1 84 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES 



case ; if we are scientists rather than devotees, each case of alleged 

 diffusion must be examined on its merits. At York Dr. Randall Maclver 

 reminded the Section of a rigorously objective criterion by which the 

 opportunity for diffusion may be scientifically established. * When the 

 natural distribution, as known to geologists, of rocks, ores, or other 

 natural products is artificially changed, there can be no doubt that man 

 has been at work.' In other words, if we find in one region, in this case 

 say Central Europe, substances naturally occurring only in another, 

 e.g., the Mediterranean basin, intercourse between the communities 

 inhabiting the two regions is unambiguously proved. And intercourse 

 implies the opportunity for diffusion of ideas. Graebner and Schmidt 

 have formulated criteria for enhancing the probability of diffusion 

 between two regions — the number of traits common to the suspected 

 areas and the continuity of their distribution. How far have fresh 

 discoveries and the co-operation of petrologists and conchologists de- 

 monstrated intercourse between Europe and the Near East and enhanced 

 the likelihood of diffusion by multiplying the traits common to both 

 areas and filling in gaps in their distribution ? 



Montelius' phraseology implies another assumption that is really a 

 corollary of the first. He is implicitly comparing Oriental cultures with 

 contemporary cultures in illiterate Europe. But how compare cultural 

 phases, dated by written records, with those where ex hypothesi no such 

 records survive } You all know the postulate by which Montelius and 

 his colleagues resolved the antinomy and set out to frame a general time- 

 scale applicable alike to Europe and Asia. He notes that type-fossils, 

 used to distinguish typological periods in Europe, recur in historical 

 periods in Mesopotamia, Egypt and the yEgean. In accordance with 

 his general assumption he assumes that the age of the type-fossils in the 

 Orient provides a terminus post quern for dating the European periods 

 which they serve to define. The rigorous application of this principle 

 by the present and former occupants of this chair has had results little 

 expected by Montelius. The neolithic period, for instance, then a hoary 

 giant reckoned in millennia, has been squeezed to the stature of a slim 

 Minoan youth. And yet, precisely at this moment, geologists and palaeo- 

 botanists have come along with chronological systems of their own for 

 dating in terms of solar years the earlier periods of European prehistory. 

 These tend to enhance the antiquity of the Old Stone Age. The gap 

 between the geological and historico-archaeological record is widening. 

 The old hiatus is becoming more distended. When Montelius wrote, 

 the mesolithic had just been created to bridge it. To-day it will take a 

 lot of microliths to fill the chasm ! 



I have unmasked a formidable conspiracy of assumptions masquerading 

 as facts. Let us critically examine the evidence put in for their defence. 

 Restated in simpler, but still not altogether unambiguous terms, the 

 statement quoted from Montelius resolves itself into the following pro- 

 positions, treated as axioms : (i) Civilisation in the Orient is extremely, 

 ancient ; (2) Civilisation can be diffused ; (3) Elements of civilisation 

 were in fact diffused from the Orient to Europe ; (4) The diffusion of 

 historically dated Oriental types provides a basis for bringing prehistoric 

 Europe within the framework of historical chronology ; (5) Prehistoric 



