GRAHAME CLARK

World
Prehistory
A NEW OUTLINE
 Published by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press
Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London nwi 2DB
American Branch: 32 East 57th Street, New York, N.Y.10022

© Cambridge University Press 1969

Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 69-19374

isbn о 521 07334 0 clothbound
isbn о 521 09564 6 paperback

First edition 1961

Reprinted 1962 (twice) 1965
Second edition 1969
Reprinted 1969 1971

Printed in Great Britain

at the University Printing House, Cambridge
(Brooke Crutchley, University Printer)
 CONTENTS

Preface xv
Introduction 1

I. man’s place in NATURE 5

1. the evolution of man: The Primates, p. 6—The Australo­
pithecines, p. 7—The genus Homo, p. 10—Homo erectus, p. 11—Homo
sapiens, p. 12—Homo sapiens sapiens, p. 13—The modem races of man,
p. 14.
2. environmental change: Sub-divisions of the Ice Age, p. 17—
The question of pluvial periods, p. 18—Geographical and biological
changes in the Ice Age, p. 19—Neothermal climate, p. 21.

3. Some basic elements of Palaeolithic economy, p. 32—Articulate speech

and self-awareness, p. 33—Chopper-tool (mode 1) industries, p. 35—
Hand-axe (mode 2) industries, p. 39—Prepared core and flake (mode 3)
industries, p. 42.

General characteristics, p. 48—The earliest Advanced Palaeolithic cul­

tures, p. 51—The French Sequence, p. 52—Eastern Gravettian, p. 54—

4. THE BEGINNINGS OF FARMING IN THE OLD WORLD 70

The earliest farmers in the Old World, p. 83—Zagros, p. 84—The Levant,

p. 87—Anatolia, p. 90.

5. THE ACHIEVEMENT OF CIVILIZATION IN 94

SOUTH-WEST ASIA
neolithic settlement in the Kurdistan, Iran and
highlands:
Turkmenia, p. 95—Anatolia, Syria and Northern Iraq, p. 96—Late
Neolithic communities, p. 99.

vii
 CONTENTS
URBAN civilization in sumer: Ubaid, p. 100—Warka, p. 103—
Protoliterate Sumer, p. 104—The Early Dynastic period, p. 105—Akka­
dians and Babylonians, p. 107.
civilization in the highlands: Anatolia and the Hittites, p. 108
—The Levant, p. 112—Iran and Turkmenia, p. 117.

6. THE FOUNDATIONS OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION:

c. 6000-1500 B.C. 119
Geographical setting, p. 119—The earliest farmers in Greece, p. 122—
The Balkans, central and eastern Europe, p. 124—The Mediterranean
and western Europe, p. 130—The west Baltic area, p. 132—Copper-
working in central Europe, p. 134—Minoan civilization, p. 135—Early
Helladic, p. 137—Aegean trade, p. 137—Diffusion of chamber tombs,
p. 139—‘Secondary Neolithic’ groups, p. 142—Battle-axe and Beaker
peoples, p. 143—Arctic hunter-fishers, p. 144.

7. THE FOUNDATIONS OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION:

FROM MYCENAE TO THE AGE OF EXPANSION 148
Mycenaean origins, p. 148—Bronze metallurgy in central Europe, p. 150
—Mycenaean trade with barbarian societies, p. 151—Wessex and Stone­
henge, p. 153—Recession in the east Mediterranean, p. 154—Urnfield
cultures in central Europe, p. 155—Copper-mining in the Tyrol, p. 156
—Expansion of the Umfield cultures, p. 158—Protogeometric Greece,
p. 160—Genesis and diffusion of iron-working, p. 161—The alphabet,
p. 162—Greek colonies, p. 163—Athenian repulse of Persia, p. 164—
The Etruscans, p. 165—The Scyths, p. 167—Hallstatt Iron Age, p. 170
—La Тenе, p. 172—Expansion of the Roman Empire, p. 173—The
Germanic Iron Age and the Migration Period, p. 173—The spread of
Christianity, p. 176—The age of exploration, p. 179.
8. AFRICA 181
Mesolithic hunters, p. 182—Early farming in Lower Egypt, p. 183—
Badarian of Upper Egypt, p. 187—Early Predynastic Egypt, p. 188—
Late Predynastic Egypt, p. 190—Unification of Upper and Lower Egypt,
p. 191—Dynastic Egypt, p. 193—The early spread of food-production in
Africa, p. 197—Pastoralism in East Africa, p. 201—The diffusion of
iron-working, p. 201—Prehistoric Africa and the literate world, p. 203.

9. INDIA 206
Microlithic industries, p. 207—Chalcolithic farmers in Baluchistan and
Sind, p. 208—The Harappan civilization, p. 209—Post-Harappan
chalcolithic cultures in the Indus and Ganges basins, p. 214—Chalcolithic
communities in Malwa and the Deccan, p. 216—Polished stone axe
cultures, p. 216—Spread of iron-working, p. 218—The Mauryan Empire,

10. CHINA AND THE FAR EAST 221

china: Yang-shao peasants, p. 223—Lung-shan and the southward
spread of farming, p. 223—The Shang (Yin) Dynasts, p. 227—Chou
dynasty (1027-222 B.C.), p. 231—Ch’in (222-207 B.C.), p. 232—Han
(207 B.C.—a.d. 220), p. 232.
viii
 CONTENTS

SOUTH-EAST ASIA, INDONESIA AND THE PHILIPPINES: Hoabin-

hian culture, p. 233—Microlithic industries, p. 233—Quadrangular
stone-adze culture of Indo-China, Thailand and Malaya, p. 233—Dong-
son bronzes, p. 238—Melanesia, p. 239.
japan: Preceramic settlement, p. 240—Jomon hunter-fishers, p. 240—
Yayoi farmers, p. 242—Protohistoric Japan, p. 243.
north-east asia: Hunter-fishers, p. 243.

11. AUSTRALASIA AND THE PACIFIC 247

Australia: Migration route to Australia, p. 247—Tasmanians, p. 248
—Australoid migrations, p. 230—The earliest settlement of Australia,
p. 253—Middle Stone Age, p. 234—Recent Stone Age, p. 257.
the pacific: Polynesia, p. 260—New Zealand, p. 265

12. THE NEW WORLD 269

early prehistory: The first immigrants, p. 269—The big-game
hunters, p. 271—Desert culture of the Great Basin, p. 276—Archaic
culture of eastern North America, p. 277.
higher civilization in the new world: The beginnings of
food-production, p. 279—The rise of Mesoamerican civilization, p. 283
—Teotihuacan, p. 284—Maya, p. 285—Postclassic of Mesoamerica:
Toltec and Aztec, p. 288—Early civilization in Peru, p. 289—The
Incas, p. 291.
marginal cultures: Basket-maker and Pueblo cultures of the North
American south-west, p. 292—Woodland culture, p. 294—Middle
Mississippi culture, p. 293—Hunting, fishing and gathering communities,
p. 296—Coastal culture of the north-west, p. 297—Denbigh and Dorset
cultures of the Arctic, p. 298—Old Bering Sea, Thule and recent Eskimo
cultures, p. 299—Yahgan, Ona and Alacaluf peoples of Tierra del
Fuego, p. 300.

Further reading 303

Index 319

ix
 PLATES

Frontispiece Ivory carving of the head of an Advanced Palaeo­

lithic woman from Brassempouy, France
[The Museum of National Antiquities, St Germain]

BETWEEN PAGES 110-11

I Reconstructed skull of Peking man (Homo erectus)

[University Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge]

II Chimpanzee extracting termites from a mound by poking

in a blade of grass
[Baron Hugo von Lawick]

III Skull with face modelled in clay from pre-pottery level

at Jericho
[Photograph by Dr К. M. Kenyon]

iv Sumerian statuette of Early Dynastic times from Tell

Asmar, Mesopotamia
[Oriental Institute, Chicago]

v Clay figurine from Early Neolithic site of Nea Nikomedeia,

West Macedonia, Greece
[Robert J. Rodden Jr.]

vi Gold funeral mask of Agamemnon, Shaft-grave V, My­

cenae
[Lord William Taylour, 'The Mycenaeans', Ancient Peoples and Places series
(Thames and Hudson)]

vii Stone ‘Janus’ head from Roquepertuse, Bouches-du-

Rhone, France
[T. G. E. Powell, 'Prehistoric Art’ (Thames and Hudson)]

viii Bronze dies for embossing helmet plates, showing Teutonic

personages of the Migration Period, Torslunda, Sweden
[State Historical Museum, Stockholm]

xi
 LOWER AND MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC HUNTERS
cess, the discernible stages are rarely clear-cut. It is not so much
that one form of technology gave place to another as that techni­
cal possibilities were enlarged by the adoption of new processes.
The degree of overlap argues that the changes on which pre­
historians rely for periodization were as a rule brought about by
the spread of ideas rather than as a result of actual movements of
people. Again, more often than not particular industries are seen
to combine techniques from more than one stage of development.
Among the factors that caused peoples living on the same time-
plane to retain or discard old forms while adopting new ones
were of course variations in the environment to which they had
to adapt. Before listing the major stages in lithic technology during
the Old Stone Age it needs to be emphasized with some vigour
that, although they formed a homotaxial sequence in the sense
that however incomplete the succession the order was invariably
the same, they were only on rare occasions and as it were by
chance synchronous in different territories. In the table that
follows the succession of stone technologies is equated broadly
with the major phases of the older Stone Age as these are com­
monly conceived of in Europe and contiguous parts of Africa and
Asia.
A point that needs emphasis is that although these modes were
homotaxial they were by no means universal. For one thing the
territories occupied by early man tended to increase in the course
of prehistory as cultures were adapted to an ever-widening range
of environments. For another the competition, which in the long
run ensured technological advance, only applied to regions
accessible to the spread of new ideas. In territories relatively re­
mote from those in which innovations first appeared old forms
of technology might survive from the mere fact that they re­
mained without challenge. Industries in mode 1, which must have
been practised over an immensely long period of time, are found
over the whole territory occupied by early man. Mode 2 industries
on the other hand failed to reach south-east Asia or China.
30
 LOWER AND MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC HUNTERS

Conventional divisions of
Dominant lithic technologies the older Stone Age

Mode 5: microlithic components of composite artifacts Mesolithic

Mode 4: punch-struck blades with steep retouch Advanced Palaeolithic
Mode 3: flake tools from prepared cores Middle Palaeolithic
Mode 2: bifacially flaked hand-axes
Mode 1: chopper-tools and flakes } Lower Palaeolithic

Mode 3 industries still did not penetrate these regions in the Far
East, but on the other hand extended northwards into European
Russia and Inner Asia. This makes it less of a surprise that when
for example men first spread into Australia by way of Indonesia
they should have carried with them a lithic tradition in Mode 1.
When men first spread into more northerly parts of Europe and
Eurasia they brought with them industries of modes 4 or 5 and
these were carried successively into the New World.

Physical evolution and cultural progress

Seeing that tool-making made exceptional calls on the accurate
correlation of hands, eyes and brain, it would be surprising if no
broad degree of correlation existed between the appearance of
successive advances in the manufacture of flint and stone tools
and the emergence of progressively more advanced types of men.
Yet there was no precise link between the two. For instance
H. erectus continued for some time to develop the chopper-tool
tradition that was apparently inaugurated by H. habilis, but he
went on to evolve the hand-axe. Again, the hand-axe tradition
was carried forward to its peak of development by early forms of
H. sapiens, but it was H. sapiens in his broadly Neanderthaloid
phase of development who was responsible for the prepared core
tradition. It might therefore be wrong to read too much into the
fact that the final stages in Palaeolithic lithic technology, along
with highly significant break-throughs in the sphere of human

31
 LOWER AND MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC HUNTERS

awareness, were associated with the appearance of modern man

(H. sapiens sapiens). The biological and cultural evolution of man
both after all unfolded in the same temporal medium. As we have
seen there was in general no close linkage between the successive
types of men and particular stages of technical achievement.
There is no justification for the idea that people who for one
reason or another were left temporarily behind at a technical level,
as the inhabitants of east Asia apparently were during much of
the Middle and Upper Pleistocene, must have continued in an
earlier stage of physical evolution. Nothing is more certain than
that even the simplest and apparently most primitive cultures of
modern times were borne by people whose claim to the status of
H. sapiens sapiens was just as valid as that of the anthropologists
who discovered them. The physical characteristics of men includ­
ing their present racial characteristics are one thing. Their cul­
tural characteristics which can be transmitted quite rapidly through
social contacts are quite another.

Some basic elements of Palaeolithic economy

If the systematic manufacture of implements as an aid to manipu­

lating the environment was a characteristic of the earliest men, so
also was the form of their economy. To judge from the biological
materials recovered from his settlements in different parts of
Europe, Africa and Asia Palaeolithic man enjoyed even from the
remotest periods a diet far more nearly omnivorous than that of
any of the surviving non-human primates. In particular early
man was a meat-eater. Whereas the great apes, though not averse
to an occasional taste of animal food, are predominantly vegetarian,
the earliest men whose food debris is known to us were evidently
able to secure a wide range of animal meat. If H. habilis was
mainly restricted to comparatively small game, this by no means
applies to H. erectus, whose ability as a hunter stands in striking
contrast with the poverty of his material aids. There seems no
doubt that man found himself and emerged as a dominant species
32
 LOWER AND MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC HUNTERS

first and foremost as a hunter. One result of enlarging the range

of his diet was in the long run to make it possible for him to
explore a much wider range of environment, something in which
he was greatly helped as time went on by the development of his
material equipment. Another was to initiate the sub-division of
labour that was to prove one of the mainsprings of human pro­
gress: whereas men pursued game and when necessary fought one
another, their mates concentrated on nurturing the family and
gathering plants and small items of animal foods such as eggs and
insects. It was the economic partnership of the sexes that more
than anything else underlay the human family, an institution
which grew in importance with every increase in the scope and
range of the culture which each generation had to acquire in
infancy. The importance of nurture is reflected in the growing
importance of the home base. Palaeolithic man remained pre­
datory: he bred no animals and grew no plants but depended on
what he could catch or collect from wild nature. It follows that
he needed extensive areas for his support. This meant that he
had to live in small widely dispersed groups, comprising at most
enough adults to man the hunt. Even so it would generally be
necessary for him to move, sometimes over extensive territories,
in the course of the year exploiting natural sources of food as
these ripened and matured. Yet the most primitive man needed a
home-base far more permanent and substantial than the nightly
nests of chimpanzees. The longer the young needed for protection
and education the more equipment was needed in daily life, the
more important cooking became, the more vital it was to secure
a base close to game and water and congenial for living where the
tasks essential for human living could be performed.

Articulate speech and self-awareness

It can be assumed, even if the surviving evidence is necessarily

slight, that early man must have owed his domination of the animal
world to qualities much less tangible than his technology or

33
 LOWER AND MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC HUNTERS

mode of subsistence. In particular he must have owed much to his

ability to understand his environment, accumulate and pass on
his experience and ensure the proper functioning of the artificially
defined societies in which he lived. One of the principal ways in
which he classified his surroundings, pooled and transmitted his
experiences and developed traditional modes of behaviour was of
course articulate speech.
Students of the great apes are agreed that one of their greatest
drawbacks is the lack of speech, which alone is sufficient to prevent
them acquiring the elements of culture. It is true that chimpanzees
have a wider ‘register of emotional expression’ than most
humans and that they are able to communicate to one another not
only their emotional states but also definite desires and urges; yet,
as Kohler has emphasized, ‘their gamut of phonetics is entirely
“subjective”, and can only express emotions, never designate or
describe objects’. In this connection it is interesting that in their
famous enterprise of bringing up the chimpanzee Viki from the
age of three days to three years, Dr and Mrs Hayes found it
possible to train her to certain commands, but failed after eighteen
months of intensive tuition to get her ‘to identify her nose, eyes,
hands and feet’. Until hominids had developed words as symbols,
the possibility of transmitting, and so accumulating, culture
hardly existed. Again, as Thorpe has remarked, man’s prelinguistic
counting ability is only of about the same order as that of birds
or squirrels: serious mathematics, with all the immense advances
in control of the environment that it portends, first became possible
with the development of symbols. Speech, involving the use of
symbols, must have been one of the first indications of humanity.
Its only drawback as a criterion for the prehistorian is that there
is no hope of being able to verify its existence directly for the
remotest ages of man. Despite suggestions to the contrary, the
best palaeontological opinion is against the notion that articulate
speech can be inferred either from the conformation of the
mandible or from study of casts taken of the inner surfaces of

34