2009
DOI: 10.3378/027.081.0313
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimations of Population Density for Selected Periods Between the Neolithic and AD 1800

Abstract: We describe a combination of methods applied to obtain reliable estimations of population density using archaeological data. The combination is based on a hierarchical model of scale levels. The necessary data and methods used to obtain the results are chosen so as to define transfer functions from one scale level to another. We apply our method to data sets from western Germany that cover early Neolithic, Iron Age, Roman, and Merovingian times as well as historical data from AD 1800. Error margins and natural… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
58
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
58
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Estimates of population densities in the early Neolithic suggest that they were low, 0.6 per square kilometer. 42 Such low population densities would have helped to promote founder effects such as those seen for the more prominent L11-related, S116 (Figure 1j) and U106 (Figure 1i) components and their respective sub-haplogroups. This is shown in part as the inversely related decreasing expansion times of S116-related haplogroups with increased distance from high-diversity areas coincident with the establishment of the early Danubian Neolithic LBK horizon in Europe (Figure 2a and b).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Estimates of population densities in the early Neolithic suggest that they were low, 0.6 per square kilometer. 42 Such low population densities would have helped to promote founder effects such as those seen for the more prominent L11-related, S116 (Figure 1j) and U106 (Figure 1i) components and their respective sub-haplogroups. This is shown in part as the inversely related decreasing expansion times of S116-related haplogroups with increased distance from high-diversity areas coincident with the establishment of the early Danubian Neolithic LBK horizon in Europe (Figure 2a and b).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their study highlighted that genetic changes in the population correlate well with population mobility, increase/ decrease of endogamy in the kinship structure, and changes in the economy, i.e., beginning of plant cultivation. Population density and distribution in archeology has been inferred also through summed probability distribution of radiocarbon dates (e.g., Crema et al 2016, Shennan and Edinborough 2007, Bamforth and Grund 2012, and references therein), through settlement pattern and distribution (Zimmermann et al 2009), or habitable areas (see Gautney and Holliday 2015, and references therein). Some of the most recent results of this approach seem to indicate that demography had a crucial role in shaping the phase of incipient food-production in Europe (Shennan et al 2013), although a different perspective is also emerging, that compares the demographic growth of HG to that of AP (Zahid et al 2016).…”
Section: Parameter 3: Social Resourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As pointed out by Pinhasi and Pluciennik (2004), the basic contention of this model was that the demographic and biological profile of farming populations differed from that of hunter-gatherers. To obtain a reliable estimate of demographic parameters (Zimmermann et al 2009) on the basis of archeological data (although see Chamberlain 2009), however, can be difficult. Estimating settlement patterns in terms of site size, density, and estimated length of occupation etc., on the basis of surveys, test excavations, and published reports, is fraught with difficulties and biases (e.g., see Webb and Frankel 2004 regarding Bronze Age Cyprus).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%