, and the emergence of farming societies in chapter 5. The next two chapters deal with the development of hierarchially organized societies between 3200 and 1400 BC, whle chapters 8810 cover the origins of the state in Europe and the development of urban communities. Occasionally, shifts on authorship can be perceived; examples are the treatment of the “secondary products revolution” and the Millaran complex in chapters 5 and 6. Overall, the emphasis in the book is on change, and its explanation, although sometimes the changes seem to be regarded as interesting for their own sake. To supplement the text, the authors use one or two boxes per chapter to expand on individual points. Some of these describe individual sites in more detail, such as Peche Merle or the Heuneberg, or comment on site distributions, as with the example on Greek and Phoenician colonization. Other boxes comment on technological issues, such as copper and iron working, models of economies and societies, or radiocarbon calibration. On the whole, these are a useful device in that they allow material to be presented without breaking up the main text with long descriptions. Just occasionally, however, they seem rather superfluous-as in, for example, the one on settlements and resources on p. 124.
BOOK
REVIEWS
93
How will an undergraduate beginning a degree course in European prehistory cope with this book? On the initial leaf-through, the drawings, tables and photographs will attract interest. Most undergraduates will not notice a few editorial slips, such as the lack of reference in the bibliography to the figure taken from Foley (see fig. 1.2); or the mislocation of Vallonet (fig. 2.1) and Lazaret (fig. 3.1). The discrepancies between the two maps of copper and gold sources (figs 6.11 and 6.28) will only strike him or her later. The text is the main hurdle. The authors’ task (well understood by this reviewer, who chose to write a different type of book on European prehistory) is to give adequate weight to all developments of European prehistory, and to provide explanations for them. The commonest types of explanation-demographic, economic, social etc.-are outlined in their introductory chapter when discussing among other matters recent developments in European prehistory. Summarized in this way, prior to fuller description and illustration, the explanations for particular phenomena have little impact. As chapter follows chapter, the same set of explanations are exhumed, and proposed again and again. In trying to be fair and nondogmatic, the authors write without bite. Only in chapter 6 when discussing changes between 3200 and 2300 BC does the reader feel some confidence and assertion from the writer. The verdict on this “elementary textbook”, therefore, is that the authors have made a brave attempt to write a difficult book, taking into account the range of approaches to European prehistory and the amount of data now available. The end result, whilst informative to the novice, lacks sparkle and stimulation. Whether this is a commentary on the committee approach to authorship, on the ethos underlying the book, or on contemporary scholarship is an interesting question. Patricia Phillips, University of Shefield
The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe. By A. J. Ammerman and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1984. 176 pp. tables, figs. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. $25.00. ISBN 0 691 08357 6 Ammerman’s and Cavalli-Sforza’s book represents the most concise and perhaps best-argued statement to date of the diffusionist approach of the transition to farming in Europe, which has pervaded (some might say plagued) mesolithic and neolithic archaeology since the end of the last century. In the present volume, we can find a further elaboration of the “Wave of Advance” mqdel, a particularly virulent form of agricultural diffusion, which was introduced by Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza in their earlier publications (1971, 1973). In this latest version, a simulation model, replicating the advance of farming populations across Europe from a centre of origin in the Near East, is built according to certain assumptions, tested against and found compatible with the actual rate of spread of farming across Europe and with the patterns of genetic variation in European populations. Despite its simplicity and elegance, the model can be faulted for being based on some untenable assumptions and some erroneous interpretations of the evidence. Errors or questionable assumptions occur in all three aspects of Ammerman’s and Cavalli-Sforza’s argument: (1) in their reconstruction of the actual rate of spread, (2) in their assumptions underlying the simulation of farming colonization, and (3) in their interpretation of genetic patterns. These include, incredibly, the assumption that the discontinuity in settlement pattern and lithic assemblages between the Mesolithic and the Neolithic are the norm, rather than exception (pp. 4647, but see Tringham, 1968; Gimbutas, 1973; Trump, 1980; Dolukhanov, 1979; none of whom can be dismissed as being anti-diffusionist); the assumption that pottery and food production were introduced simultaneously (p, 46), the assumption of little or no overlap between the late mesolithic and the onset of early farming (p. 60), and the minimal view of hunter-gatherers (p. 9). Some of the sites used in recording the rate of spread of farming do not have any positive palaeobotanical evidence for cereals and only few domesticated bones in otherwise wild fauna1 assemblages (p. 52, Appendix); while others are clearly hunting and gathering sites but were included in the analysis because of the presence of pottery (e.g. Sarnate, Piestina; see Appendix). Because of their underlying assumptions about the poverty of foragers and the dynamism of a
BOOK
REVIEWS
of skulls were reminiscent of a low-budget horror movie, with glimpses of eye-sockets leering sinisterly at the reader against a background of some sepulchral fog. So what are the highlights of this volume? There are three that I would single out. The first is Clark Howell’s expectedly magisterial introduction, and the second, Wolpoff, Zhi and Thorne’s paper on E Asia, a region that will inevitably become even more important in the next few years. The third was Brauer’s paper on the African data. This author’s views on an Afro-European origin of H. sapiens are contentious and thought-provoking, but probably less familiar to readers than other viewpoints expressed in this volume. Overall, therefore, we have here a blockbuster, priced beyond the means of most individuals and many universities; containing many good overviews but few surprises; and focused on an unduly narrow range of issues. The volume would have been stronger if it had addressed a wider audience than physical anthropologists. I somehow doubt that this book will have the same impact on Upper Pleistocene research as did the multi-disciplinary and often innovative After the Australopithecines volume (Butzer and Isaac, 1975) on the Middle Pleistocene.
References Butzer, K. W. & Isaac, G. (Eds) (1975). After the Australopithecines. The Hague: Mouton Koenigswald, G. H. R. von (Ed.) (1958) Hundert Jahre Neanderthaler 1856-1956. Utrecht: Kemink en Zoon. Smith, F. (1982). Upper Pleistocene hominid evolution in South-Central Europe: a review of the evidence and analysis of trends. Current Anthropology 23,667-703. Spencer, F. & Smith, F. (1981). The significance of AleS HrdliEka’s “Neanderthal phase of man”: a historical and current assessment. American Journal of Anthropology 56,435459. Trinkhaus, E. (Ed.) (1983). The Mousterian Legacy: Human Biocultural Change in the Upper Pleistocene. British Archaeology Reports (International Series) 164. R. W. Dennell, University of Sheffield Prehistoric Europe. vii + 359 pp., tables, 0 12 1675505.
By T. Champion, figures. London:
C. Gamble, S. Shennan and A. Whittle. Academic Press. E28.50 (paperback L14.50).
1984. ISBN
This substantial volume has been prepared, according to the preface, as an elementary textbook for archaeology students. The four authors (whose contributions are not acknowledged individually in the chapter headings) have provided a text of 10 chapters, a series of “boxes” of explanations, and nearly 200 figures and tables. The design of the chapters, with a two-column text interspersed with the boxes and figures, is on the whole an attractive one. There is an adequate bibliography at the end, and shorter ones at the end of each chapter listing the most relevant sources; the index is also useful. The 10 chapters proceed from an introduction on the study of European prehistory, to two chapters on the earliest humans in Europe, their subsistence, technology and social organization. Postglacial (i.e. mesolithic) developments are covered in chapter 4, and the emergence of farming societies in chapter 5. The next two chapters deal with the development of hierarchially organized societies between 3200 and 1400 BC, whle chapters 8810 cover the origins of the state in Europe and the development of urban communities. Occasionally, shifts on authorship can be perceived; examples are the treatment of the “secondary products revolution” and the Millaran complex in chapters 5 and 6. Overall, the emphasis in the book is on change, and its explanation, although sometimes the changes seem to be regarded as interesting for their own sake. To supplement the text, the authors use one or two boxes per chapter to expand on individual points. Some of these describe individual sites in more detail, such as Peche Merle or the Heuneberg, or comment on site distributions, as with the example on Greek and Phoenician colonization. Other boxes comment on technological issues, such as copper and iron working, models of economies and societies, or radiocarbon calibration. On the whole, these are a useful device in that they allow material to be presented without breaking up the main text with long descriptions. Just occasionally, however, they seem rather superfluous-as in, for example, the one on settlements and resources on p. 124.
BOOK
REVIEWS
93
How will an undergraduate beginning a degree course in European prehistory cope with this book? On the initial leaf-through, the drawings, tables and photographs will attract interest. Most undergraduates will not notice a few editorial slips, such as the lack of reference in the bibliography to the figure taken from Foley (see fig. 1.2); or the mislocation of Vallonet (fig. 2.1) and Lazaret (fig. 3.1). The discrepancies between the two maps of copper and gold sources (figs 6.11 and 6.28) will only strike him or her later. The text is the main hurdle. The authors’ task (well understood by this reviewer, who chose to write a different type of book on European prehistory) is to give adequate weight to all developments of European prehistory, and to provide explanations for them. The commonest types of explanation-demographic, economic, social etc.-are outlined in their introductory chapter when discussing among other matters recent developments in European prehistory. Summarized in this way, prior to fuller description and illustration, the explanations for particular phenomena have little impact. As chapter follows chapter, the same set of explanations are exhumed, and proposed again and again. In trying to be fair and nondogmatic, the authors write without bite. Only in chapter 6 when discussing changes between 3200 and 2300 BC does the reader feel some confidence and assertion from the writer. The verdict on this “elementary textbook”, therefore, is that the authors have made a brave attempt to write a difficult book, taking into account the range of approaches to European prehistory and the amount of data now available. The end result, whilst informative to the novice, lacks sparkle and stimulation. Whether this is a commentary on the committee approach to authorship, on the ethos underlying the book, or on contemporary scholarship is an interesting question. Patricia Phillips, University of Shefield
The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Populations in Europe. By A. J. Ammerman and L. L. Cavalli-Sforza. 1984. 176 pp. tables, figs. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. $25.00. ISBN 0 691 08357 6 Ammerman’s and Cavalli-Sforza’s book represents the most concise and perhaps best-argued statement to date of the diffusionist approach of the transition to farming in Europe, which has pervaded (some might say plagued) mesolithic and neolithic archaeology since the end of the last century. In the present volume, we can find a further elaboration of the “Wave of Advance” mqdel, a particularly virulent form of agricultural diffusion, which was introduced by Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza in their earlier publications (1971, 1973). In this latest version, a simulation model, replicating the advance of farming populations across Europe from a centre of origin in the Near East, is built according to certain assumptions, tested against and found compatible with the actual rate of spread of farming across Europe and with the patterns of genetic variation in European populations. Despite its simplicity and elegance, the model can be faulted for being based on some untenable assumptions and some erroneous interpretations of the evidence. Errors or questionable assumptions occur in all three aspects of Ammerman’s and Cavalli-Sforza’s argument: (1) in their reconstruction of the actual rate of spread, (2) in their assumptions underlying the simulation of farming colonization, and (3) in their interpretation of genetic patterns. These include, incredibly, the assumption that the discontinuity in settlement pattern and lithic assemblages between the Mesolithic and the Neolithic are the norm, rather than exception (pp. 4647, but see Tringham, 1968; Gimbutas, 1973; Trump, 1980; Dolukhanov, 1979; none of whom can be dismissed as being anti-diffusionist); the assumption that pottery and food production were introduced simultaneously (p, 46), the assumption of little or no overlap between the late mesolithic and the onset of early farming (p. 60), and the minimal view of hunter-gatherers (p. 9). Some of the sites used in recording the rate of spread of farming do not have any positive palaeobotanical evidence for cereals and only few domesticated bones in otherwise wild fauna1 assemblages (p. 52, Appendix); while others are clearly hunting and gathering sites but were included in the analysis because of the presence of pottery (e.g. Sarnate, Piestina; see Appendix). Because of their underlying assumptions about the poverty of foragers and the dynamism of a