Search

We present a mathematical model, based on the compilation and statistical processing of radiocarbon dates, of the transition from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic, from about 7000 to 4000 BC in Europe. With the arrival of the Neolithic, hunting and food gathering gave way to agriculture and stock breeding in many parts of Europe; pottery-making spread into even broader areas. Archaeological evidence, radiocarbon dates and genetic markers are consistent with the spread of farming from a source in the Near East. However, farming was less important in the East; the Eastern and Western Neolithic have distinct signatures. We use a population dynamics model to suggest that this distinction can be attributed to the presence of two waves of advance, one from the Near East, and another through Eastern Europe. Thus, we provide a quantitative framework in which a unified interpretation of the Western and Eastern Neolithic can be developed.

Newly available radiocarbon dates show the early signs of pottery-making in the North Caspian area, the Middle-Lower Volga, and the Lower Don at 8–7 kyr cal BC. Stable settlements, as indicated by “coeval subsamples,” are recognized in the Middle-Lower Volga (Yelshanian) at 6.8 kyr cal BC and the Caspian Lowland at about 6 kyr cal BC. The ages of the Strumel-Gostyatin, Surskian, and Bug-Dniesterian sites are in the range of 6.6–4.5 kyr BC, overlapping with early farming entities (Starčevo-Körös-Criş and Linear Pottery), whose influence is perceptible in archaeological materials. Likewise, the14C-dated pollen data show that the spread of early pottery-making coincided with increased precipitation throughout the forest-steppe area.

We present a mathematical model, based on a compilation of radiocarbon dates, of the transition to the Neolithic, from about 7000 to 4000 BC in Europe. With the arrival of the Neolithic, hunting and food gathering gave way to agriculture and stock breeding in many parts of Europe; pottery-making spread into even broader areas. We use a population dynamics model to suggest the presence of two waves of advance, one from the Near East, and another through Eastern Europe. Thus, we provide a quantitative framework in which a unified interpretation of the Western and Eastern Neolithic can be developed.