The Origins of Millet Cultivation (Panicum miliaceum and Setaria italica) along Iberia’s Mediterranean Area from the 13th to the 2nd Century BC
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript is a remarkable contribution documenting the arrival of millets along the Mediterranean coast of the Iberian Peninsula. The work contains the oldest direct dating of millets in the region and represents an important starting point to complete the route of east-west expansion of these crops, as several works have characterised over the last decade. The article also raises the possibility of different drives for the spreading of millets, possibly linked to different communities or agrosystems. Notwithstanding the above, the paper would benefit from some minor changes. I therefore suggest its publication after revision. In order to provide some ideas that may be useful for improving the manuscript, please see the comments below.
Abstract
Although the oldest assemblages are in the Cinca river valley, affirm that the introduction occurred through this valley could be problematic (lines 15-16). This theory is not strong enough to be challenged by a new dating of another site. Other data, such as the isotopic analyses mentioned throughout the text, suggest no very distant chronologies (1 century later) for the Cantabrian area, so there could be different routes through the Pyrenees.
1 Introduction
The following chapter of the book may be of interest in order to focus the debate on millets in northern France (page 1-2, lines 42-46). Some direct radiocarbon dates can be found.
Toulemonde, F., Wiethold, J., Bonnaire, E., Daoulas, G., Derreumaux, M., Durand, F., Pradat, B., Rousselet, O., Schaal, C., Zech-Matterne, V., 2022. Millets in Bronze Age agriculture and food consumption in northeastern France. in: Kirleis, W., Dal Corso, M., Filipović, D. (Eds.), Millet and what else? The wider context of the adoption of millet cultivation in Europe, Sidestone Press, Leiden, pp. 155-184. https://www.sidestone.com/books/millet-and-what-else
2 Material and Methods
Page 2, line 80. “into the three following periods: 1300 to 950 BC, 950 to 550 BC and 550 to 150 BC. The last corresponds to the Second Iron Age, also known as the Iberian period.” Just as the last period is described, it would be useful to mention the two previous periods for coherence.
3 Results
Page 5, line 115. “Panicum miliaceum groupings”. Assemblages or sets are more common terms than groupings.
Page 6: lines 152-158. I recommend a rewrite of this paragraph. The first sentence is more focused on characterising the southtern sites, which should be described in more detail. The following two sentences of the paragraph are aspects such as the introduction of millets in different regions that would be more coherent to explain in chapter 4.
Chapter 4.1.
Page 8, lines 223-226.
In addition to the El Espinoso cave, I recommend including the doctoral thesis by Higuero Pliego (2020), which also suggests the consumption of C4 cereals through the analysis of dentine in the Los Canes cave, near the El Espinoso site. The study concludes the contribution of C4 plants in the childhood and youth stage of several individuals in a period between 1276-1031 cal BC.
Higuero Pliego, A. 2020. Análisis isotópico de carbono y nitrógeno en secuencias de dentina y de estroncio en esmalte procedente de restos humanos prehistóricos de la cueva de Los Canes (Cabrales, Asturias). Thesis, University of Cantabria http://hdl.handle.net/10902/19217
Free accesible on: https://www.educacion.gob.es/teseo/imprimirFicheroTesis.do?idFichero=oR3s25cHkJQ%3D
Figures
Please, add a scale and north (or to indicate the figures are oriented to geographical north in the caption) in the location maps: Figure 1 and Figure 4.
Author Response
Abstract
Although the oldest assemblages are in the Cinca river valley, affirm that the introduction occurred through this valley could be problematic (lines 15-16). This theory is not strong enough to be challenged by a new dating of another site. Other data, such as the isotopic analyses mentioned throughout the text, suggest no very distant chronologies (1 century later) for the Cantabrian area, so there could be different routes through the Pyrenees.
DONE
1 Introduction
The following chapter of the book may be of interest in order to focus the debate on millets in northern France (page 1-2, lines 42-46). Some direct radiocarbon dates can be found.
Toulemonde, F., Wiethold, J., Bonnaire, E., Daoulas, G., Derreumaux, M., Durand, F., Pradat, B., Rousselet, O., Schaal, C., Zech-Matterne, V., 2022. Millets in Bronze Age agriculture and food consumption in northeastern France. in: Kirleis, W., Dal Corso, M., Filipović, D. (Eds.), Millet and what else? The wider context of the adoption of millet cultivation in Europe, Sidestone Press, Leiden, pp. 155-184. https://www.sidestone.com/books/millet-and-what-else
DONE
2 Material and Methods
Page 2, line 80. “into the three following periods: 1300 to 950 BC, 950 to 550 BC and 550 to 150 BC. The last corresponds to the Second Iron Age, also known as the Iberian period.” Just as the last period is described, it would be useful to mention the two previous periods for coherence.
DONE
3 Results
Page 5, line 115. “Panicum miliaceum groupings”. Assemblages or sets are more common terms than groupings.
DONE
Page 6: lines 152-158. I recommend a rewrite of this paragraph. The first sentence is more focused on characterising the southtern sites, which should be described in more detail. The following two sentences of the paragraph are aspects such as the introduction of millets in different regions that would be more coherent to explain in chapter 4.
DONE
Chapter 4.1.
Page 8, lines 223-226.
In addition to the El Espinoso cave, I recommend including the doctoral thesis by Higuero Pliego (2020), which also suggests the consumption of C4 cereals through the analysis of dentine in the Los Canes cave, near the El Espinoso site. The study concludes the contribution of C4 plants in the childhood and youth stage of several individuals in a period between 1276-1031 cal BC. Higuero Pliego, A. 2020. Análisis isotópico de carbono y nitrógeno en secuencias de dentina y de estroncio en esmalte procedente de restos humanos prehistóricos de la cueva de Los Canes (Cabrales, Asturias). Thesis, University of Cantabria http://hdl.handle.net/10902/19217 Free accesible on: https://www.educacion.gob.es/teseo/imprimirFicheroTesis.do?idFichero=oR3s25cHkJQ%3D
DONE
Figures
Please, add a scale and north (or to indicate the figures are oriented to geographical north in the caption) in the location maps: Figure 1 and Figure 4.
DONE
Reviewer 2 Report
Natàlia Alonso and Guillem Pérez-Jordà manuscript deals with “The origins of millet cultivation (Panicum miliaceum and Setaria italica) along Iberia’s Mediterranean area from the 13th to the 2nd century BC”. Based on published and new data, the authors show that the earliest cultivation pieces of evidence are found in Western Catalonia and in the Northeast of the Iberian Peninsula in contexts dated to the 13th century BC. Only later, in the 10th-8th century BC are millet species found in southern and eastern Iberia. The possible link between the introduction and expansion of these species with the cultivation of fruit trees during the 9th-7th centuries BC is also addressed.
Looking at the different parts of the manuscript some general comments can be given:
- Abstract. needs some information addition but is mostly well-prepared.
- 1. Introduction. Gathers information on the origin and spread of broomcorn millet and foxtail millet in Europe. According to the authors, this paper’s aim is to address the history of the cultivation of millets in the Western Mediterranean by i) doing a review of existing evidence and ii) presenting new radiocarbon dates, including directly dated millet seeds (lines 49-52).
- 2. Materials and Methods. The authors indicate that 39 sites located in the area between the Pyrenees and the south of the Iberian Peninsula, dated between 1300-150 BC, with remains of broomcorn millet or foxtail millet are the basis for the overview presented. The rationale behind the selection of contexts/sites mentioned is given, while the motifs behind the exclusion of some specific data are also present.
- 3. Results. The results of the overview are succinctly described, with the contexts considered of higher interest being presented with a larger amount of information. Both chronology and location of samples are occasionally addressed during the presentation of the results.
- 4. Did millets penetrate the Iberian Peninsula through different routes and in different time frames? This section corresponds to the discussion and is divided into three time periods following what was previously mentioned in the manuscript. An initial discussion is presented on the Late Bronze Age data and the trans-Pyrenean route (13th-century cal BC). The authors discuss data from different regions of the Iberian Peninsula, while also considering evidence from closer areas in France and other European countries. This is followed by a discussion on the southern Phoenician route (10th-century cal BC) of expansion and consolidation of millets. Besides the data analysed in this paper, the authors discuss other surrounding countries’ pieces of evidence to enrich the discussion. A focus on the Iberian data is made with an interesting argument on the adoption or lack of adoption of millets by also looking at other archaeological evidence. Finally, a discussion on the evolution of the cultivation of millets (550-150 BC) and the possible inferences that can be made based on existing scant data are addressed.
- 5. Conclusion. The authors summarize the main results considering the pathways of millet cultivation introduction and their chronology.
This paper is scientifically sound and the tables and figures are generally well-prepared although some changes are needed. Throughout the manuscript, the different limitations and caveats of the analysis and the inferences made are acknowledged. The Introduction, Materials and Methods, and Discussion sections are adequate, and the Conclusion is clear and concise. The bibliography is updated and well-prepared.
Some comments and suggestions:
- The Abstract should clearly mention that the paper aims to address the history of the cultivation of millets in Iberia’s Mediterranean area from the Late Bronze Age to the Second Iron Age based on an overview of published but also new data.
- Materials and Methods. The authors state that the 550-150 BC time spawn corresponds to the Second Iron Age (aka Iberian period), but should also give this type of chrono-cultural information for the other time frames mentioned. This is only presented later on lines 132-133 in the Results section.
- Materials and Methods. A small paragraph succinctly describing the type of sites/provenance of samples considered is needed in order for the reader to be aware of the “archaeological realities” being analysed.
- Table 2. Please double-check the data for El Pontarró.
- Lines 105-106. I advise changing to “(n = 26)”, “(n = 14)”, and “(n = 3)” and doing the same for other such references in the text.
- Line 153-154. Please check the sentence.
- Please double-check the use of calibrated and uncalibrated dates. Ideally, the information should follow the same type of presentation or be clearly understood when different types of chronologies are being used. Also, add “BC” in lines 37 and 173.
- Figure 2. The graph and caption should mention that the numbers correspond to the sites from table 2. Also, please change the colour of the graph since it would be easier to read if the bars are not different shades of the same colour, especially for colour-blind readers.
- Figure 5. Please also change the graph colours and indicate the chronology in the graph.
- Line 203. “(final stage of the Late Bronze Age IIIa)”
- Line 211 “[37-40]. Panicoidea”
- Line 214-215 check “in that timeframe”
Overall, this paper is of interest and fits the standards of Agronomy and the scope of the special issue on “Millet and Pseudocereals: New insights into Archaeobotany, Plant Domestication and Global Foodways”. It is an interesting contribution based on the review of published data and by adding new archaeobotany and chronology information. Considering all the above mentioned, I suggest that the paper is accepted following the minor revisions indicated.
Author Response
- The Abstract should clearly mention that the paper aims to address the history of the cultivation of millets in Iberia’s Mediterranean area from the Late Bronze Age to the Second Iron Age based on an overview of published but also new data.
DONE
- Materials and Methods. The authors state that the 550-150 BC time spawn corresponds to the Second Iron Age (aka Iberian period), but should also give this type of chrono-cultural information for the other time frames mentioned. This is only presented later on lines 132-133 in the Results section.
DONE
- Materials and Methods. A small paragraph succinctly describing the type of sites/provenance of samples considered is needed in order for the reader to be aware of the “archaeological realities” being analysed.
DONE
- Table 2. Please double-check the data for El Pontarró.
DONE
- Lines 105-106. I advise changing to “(n = 26)”, “(n = 14)”, and “(n = 3)” and doing the same for other such references in the text.
DONE
- Line 153-154. Please check the sentence.
DONE
- Please double-check the use of calibrated and uncalibrated dates. Ideally, the information should follow the same type of presentation or be clearly understood when different types of chronologies are being used. Also, add “BC” in lines 37 and 173.
DONE
