See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/276372572

Palaeoethnobotany: The Prehistoric Food Plants of the Near East and

Europe. By Renfrew J. M.. 248 pages, 48 plates. Methuen, London,
1973. Price £6.50.

Article in Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society · December 2014

DOI: 10.1017/S0079497X00011440

CITATIONS READS

0 469

1 author:

Robin Dennell
The University of Exeter
168 PUBLICATIONS 5,412 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Robin Dennell on 06 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY

(2) The Stone Age. Chapter 4 contains a discussion of the nomenclature and terminology used together
with a detailed description of the typology and raw materials of the aggregates recovered. Professor Clark and
Dr M. R. Kleindienst with the help of Dr C. M. Keller have produced an objective set of typologies that
could be as important for Central African Studies as was the work of Tixier for typological studies in North
Africa.
As the Later Stone Age aggregates are not directly comparable with contemporary industries in adjacent
areas the name of the Kaposwa Industry is suggested for the microlithic assemblages at the Kalambo Falls.
Three radiocarbon dates are available for the Kaposwa industry, GrN-4225 3850 i 40 bp, GrN-4224 3620 ±
40 bp and GrN-4223 2730 ± 4° bp suggesting a Later Stone Age occupation of the area from the beginning of
the second millenium be to the eighth century be. Whether the apparent gap of twelve hundred years between
the Later Stone Age and the Early Iron Age is more apparent than real only future work will reveal. In view of
the dates for microlithic industries now available from Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, North-East Angola, and
Lesotho covering the time span from 18,000 to 13,000 bp it would seem likely that only a small part of the
Later Stone Age sequence has been recovered from the Kalambo falls region unless the Polungu components
are contemporary with microlithic industries elsewhere.
Little direct evidence is available to reconstruct the economic base of the Later Stone Age population but the
distribution of modern resources in the area does suggest that some form of mobile economy was practised.
It is to be hoped that in his future work Professor Clark will develop the potential of economic studies that
he begins at Kalambo Falls.
The final three chapters deal with the Polungu components which document the changes at Kalambo Falls
from 'Middle Stone Age' technologies to the 'Later Stone Age' Kaposwa industry. Chapters 6 and 7 are
descriptive and chapter 8 discusses the relationship and dating of the Polungu industrial components which
are compared with similar assemblages from other sites in East, Central and Southern Africa. This final
chapter is perhaps the least satisfactory part of the book. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the author
is trying to have his cake and also to eat it! On page 248 we read that 'Unless therefore the association of
the C14 date is in error, the concept that technological stages necessarily imply chronological contemporaneity
must now be abandoned,' and on page 250 'typological/technological equivalence is not confined to those
entities that are generally contemporary. If the radiocarbon dating is not in error, then aggregates far sep-
arated in time and space appear sometimes to have more in common than do those for which contemporaneity
is established'. These two statements are surely inconsistent with the opening paragraph of the chapter where,
referring to the Polungu Industrial components, it is stated 'In part, therefore, they fall within the broad time
range of what has been described as the "Second Intermediate Period" and may thus be considered to be
in part contemporary with those archaeological occurrences which typologically and technologically would
appear to belong within this period'.
The fact that such a prominent practitioner as Professor Clark can make such apparently contradictory state-
ments within the same chapter only serves to highlight, as Professor Clark would surely be the first to admit,
that a shift in paradigm is taking place within our subject. Crucial to this change of paradigm is a balanced
assessment of the importance of detailed typological analysis to archaeological studies. Methodologically it is
difficult to fault this second volume of Kalambo Falls so well produced by the Cambridge University Press
for Professor Clark and his collaborators but is it not time that the concepts on which the work is based were
re-examined?
P. L. CARTER

PALAEOETHNOBOTANY: THE PREHISTORIC FOOD PLANTS OF THE NEAR EAST AND EUROPE. By J. M. Renfrew. 248
pages, 48 plates. Methuen, London, 1973. Price £6.50.
This book introduces itself as 'the first... to examine the criteria for the identification of the different species'
of food plants found on archaeological sites in Europe and the Near East. It also surveys the type of evidence
at our disposal, the problems involved in its interpretation, and also the genetic relationships, usage, and
preferred conditions of growth of each plant. Dr Renfrew is certainly to be praised for undertaking such an
ambitious and much needed work.
The introductory section neatly outlines the development of archaeo-botanical research; in the following
chapter, there is a lucid account of the types of evidence at our disposal. Chapter 3 considers the problems of
interpreting this evidence. As Dr Renfrew points out, samples of plant remains from archaeological sites
'cannot be regarded as truly "random". They have become carbonized due to some accident in antiquity . . .
and thus are only indicative of their own immediate circumstances, and not even of the entire harvest of that

2IO

Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Sheffield Library, on 06 Jan 2017 at 17:49:27, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00011440
 REVIEWS
season' (p. 21). It is regrettable that no attempt is made to show how such 'accidents' might be recognized,
or to consider how they might distort our conclusions. A sample such as the 71 seeds and grains from Ghediki
(p. 25), for example, could have resulted from a variety of crop processing and other activities; thus to regard it
as representative of the crop economy (p. 26) is falling into a trap which had already been noticed.
The main section of the book (chapters 4-19) is largely concerned with the criteria for identifying plant
remains. This is an especially difficult task, since those parts of a plant which do survive, such as the seeds and
grains, seldom constitute diagnostic features for a specific identification; or if they do, have often lost many of
their key features. As Dr Renfrew rightly states (p. 11): 'The technique of identifying carbonized plant remains
is based on the careful comparison of the minute details of morphology preserved in the carbonized grains and
seeds with the corresponding parts of fresh plants of the same species'. However, many of the criteria she sets
out are applicable only to fresh plant material. They describe features unlikely to survive in an archaeological
context, and are thus largely irrelevant. In the discussions of the cereals (chapters 4-9) for example, accounts
of the length of the ear, or profile and softness of the glumes and paleae are hardly applicable to the bulk of
archaeological finds. There is relatively little discussion of those parts of the plant which do survive archaeo-
logically, such as carbonized spikelet fragments.
The discussion of pulse crops (chapters 10-14) provides a useful summary of the criteria currently in use,
and of the finds so far published. As Dr Renfrew points out, the importance of legumes has been seriously
under-estimated; hopefully these chapters might help redress the balance.
The criteria in chapters 15-19 for identifying plants other than cereals and the main legumes are often
inadequate, and at times inaccurate. Many of the genera in these chapters contain several species, of which
the seeds are often similar, but of which only one or a few species are considered here. For example, the
diagnostic criteria for identifying seeds of Chenopodium album (p. 170) is not seed size or shape as stated, but
the cell pattern on the testa at a magnification of X 40; moreover, there are at least 22 species of Chenopodium,
of which only C. album is considered here. Similar criticisms can be made of the discussion of other plants in
these chapters, such as Polygonum, Rumex, Linum, Papaver and Galium.
The final section on the food values of utilized plants, and on our present knowledge of prehistoric agri-
culture, is a sound if conventional account, and provides a useful synthesis. The bibliography is a helpful
compilation of the existing literature. The plates are of varying quality; the captions to plates 46.6 and 46.7
should be interchanged. The illustrations, by Alan Eade, are excellent. The book is attractively produced, and
by present-day standards reasonably priced.
For many years there has been a need for a book which summarizes our present knowledge of prehistoric
plant husbandry. Dr Renfrew has made a useful contribution in this respect, and her book will be valuable to
archaeologists interested in the use of various plants in prehistory, and the type of evidence at our disposal.
Although there is no substitute for a comprehensive comparative collection for identifying archaeological plant
remains, there is also a need for an exhaustive account of the key diagnostic features of each species within
each relevant genus. Clearly, this would be an extremely long and difficult undertaking, and is not one which
any one researcher could hope to achieve within a single book. Although Dr Renfrew's book cannot be used as
a basis for identifying plant remains from an archaeological site, it will serve however as a helpful introduction
to the subject.
R. DENNELL

PREHISTORIC RUSSIA: AN OUTLINE. By Tadeusz Sulimirski. 449 pages, 91 figures, 32 maps, 23 tables, 50 plates.
John Baker, London, 1970.
We have no 'Prehistoric Russia' in Russian and by a Russian author. This is perhaps caused by the fact that
Russian archaeologists are nearer to the subject and can see better all the gaps and pitfalls, therefore being
more cautious. Another possible cause could be of a theoretical nature. Professor Porshnev has recently pub-
lished an article under the title: 'Is a history of a single country thinkable?' (Porshnev 1969). His answer is: no.
A collateral question may be posed: is a prehistory of a single country thinkable? The answer here is not so
easy and perhaps must be not so simple. The mutual contacts and ties of the societies in prehistory were not
as multiple and strong as in history. However, on the other hand, we must take into account also indirect
relations and interdependencies, for even in ecology they play a substantial role. So the answer depends on
some conditions. Firstly, which level of prehistoric research is considered. Secondly, what is meant under the
term 'country*.
If we try to register the monuments and the cultures, to describe them and to establish a chronological
framework, then the limits of the selected region may be arbitrary in size and correspond to the modern

211

Downloaded from https:/www.cambridge.org/core. University of Sheffield Library, on 06 Jan 2017 at 17:49:27, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at
https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00011440
View publication stats