Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, 2 vols.

Manning, Sturt W.

The 1965 edition of Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (COWA) was a landmark. Sir Mortimer wheeler had stated, 'we have . . . been preparing time-tables; let us now have some trains.' COWA, offering a one-volume time-table for the archaeology of the Old World in succinct critical syntheses, became a standard reference. Nearly 30 years later it repays study; several articles are classics. The 1965 volume replaced a forerunner of 1954. It was with interest and anticipation, therefore, that one heard of a new edition of COWA (COWA3) in progress. By the later 1980s citations to it were appearing (e.g. Barber 1987 refers to the chapter by J.E. Coleman). But COWA3 did not appear until 1992. A review copy was received in mid 1993.

COWA3 is impressive in its proportions: two thick cloth-bound volumes, containing 29 chapters, the first of text, the second of maps, figures, lists of radiocarbon dates, bibliography, 14C calibration scheme and 12 indices divided up by geographical areas. The text contains relatively few typographical errors, but the figures are variable in quality (the maps in 2: 516-43 are particularly poor).

The scope is admirable, now interpreting the Old World to include Eurasia and Africa; only the Pacific and Americas miss out.

The length, compass and detail of the papers varies. Firm editing is not apparent, and some chapters meander (e.g. J.E. Coleman on Greece, the Aegean and Cyprus at pp. 251-64). A few are rather odd, old-fashioned rambles through selected radiocarbon dates with little solid archaeology, and no consideration of recent (post-1960) theory concerning cultural relationships, social status, trade and fashion (worst: H.L. Thomas & R.M. Rowlett on northwest Europe, H.L. Thomas & E.S.-J. Rowlett on northern Europe). A few are very short or summary discussions: D.F. Brown on Italy, A. Gilman on Iberia, D. Lubell et al. on the Maghreb, P.S. Wells on central Europe, K.-C. Chang on China. Others are fuller, with exploration of matters of controversy or interest, notably H.J. Kantor on Egypt, L.E. Stager on Palestine, E. Porada et al. on Mesopotamia, M.J. Mellink on Anatolia, G.M. Schwartz & H. Weiss on Syria. J.G. Shatter on the Indus Valley, Baluchistan and the Helmand Drainage, G.L. Possehl & P.C. Rissman on India. Several are excellent. All in all, COWA3 offers a remarkably broad set of syntheses, and will be seized upon as a convenient reference work. The bibliographies will be a boon to non-specialists venturing into new territory. The cost in the UK is about |pounds~110. This seems outrageous for what should really be seen as a remaindered or second-hand book.

What do I mean? The problem is chronology. The average date of composition of the chapters is 1985. Several date from 1982-4. This delay alone seriously undermines the status in 1993 of the chapters as up-to-date syntheses -- especially since COWA3 is described as 'more of a guidebook and summary than a compendium' (1: vii). Addenda and postscripts tacked on to many chapters (e.g. of 1984, 1985 and 1990 for P.L. Kohl on central Asia) highlight this point. The reader is quickly moved to ask why the chapters were not properly revised or re-written, given that the book was nonetheless published despite the long delay. At its high price, COWA3 ought to be a prestige to item, the best of its type.

COWA3 is built around two types of data: relative chronology and radiocarbon determinations. But in very few cases are these two critically examined. Issues concerning ceramic (and other) typology, and its relevance to the past or present, or the transfer and chronology of 'style' or 'technology' within and between social groups (set amid discussions of society, power relations, and trade), are usually not considered. Time-lags between artefact production, distribution and final non-local deposition are not addressed, nor whether prestige goods, or isolated special artefacts, should be analysed in the same broad fashion as other 'correlations'. Regular readers of ANTIQUITY will notice a failure to cite many important articles from the last 20 years. Nonetheless, the better chapters of COWA3 are strong in terms of good old-fashioned relative (or historical) chronology -- often through detailed discussion of sequences or specific artefact types (Kantor, Stager, Porada et al., Mellink, Schwartz & Weiss, Shaffer, Possehl & Rissman).

When it comes to radiocarbon, COWA3 can only be described as irrelevant, and in fact dangerous. A health warning ought to be offered to the reader. COWA3 shows no critical awareness of issues raised from the early 1970s about samples, contexts, and interpretation (e.g. by Waterbolk 1971). Most of the tables of determinations do not say what material was dated. There is no consideration of the quality of the determinations, of laboratory pre-treatment, of correction for isotopic fractionation or the marine reservoir effect, or of realistic assigned errors. Instead, duplicate and irrelevant lists of dates are offered on the 5730 half-life.

For calibration, COWA3 employs a system from Klein et al. (1982) -- notwithstanding an admitted computer error (1: ix). This is completely obsolete. In 1986 a special volume of Radiocarbon set out the world standard high-precision calibration (ANTIQUITY 61: 97-138), itself now superseded this year by a revised calibration from the present back to c. 20,000 BC (Radiocarbon 35(1)). Does this matter? Yes. For example, where Mellink (1: 210) notes that 'Catal Huyuk has a good number of determinations for level VI which cluster in the 6000-5800 BC era' we may now state that the 12 level VI determinations in 2: 175 offer a combined 1-sigma calibrated range of 6648-6224 BC (Stuiver & Reimer 1993).

Good analysis of radiocarbon determinations, and especially of calibrated radiocarbon ranges, is almost non-existent in COWA3. Most authors just make vague statements, e.g. 'the general range for radiocarbon dates for the Early Bronze Age is from 3400 to 1900 BC' (1: 219). Even when available, as in the cited case (Weninger 1987), sophisticated analyses are not discussed (also 1: 392 where the Ezero determinations are said 'not |to~ accord with the sequence given' despite Neustupny (1973) and Weninger (1986: figure 21)).

The editor refers to 'decisions to include or eliminate certain determinations . . .' (1: ix, see also 2: 291, note to table 1), but no explicit or appropriate methodology is employed. Sample comparability, calibration curve taphonomy, dispersion diagrams, calibrated probability distributions (and the combination of these according to archaeological context), interlaboratory comparability -- all the stuff of good radiocarbon practice today (cf. e.g. ANTIQUITY 64: 319-22; 65: 108-16, 808-21; 66: 636-63) -- are absent from COWA3. COWA3 cannot offer a time-table for Old World archaeology in the 1990s, since it got stuck somewhere far down the track a decade ago. It is not so much wrong, as pointless. For example, J.E. Coleman on the Aegean EBA was superseded three years ago by Warren & Hankey (1989), and his addenda on Thera and Akrotiri Aetokremnos are overtaken by detailed publications of two to three years ago (see ANTIQUITY 65: 857-78, 998-1001). Better and newer reviews exist for many of the subject areas in the Journal of World Prehistory, in books like Aurenche et al. (1987) and Breunig (1987), in annual field summaries such as Mellink on Anatolia in the American Journal of Archaeology, 'Special sections' in ANTIQUITY, etc., etc.

COWA3 cannot be recommended.

References

AURENCHE, O., J. EVIN & F. HOURS (ed.). 1987. Chronologies du Proche Orient/Chronologies in the Near East: relative chronologies and absolute chronology 16,000-4000 BP. CNRS International Symposium Lyon (France) 24-28 November 1986. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. International Series S379.

BARBER, R.N.L. 1987. The Cyclades in the Bronze Age. London: Duckworth.

BREUNIG, P. 1987. 14C-Chronologie des vorderasiatischen, sudost- und mitteleuropaischen Neolithikums. Cologne: Bohlau.

KLEIN, J., J.C. LERMAN, P.E. DAMON & E.K. RALPH. 1982. Calibration of radiocarbon dates: tables based on the consensus data of the workshop on calibrating the radiocarbon time scale, Radiocarbon 24: 103-50.

NEUSTUPNY, E. 1973. Absolute chronology of the Aeneolithic period, in Actes du VIII(e) congres international des sciences prehistoriques et protohistoriques. Beograd 9-15 September 1971 2: 243-8. Beograd: Comite d'Organisation.

STUIVER, M. & P.J. REIMER. 1993. Extended 14C data base and revised CALIB 3.0 14C age calibration program, Radiocarbon 35: 215-30.

WARREN, P. & V. HANKEY. 1989. Aegean Bronze Age Chronology. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.

WATERBOLK, H.T. 1971. Working with radiocarbon dates, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 37: 15-33.

WENINGER, B. 1986. High-precision calibration of archaeological radiocarbon dates, in Acta Interdisciplinaria Archaeologica 4: 11-53. Nitra: AIA. 1987. Die Radiocarbondaten, in M. Korfmann (ed.), Demircihuyuk: die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1975-1978 II: Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen: 4-13. Mainz-am-Rhein: Philipp von Zabern.