Australian students of archaeology could be excused for thinking that aerial photography is a technique with little archaeological application in their own country. Archaeological text books usually draw their examples of the uses of aerial photography from Europe or the Americas; even the pages of Antiquity, graced for many years by the work of J. K. St Joseph and others, suggest a similar geographic limitation. It is also a fact that there are not many published aerial photographs of Australian archaeological sites. In particular, the great tradition of low-level oblique photography with hand-held camera seems to have had comparatively little impact on Australian archaeology. There have been notable exceptions: for instance Bill Webster, of the University of New England, has taken low-level oblique infra red photographs of the Moore Creek Axe Quarry near Tamworth, New South Wales (Binns and Mc- Bryde, 1972; McBryde, 1974); Jim Bowler of the Australian National University provided photography of Lake Mungo (Mulvaney, 1975, P1.47), and Judy Birmingham of Sydney University has published an aerial photograph of the Irrawang Pottery (Birmingham, 1976)

More than a century ago the publications of Gdouard Lartet laid the foundations for the nomenclature and stratigraphy of the French Upper Palaeolithic. Academic debate arising from Lartet's work continued until the 1930s by which time the framework and classification of the period were fixed. They have remained fairly static ever since. Indeed, the French system appeared unimpeachable, so that scholars strove to apply it, unchanged, to widely differing areas. Since the 1930s most work on the French sequence has been designed to confirm the results of old and 'untrustworthy' excavations, and to shore up an original framework with additional information. The situation is much the same for the way of life of palaeolithic man: the standard textbook description of savage hunters eking a living from a harsh environment was in vogue for a very long time, and one might be forgiven for believing that this hypothesis had always been dominant; this is not the case. It is little-known fact in this country that during the latter part of the nineteenth century there were major arguments in academic circles concerning the way of life in the Palaeolithic, and in particular the question of domestication during that period. Were it not for the demise of Piette and the subsequent dominance of Breuil, it is possible that the present orthodox account of the Upper Palaeolithic might be very different

Professor Renfrew, who holds the Chair of Archaeology in the University of Southampton, has prepared for us an account of the sanctuary at the important site of Phylakopi in the Cycladic island of Melos, excavated by the British School of Archaeology at Athens from 1896 to 1899. The publication (Atkinson et al., 1904) was a landmark in the study of European prehistory. The person in day-to-day charge (although not nominally Director) was Duncan Mackenzie, who later assisted Evans at Knossos. Mackenzie's Daybooks have been preserved and are a useful source of stratigraphic information.

Excavation was resumed in 1974–7, directed by Professor Renfrew, for the British School of Archaeology at Athens, with the authority of the Greek Archaeological Service. The most important and altogether unexpected result has been the discovery of a sanctuary of the Mycenaean period, with a number of very beautiful finds (cf. Frontispiece)* as well as some highly unusual ones (male figurines). The only well-preserved Mycenaean shrine previously excavated is that at Mycenae itself, discovered by Lord William Taylour and first published in this journal (Taylour, 1969 and 1970).

The Phylakopi shrine is of great importance for the Mycenaean period in the Cyclades, for the understanding of Mycenaean cult and religion, and for the several works of art which it has yielded, including the Lady of Phylakopi, perhaps the most beautiful of the ceramic cult figures known from the Mycenaean world.

In April 1972 Mr Fleming, Lecturer in Prehistory and Archaeology at the University of Sheffield, and his colleague Dr John Collis, were able to demonstrate the prehistoric date of a system of reaves, or low walls, on south-west Dartmoor. Further research showed that the true date and function of the reaves had been suggested in the early nineteenth century, but that they gradually come to be ignored by prehistorians of more recent times; Mr Fleming, Director of the Dartmoor Reave Project, here documents this curious case of lost knowledge.

The authors of this paper were invited to attend a conference on ‘Ancient Vermont’ held at Castleton in Vermont in October 1977, and to examine and comment upon the ‘evidence’ for the extensive occupation of New England by Celts and others in the first or second millennium BC as propounded by Professor L. B. Fell of Harvard University. The ‘evidence’ consists broadly of supposed ‘Ogam’ and ‘proto-Ogam’ inscriptions on rocks and stones and megalithic stone structures, some of the structures appearing to have specific orientation in association with standing stones which, it has been suggested, indicates possible solar observatories. The nature of some of the evidence was examined by the authors both in the field and in an exhibition as well as by way of papers delivered at the conference. The conclusions reached were negative concerning any material evidence of a Celtic presence but do not, of course, preclude the possibility that Celts reached the New World in remote antiquity, nor deny that there are numerous anomalous features in the New England landscape which need to be carefully documented, explored and analysed.

Over half of Leo Klejn's monograph-length article constitutes what might be described as an ethnography of Western archaeology; more particularly an armchair ethnography written from the perspective of Leningrad. Western archaeologists will inevitably react to it in much the same manner as native peoples react to ethnographic studies of their cultures. They may admire the industriousness and intelligence of the ethnographer and grudgingly admit that he perceived things about them of which they were unaware. Yet they remain convinced that in some significant way he failed to comprehend the inner spirit of their culture or to appreciate sufficiently its merits. At its healthiest, this feeling constitutes a challenge to understand one's own culture better. Klejn's monograph surveys developments in theory and method in archaeology between 1960 and 1973 in the Soviet Union, Central and Western Europe, and the United States. No attempt is made to consider trends in China, Latin America, or elsewhere in the Third World. Klejn's aims are three-fold : bibliographical, historical, and critical. Although he denies that his presentation is sufficiently detailed to constitute genuine scientific criticism, his evaluations of recent trends in the development of archaeological theory influence his historical interpretations and enhance the interest and value of the entire study.

The Jomon Period of Japanese prehistory, which extends from the 11th millennium BC to about 300 BC, has been termed ‘Neolithic’ in the tradition of the archaeology of North-eastern Asia since diagnostic artifacts include ceramics and polished stone tools. In more general terms, however, the subsistence pattern may be seen as Mesolithic, with the utilization of shellfish, fish, nuts, and roots. In recent years, Japanese archaeologists have raised the question of the possibility of early cultivation, and this has become one of the main problems in Jomon research. Richard and Kazue Pearson prepared this general survey of problems in Jomon subsistence for the Symposium on Japanese Archaeology held at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, Boston, 3 April 1974. It was further revised during the tenure of a Research Fellowship of the Japan Foundation, Tokyo, during the summer, 1974, as part of a broader study of prehistory of the broadleaf evergreen forest zones of eastern Asia. Richard Pearson is a Professor of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia. Kazue Pearson is co-translator of the English edition of Jeong-hak Kim's book on Korean archaeology (Kankoku no Kokogaku, 1972; Kawade Shobo Press) which will appear in 1978 as the ‘Prehistory of Korea’, from the University Press of Hawaii.

The discovery of what is demonstrably, on the basis of present knowledge, the earliest major assemblage of gold artifacts to be unearthed anywhere in the world is an event of some note, comparable in significance with Schliemann's find of the Great Treasure at Troy more than a century ago. The finds at Varna must be at least 1,500 years older than those of Troy 11, yet apart from the original announcement by their excavator (Ivanov, 1975), and useful, although brief, descriptions by Gimbutas (1977 a and b), the Varna cemetery has so far excited little archaeological comment. The publication by Ivanov (1978) of the first well-illustrated account of the cemetery allows an assessment of its importance. Its status as the oldest substantial find of gold emphasizes the position of south-east Europe as an early and independent centre of metallurgical innovation. But the gold is only one of several materials indicative of high status in the cemetery: what had hitherto seemed a moderately egalitarian society now displays clear evidence of salient ranking. This in turn has major implications for our understanding of the social context in which early metalworking in Europe developed and prospered.

The discovery of three bronze age cist burials at Ashgrove, Fife, was unusual in revealing highly decomposed macroscopic plant debris in cist I, which was excavated by Professor R. J. Adam, Mrs Mary Adam and Professor L. H. Butler. Miss A. Henshall (1964) states that the liberal clay luting of the side slabs and cover of cist I had been so effective as to keep the interior dry and free of soil. She also reports that 'Over the skeleton and cist floor there was a thin deposit of black crumbly matter which formed a deep deposit nearly I ft across in the area between the forearms and upper arms, i.e., in the vicinity of the chest' (p. 167) (PL. xva). Miss C. A. Lambert (now Mrs C. A. Dickson), in an appendix to Henshall's paper, found that 'The plant material consisted of abundant dicotyledonous leaf fragments, bark, twigs, wood charcoal (two tiny fragments), plant tissue with crystalline copper salts adhering to it and fairly abundant sphagnum moss. The leaf fragments were several layers thick but their poorly preserved condition prevented their separation and identification.

Prior to the recent description of stone-lined ovens in Hawaii (Hendren, 1975, 133, 139), such ovens had not been reported elsewhere in Polynesia, and as a result some attention has been placed on the origin of the urnu pae. An undocumented claim has been made for the probable Peruvian source of the Easter Island stone-lined oven (Heyerdahl, 1968, 1g5), but in fact cultural origin is still in question because local innovation by the undeniably Polynesian substratum of the indigenous population has not been ruled out. Regardless of their origin, urnu pae are a class of cultural remains that assume major importance in Easter Island settlement-pattern studies by virtue of their easy identification and common occurrence with other structures on extended family residential sites. The exposed rims of umu pae eliminate the need for excavation to locate cook houses, which means that the layout of habitation sites and relationship of major household activity areas often can be determined on the basis of surface survey alone. Umu pae function independently to fix the location on flat terrain of open-site habitations that may otherwise be hard to see owing to the absence of structural remains or earthen terraces.

Dr Joan M. Frayn was formerly Head of the Classics Department at Wimbledon High School (GPDST). She is at present engaged in making a study of subsistence farming in Italy in the Roman period.

Clark (1975) gave a clear account to ANTIQUITY readers of the current state of the radiocarbon calibration problem. It is now 19 years since De Vries demonstrated that one of the primary assumptions of the radiocarbon dating method was in error. Since then more than 1,200 measurements have been made on samples of known-age wood and over 70 papers published on this topic (reviewed by Bermingham and Renfrew, 1972 and by Clark, 1975). In spite of this activity, at the recent radiocarbon conference in Los Angeles and La Jolla no international agreement could be reached on a single calibration or correction that could be used to convert radiocarbon measurements to calendar ages. The problems of calibration have undermined the confidence of many European archaeologists in radiocarbon dating-one hears remarks such as ‘one can’t take the dates seriously, after all they are only radiocarbon dates’. Workers attempting to reconcile calibrated radiocarbon dates with historically based chronologies have found that the agreements do not live up to their expectations based on the quoted standard deviations of the dates. In the short term the results we present here may further convince the archaeologist that radiocarbon dates will not solve his chronological problems. However, we hope to demonstrate that radiocarbon dating is ultimately capable of sufficient accuracy to be fully compatible with historical chronologies

Various ways of dividing up the chronological and cultural content of the Neolithic of the British Isles have been proposed. Thus Piggott assigned the Windmill Hill culture to Early and Middle phases, and the Peterborough and other cultures to a Late phase (1954); Clarke proposed similar Early, Middle and Late phases, with the addition of a Final phase (1970,275); Case divided the Irish Neolithic into a beginning, a middle and an end (1969a) (a scheme recently further subdivided by ApSimon (1976)), his stages marked by various cultural innovations and developments. Though based on such cultural changes, these schemes—necessary as they are—all tend to create the impression of steady and consistent human activity, though manifesting itself in different ways at different times, over the by now vast span of the British Neolithic. Nor has this impression been altered greatly by the large number of radiocarbon dates-over 150—available for cultural activity over the period from at the latest 3500 bc down to 2000 bc or soon after.