Notes and News
Radiocarbon Dating and the Spread of Farming Economy
Much criticism of the radiocarbon method of
dating might have been spared if it had not
been necessary to maintain interest by publish-
ing so many isolated determinations. The
element of uncertainty inherent in the method
and the many sources of error affecting indi-
vidual samples mean that reliable conclusions
can be drawn only in regard to specific problems
from a substantial number of critical analyses;
and this is particularly true of samples from
archaeological sites. Professor Waterbolk put
his finger on the essential point when he wrote
in ANTIQUITY [1960, 181 that ‘one Carbon-14
date from a site or culture is no date: only a
series of dates, that mutually make sense, can
be used for chronological purposes’.
It is not for nothing that some of the method’s
first triumphs, mostly since the first Symposium
on Radiocarbon Dating held at Copenhagen in
1954 [I], have been won in contexts already
charted by pollen-analysis or by well-docu-
mented cave stratigraphy. Thus the dating of
the minor climatic fluctuations during the
closing phase of the Ice Age over an extensive
zone of northern and north-western Europe [z]
was greatly eased because the deposits con-
cerned had already been zoned in terms of
pollen; and, conversely, it was notably fortified
by the close agreement between the date
determined for the final onset of Postglacial
conditions and that previously arrived at on the
basis of counting varved sediments. In the
* Only determinationswith laboratorydesignations
have been used, up to and including Radiocarbon
Supplement No. 6 , except for two (nos. 5 5 , 74)
published in ANTIQUITY, and one (no. 25) in
G e r m n i a ; one (no. 4), only a trial run, is from
Arctic Anthropology. No corrections have been made
to published dates except that these are quoted to
45
same way notable success has attended the
dating of archaeological finds, like timber
trackways, boats, houses and bows, incor-
porated in deposits zoned by pollen-analysis [3].
Similarly, the more or less clearly defined and
frequently repeated succession of deposits in
caves and rock-shelters has greatly facilitated
the radiocarbon dating of the Upper Palaeo-
lithic cultures of Europe [4], in the same way
as the newly discovered succession of Stone
Age cultures in Australia is helping the applica-
tion and interpretation of radiocarbon dates in
that continent [s].
I n seeking to date successive stages in the
emergence of farming, as Robert Braidwood
has shown in relation to the Old World [6] and
as Richard MacNeish is at present demon-
strating with regard to the domestication of
maize [7], stratigraphy is often, though by no
means always, of assistance. When we come
to consider the spread of farming economy we
have necessarily to take account of samples
taken from a very extensive area within which
local successions are reasonably well established,
but over which as a whole it is difficult to make
precise chronological correlations: indeed it is
precisely because of this that the radiocarbon
method offers such great possibilities as a tool
of research into this particular problem.
The present note is designed to illustrate
how far the determinations available as of
October 1964%are adequate to throw light on
the nearest decade. Where many samples have been
analysed over a period of time, the most recent
batches, or averages from these, are quoted. Where
two samples have been tested from the same labora-
tory at the same time, that with the earlier serial
number is usually the one quoted.
 0 4000-5200 B.C.

52@

EARLY FARMING S E T T L E M E N T S
 List of dates of sites shown on map of early farming settlements
NOTE. All dates are quoted R.C. to the nearest decade, and standard deviations
are omitted. Where more than one laboratory number is listed for one site, an
average date is given. In all but four instances references are to Radiocarbon
laboratory samples.
ABBREVIATIONS. p = earliest pottery level; pp = pre-pottery or aceramic
level; Ant. = Antiquity; Arc. A. = Arctic Anthropology; Ger. = Germania.
Tal-i-Bakun B ( P 438) 4040 26 VBr5;ti (GrN 1987)3410 55 Rocadour (Ant. 1960,147) 3960
Belt Cave p ( P 19,A, B) 5330 27 Gumelnita (GrN 3025) 3760 56 St-LConard ( B 232) 2800
Dzhebel Cave (Arc.A. I, 86) 4080 28 Hamangia (GrN 1986)3930 57 Lagozza (pa 34) 2840
Tepe Sarab ( P 466) 6010 29 Valea Lupuliu (GrN 1982) 3000 58 Egolzwil 3 (K115-6,8,121) 2940
Hajji Firuz (P 455) 53x9 30 Habase~ti (GrN 1985) 3380 59 Seeburg (3 244) 2840
Jarrno pp ( W 607-8,651-2)6500 31 Salcuta (GrN 1989)3500 60 Weiher ( K 539) 2800
Matarrah ( W 623) 5620 32 VinEa A (GrN 1546)4240 61 Riedschachen Pv353) 321°
Zawi Chemi ( W 667) 8650 33 Gornja Tuzla 2 (GrN 2059) 4690 62 Wittislingen ( G o 265) 4070
Shanidar pp 34 Gyilarkt (Bln 75) 5140 63 Friedberg (BEn56) 4170
Hassuna ( W 660) 5090 35 H6drnezov;isPrhely (Hln I I 5) 4500 64 Zwenhu-Harth ( H 223-4) 4050
Tell Halaf (GrN 2660) 5620 36 Icatalszag (Bln 86) 4420 65 Westeregeln (B1n42) 4090
Ras Sharnra p ( P 458) 5740 37 l'amabod (Bln 123) 4330 66 Eitzum (Bb 51) 4360
PP (P460) 6410 38 Korlit (Bln I 19)4490 67 Mogetorp (U1617227)3350
Mersin (W617) 6000 39 Keeovo (GrN 2435) 4130 68 Muldbjerg I (K123-9,131-2)2820
Hacilar VII (BM 125)5820 40 Zalkvir (Bln 87) 4230 69 Heidmoor ( H 29,146) 3190
Khirokitia ( S t 414-5) 5690 41 ZOPY (Bln 57) 4480 70 Sittard (Gro 421-3) 4070
Jericho A pp (P 377-9)7700 4.2 Mohelnice (Bln 102,102A) 4390 71 Geleen (GrN 995-6) 4320
(BM 105)8300 43 Pulkau (Bln 83) 4260 72 Elsloo (GrN 2164) 4320
Merimde ( U 6) 4180 44 Mold (Bln 58) 4040 73 Vailly-sur-Aisne (sa57) 3520
Fayum A (C 550) 4440 45 Penre i Pescara (Pi 101) 4620 74 Soumont-St-Quentin
Badari (Gro 223) 3160 46 Grotta Piccioni ( p i 46) 4300 (Ant. 1960,147) 2800
Nagada (C 810)3790 47 Petescia (Pi 28) 3450 75 Curnic (GrN 1966)3390
Shaheinab (C 753) 3110 48 Ggantija (BM 142)3290 76 Hembury (Bllrf 130) 3150
Haua Fteah p (NPL 42) 4420 49 Zebbug (BM 145)3190 77 Windmill Hill (Bl'M 73) 2860
Knossos (BM 124)6100 50 Sefar (Sa 62) 3080 78 Shippea Hill (Q 525,528) 2960
Elateia (GrN 2973) 5530 51 Jabbaren (Sa 66) 3520 79 Ehenside Tarn (C462) 3010
Nea Nikomedeia (Q655) 6230 52 Adrar Bouss 111 (Sa 100)3190 80 Dalkey IsIand (D38) 3350
Vrsiiik (Ger. 36,414)4915 53 Hassi Meniet (Sa 59) 3460 81 Newferry ( D 36) 334O
54 G.de la Madeleine (MC 8) 3270
 ANTIQUITY
this expansion. The accompanying map and
schedule show the earliest sites of farming
settlements,* as determined by radiocarbon
analysis, in the various territories for which
results have been published. I n order to define
the main lines of expansion varied symbols
have been used to express degrees of age as
determined by C14 analysis. The limited
number of determinations at present available
suggests that to begin with a threefold grading
is all that can profitably be used. The precise
chronological limits of each has been deter-
mined empirically. Since farming appears to
have reached its early limits by c. 2800 B.C.
in terms of radiocarbon dating, this date has
been taken as a qualifying limit for inclusion
on the map. Again, the widespread and rapid
expansion into central Europe of the Danubian
peasants at a period towards the end of the
Vth millennium B.c., again in terms of radio-
carbon, makes it convenient to employ
4000 B.C. as a threshold for the intermediate
category. If we agree to allow an equal span
for this we arrive at a figure of 5200 as the
threshold of the sites of the earliest category of
farming settlements.
The pattern revealed by the map is clear and
coherent. One may first observe how clearly
the black dots (5200 B.c.) denoting the earliest
farming settlements are restricted within less
than ten degress of latitude between Iran and
Greece. Next, and most significantly, one may
note how the haif-black dots (4000-5200 B.c.)
bring out the main lines of early expansion
from the primary zone. Outstanding is the
powerful drive north of the Mediterranean
through the Balkans and central Europe up to
the margins of the north European plain, with
a small side branch across the Adriatic to
* Determinations from burial sites and from bog
horizons lacking archaeological data are omitted for
various reasons. Their inclusion would not have
affected the overall pattern.
NOTES
[I] Nature, 174,1954,868.
[2] E.g. Science, 118, 1953, 6-11; Geologie en
Mijnbouw, 1957, 288-302; Proc. Roy. SOC.,150,
199-21 5 .
[3] E.g. Proc. Prehist. SOC.,XXIX, 1963,17-98.
48
eastern central Italy. By contrast the expansion
south of the Mediterranean into Africa is
relatively weak, being confined to the lower
Nile and the coastal zone. Outside we have
the outer penumbra of open dots (2800-4000
B.c.) reflecting the later spread of the new
economy. Taking first the main thrust, we may
note the expansion across the Danube towards
the Ukraine; the spread to the far north to
Denmark and south Scandinavia, the zone
defined in the archaeological record by the
TRB culture; and westward another, corre-
sponding broadly with the Western group of
cultures, covering a broad zone from the
British Isles [S], the Alpine Zone and France.
I n the case of the much weaker movement into
North Africa we may note that this passed up
the Nile to the neighbourhood of Khartoum
and thence westward across the Sahara to the
Hogar.
Such a picture, generalized as it is, carries
conviction because despite its incompleteness
it reveals a consistent, coherent pattern.
Nevertheless, its main value is as a pointer to
further research. I n particular one would like
to see some of the important gaps filled. So far
as Europe is concerned one would like to see
analyses of samples from some of the earliest
agricultural settlements of Bulgaria, Poland
and Iberia. .Then one would like to see far
more information from the northern and
eastern margins of the Iranian plateau, not to
mention the more distant spreads to India and
north China. Looking further ahead to a time
when far more samples have been processed
from critical sites, one may hope to see the
construction of more finely graded maps, con-
touring the depth in time not only of agri-
culture, but also of such important economic
thresholds as the practice of bronze and iron
metallurgy in the several zones of the pre-
historic world.
J . G . D . CLARK
[4] Current Anthropology, 1960,355-91.
[5] Proc. Prehist. SOC.,
XXVII, 1961,101.
[6] Science, 127,1958,1419-30.
[71 Science, 143,1964,538.
[8] ANTIQUITY, 1962,1-23.