Dispersal distances and cultural effects in the spread of the Neolithic along the northern Mediterranean coast

Abstract

We estimate a spread rate of 7.5–10.6 km/year for the Neolithic expansion along the northern shore of the western Mediterranean. Comparing to theory and numerical simulations of demic-cultural waves of advance, we find that the length of coastal jumps was $$240\le \Delta \le 427$$ 240 ≤ Δ ≤ 427 km. We also derive what we believe are the first analytical equations for spread rates of waves of advance along a coast, and they agree with the simulation results. We show that the importance of cultural diffusion in this Neolithic spread was less than 21%, so demic diffusion was responsible for at least 79% of the observed spread rate. We argue that these results suggest that the spread took place using boats, and also a limited interaction between the incoming farmers and the autochthonous hunter-gatherers.

The shaping of social and symbolic capital during the transition to farming in the Western Mediterranean: Archaeological network analyses of pottery decorations and personal ornaments

“…The loosely connected Impressa nodes may reflect this pioneer, fragmentary, and small-scale peopling event. The low degree of transformation observed during this spatially fragmented pioneer phase is seen as resulting from the process of long-distance maritime displacement [56,[83][84][85] and exploratory behavior [86]. This long-distance connection, highlighted by the higher Impressa mean similarity radius, may reflect these maritime displacements, compared to later periods when the smaller-scale inland dispersions of bigger communities is more likely [83,87].…”

“…Previous studies have shown that during the Early Neolithic human communities were highly connected and mobile, with well-developed large-scale circulation networks [51][52][53][54] that favoured both cultural and demic diffusions. Additional studies have evidenced that each mechanism acted to a different extent across Europe [55,56], although these interactions did not uniformly affect the various elements of the first farmers' material culture. Nevertheless, by comparing two proxies with an exclusively symbolic function, pottery decorations and personal ornaments, distinct patterns of interaction among early farming communities can be identified.…”