Diffusion

The process whereby cultural traits, idea, or objects are spread or transmitted from one culture or society to another. It may be carried by folk movement, war, or trade, or imitation. Diffusion has played a major part in human development by spreading ideas and techniques more rapidly than they could have spread had they been independently invented. Primary diffusion occurs when people migrate and take their habits with them. When ideas or customs, but not the people who have them, move, it is secondary diffusion. The spread of agriculture in North America was secondary diffusion. The burden of proof is on the diffusionist to show that the trait is the same in the two areas, that communication between the two was possible, and that there are no difficulties in the relative dates. In a great number of cases these criteria can be met and diffusion is an important explanatory concept in culture history. The theory popularized by V.G. Childe, who said that all the attributes of civilization from architecture to metalworking had diffused from the Near East to Europe.

The spread of a technique or cultural trait or a complete way of life from on area to another. This can take place through the movement of people or through the spread of ideas (sometimes known as stimulus diffusion). It is clear that diffusion has often taken place in the past and that it has sometimes been a potent force for change. However, general interpretative frameworks based on diffusion are now less popular than they once were. In the early part of this century Sir Grafton Elliot Smith and his followers, like William Perry, expounded a view which is often described as ‘hyperdiffusionist’; they believed that all inventions had taken place only once, in ancient Egypt, and that the knowledge of these inventions and practices had spread outwards from Egypt, carried by crusading missionaries, the ‘Children of the Sun’. To take a single example, every mound-like structure from European Megalithic tombs to central American platform mounds was regarded as derivative of the Egyptian pyramids. This view was never widely accepted by scholars, but a modified version — often known as ‘modified diffusionism’ and associated especially with Gordon Childe — gained support. This version did not accept far-fetched connections and allowed for the possibility of independent invention in more than one area, but nonetheless accounted for most major developments in European prehistory in terms of diffusion from the Near East. Until relatively recently this was the standard interpretative framework for European prehistory, but in the last 10-15 years many of its tenets have been challenged, partly as a result of radiocarbon dates and the tree-ring calibration(see dendrochronology, RADIOCARBON DATING), partly on theoretical grounds.            ‘