Summed radiocarbon probability distributions from cereal grains: arable cultivation proxy or the ‘archaeology of us’? (a reply to Stevens and Fuller 2015)

Abstract

In response to the critique in this volume (Bishop 2015), Stevens and Fuller (2015) have modified their original interpretation of Late Neolithic subsistence strategies in the British Isles (Stevens and Fuller 2012). This article highlights the key issues that remain with their analysis. It is reiterated that radiocarbon summed probability distributions from cereals are not a suitable proxy for the changing importance of arable cultivation through time.

Keywords:

• Neolithic
• cereal cultivation
• archaeobotany
• radiocarbon summed probability
• research bias

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Rod McCullagh of Historic Scotland for his helpful discussions about his excavations at Lairg and potential taphonomic biases, and Peter McKeague from the RCAHMS for supplying the Scottish Radiocarbon Database. Thanks also to Simon Gilmour, Jeff Sanders and Emma O’Riordan of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, Rowan McLaughlin of Queen’s University Belfast and Rick Schulting of the University of Oxford for useful discussions about potential research biases and to Simon Holdaway of the University of Auckland for permission to use the phrase, ‘the archaeology of us’ in the title of this paper.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Rosie R. Bishop

Rosie Bishop completed her PhD on Mesolithic-Neolithic plant use in Scotland in the Department of Archaeology, Durham University, in 2013 and is now a post-doctoral research associate for the Uig Landscape project in the same department. She is also currently involved in archaeobotanical research in Scotland, England and Iceland.