Estimating population size, density and dynamics of Pre-Pottery Neolithic villages in the central and southern Levant: an analysis of Beidha, southern Jordan

Birch-Chapman, Shannon; Jenkins, Emma; Coward, Fiona; Maltby, Mark

doi:10.1080/00758914.2017.1287813

Cited by 35 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methods for generating absolute estimates of prehistoric population parameters vary, but typically combine direct data from one of the disciplines discussed above with quantitative demographic data from recent small-scale or subsistence-level societies (e.g. [72][73][74]). The 'Cologne Protocol', summarized by Schmidt et al in this issue [35] is the most robust method for producing absolute demographic estimates from archaeological data, quantifying prehistoric population sizes and densities using a combination of geospatial analysis and demographic data from ethnographically documented foraging and/or farming groups.…”

Section: Looking Forward: Grand Challenges For Palaeodemographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A manifesto for palaeodemography in the twenty-first century

French

Riris

Pablo

et al. 2020

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Looking Forward: Grand Challenges For Palaeodemographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A manifesto for palaeodemography in the twenty-first century

French

Riris

Pablo

et al. 2020

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3.A recent study by Birch-Chapman et al (2017) presents an alternative method of estimating population in Neolithic villages based on the amount of sleeping space. Though strictly comparable data are not available for Çatalhöyük and Awat'ovi, this method produces estimates for Çatalhöyük in the same range as those cited by Cessford (2005) (i.e.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Near Eastern Neolithic Megasites and Southwestern Pueblos: Population Size, Exceptionalism and Historical Trajectories

Bernardini

Schachner

2018

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractÇatalhöyük and other Near Eastern Neolithic 'megasites' are commonly interpreted as exceptional because of their large size and early dates. In this paper, we question exceptional claims about the size and social organization of megasites like Çatalhöyük by comparing them to pueblos in the American Southwest. We argue that Çatalhöyük and other Near Eastern Neolithic megasites are better understood as large villages whose size, layout, and social organization compare readily to many of the late prehispanic and historic period pueblos in the American Southwest. We suggest that four factors contribute to disparate interpretations of structurally similar sites in the Near East and American Southwest: 1) surface architectural visibility; 2) different regional intellectual traditions that emphasize 'micro-' vs 'macro' scale social organization; 3) a tendency toward overestimation in archaeological population estimates, especially when the 'biggest' or the 'earliest' sites are involved; and 4) perceptions of continuity with later time periods. 1 Çatalhöyük is often described as a Neolithic "megasite" with a large, densely packed population that is puzzling because it predates by 3000 years the kind of urban settlement associated with early cities. Although no longer seen by most archaeologists as the 'first city' (e.g., Mellart 1967), Çatalhöyük is nevertheless still viewed as exceptional: a site whose size "pushes the idea of an egalitarian village to its ultimate extremes" (Hodder 2006, 98), a huge street-less mass of houses that was a '"dead end' in the evolution of human architecture and In this paper, we raise questions about exceptional claims regarding the size and social organization of Near Eastern megasites like Çatalhöyük by comparing them to pueblos in the American Southwest, in particular the pueblo of Awat'ovi ( Fig. 1). Although comparisons between Çatalhöyük and pueblo architecture are not uncommon (e.g., Hodder 2006, 25), these are often anecdotal (but see Mills 2014). Here we suggest that more systematic comparison can provide insights into key questions about Çatalhöyük population levels and social organization, and about the phenomenon of Near Eastern Neolithic megasites more generally. Awat'ovi has 2 roughly the same architectural footprint as Çatalhöyük, but is estimated to have had a population less than half the size, and is interpreted as a classic 'tribal' village rather than a proto-urban centre. We argue that four factors contribute to disparate interpretations of these structurally similar sites: 1) surface architectural visibility; 2) different regional intellectual traditions that emphasize 'micro-' vs 'macro' scale social organization; 3) a tendency toward overestimation in archaeological population estimates, especially when the 'biggest' or 'earliest' sites are involved; and 4) perceptions of continuity with later time periods.Rather than outliers requiring special explanation, we argue that Çatalhöyük and other Near Eastern Neolithic megasites are better understood as large vi...

show abstract

“…Researchers studying the outcome of variation in these demographic processes (changes in population size, density, and growth rate) have met with more success, but are largely limited to the comparison of relative changes in these measures. 9 Furthermore, most established paleodemographic methods [10][11][12][13][14] have limited applicability to the Pleistocene contexts (2.6 million to 12,000 years ago 15 ) that constitute much of prehistory. Genetic data (from both ancient and living populations) inform on some elements of prehistoric demography, notably interbreeding between different hominin taxa, and estimates of effective population sizes, 16,17 but address a limited range of demographic questions, and ancient DNA sequences are comparatively rare.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconstructing prehistoric demography: What role for extant hunter‐gatherers?

Page

French

2020

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Demography is central to biological, behavioral, and cultural evolution. Knowledge of the demography of prehistoric populations of both Homo sapiens and earlier members of the genus Homo is, therefore, key to the study of human evolution. Unfortunately, demographic processes (fertility, mortality, migration) leave little mark on the archeological and paleoanthropological records. One common solution to this issue is the application of demographic data from extant hunter‐gatherers to prehistory. With the aim of strengthening this line of enquiry, here we outline some pitfalls and their interpretative implications. In doing so, we provide recommendations about the application of hunter‐gatherer data to the study of demographic trends throughout human evolution. We use published demographic data from extant hunter‐gatherers to show that it is the diversity seen among extant hunter‐gatherers—both intra‐ and inter‐population variability—that is most relevant and useful for understanding past hunter‐gatherer demography.

show abstract

Estimating population size, density and dynamics of Pre-Pottery Neolithic villages in the central and southern Levant: an analysis of Beidha, southern Jordan

Cited by 35 publications

References 47 publications

A manifesto for palaeodemography in the twenty-first century

A manifesto for palaeodemography in the twenty-first century

Comparing Near Eastern Neolithic Megasites and Southwestern Pueblos: Population Size, Exceptionalism and Historical Trajectories

Reconstructing prehistoric demography: What role for extant hunter‐gatherers?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About