{"title":"Landscape Taphonomy Predictably Complicates Demographic Reconstruction","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s10816-023-09634-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Accurately reconstructing past human population dynamics is critical for explaining major patterns in the human past. Demand for demographic proxies has driven hopeful interest in the “dates-as-data” approach, which models past demography by assuming a relationship between population size, the production of dateable material, and the corpus of radiocarbon dates produced by archaeological research. However, several biases can affect assemblages of dates, complicating inferences about population size. One serious but potentially addressable issue centers on landscape taphonomy — the ways in which geologic processes structure the preservation and recovery of archaeological sites and/or materials at landscape scales. Here, we explore the influence of landscape taphonomy on demographic proxies. More specifically, we evaluate how well demographic proxies may be corrected for taphonomic effects with either a common generalized approach or an empirically based tailored approach. We demonstrate that frequency distributions of landforms of varying ages can be used to develop local corrections that are more accurate than either global corrections or uncorrected estimates. Using generalized scenarios and a simulated case study based on empirical data on landform ages from the Coso Basin in the western Great Basin region, we illustrate the way in which landscape taphonomy predictably complicates “dates-as-data” approaches, propose and demonstrate a new method of empirically based correction, and explore the interpretive ramifications of ignoring or correcting for taphonomic bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-023-09634-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Accurately reconstructing past human population dynamics is critical for explaining major patterns in the human past. Demand for demographic proxies has driven hopeful interest in the “dates-as-data” approach, which models past demography by assuming a relationship between population size, the production of dateable material, and the corpus of radiocarbon dates produced by archaeological research. However, several biases can affect assemblages of dates, complicating inferences about population size. One serious but potentially addressable issue centers on landscape taphonomy — the ways in which geologic processes structure the preservation and recovery of archaeological sites and/or materials at landscape scales. Here, we explore the influence of landscape taphonomy on demographic proxies. More specifically, we evaluate how well demographic proxies may be corrected for taphonomic effects with either a common generalized approach or an empirically based tailored approach. We demonstrate that frequency distributions of landforms of varying ages can be used to develop local corrections that are more accurate than either global corrections or uncorrected estimates. Using generalized scenarios and a simulated case study based on empirical data on landform ages from the Coso Basin in the western Great Basin region, we illustrate the way in which landscape taphonomy predictably complicates “dates-as-data” approaches, propose and demonstrate a new method of empirically based correction, and explore the interpretive ramifications of ignoring or correcting for taphonomic bias.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field, presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline. The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology. Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology, new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing. The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues. Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
