Distinguishing Between the Conditional Effects of Material Wealth Inequality and “Projected” Household Size on the House Floor Area Distribution in Early Agriculturalists: A Probabilistic Model
Alexander Iksanov, Aleksandr Diachenko, Oleh Iksanov
{"title":"Distinguishing Between the Conditional Effects of Material Wealth Inequality and “Projected” Household Size on the House Floor Area Distribution in Early Agriculturalists: A Probabilistic Model","authors":"Alexander Iksanov, Aleksandr Diachenko, Oleh Iksanov","doi":"10.1007/s10816-026-09781-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"House size in early agricultural societies is assumed to be mutually conditioned by the “projected” maximal size of a household and its material wealth. This paper presents a probabilistic model distinguishing the impact of these factors on Gini-index inequality estimates derived from the distribution of house floor areas in early agriculturalist groups characterized by a periodic relocation to a new place(s), available construction space within a settlement, and individual houses inhabited by nuclear families. Accordingly, the model is a step towards a large-scale comparative framework with reliable indices of material wealth inequality. In addition, we analyze the impact of population size and settlement span on the variation in house floor areas during three phases of a settlement’s life: formative, developmental, and terminal. The results reveal that during the formative phase of settlement, population <italic>structure</italic> rather than the population <italic>size</italic> of the initial settlers is the primary driver of the “projected household size” component of Gini estimates for the analyzed subset of early agriculturalists. Population structure also impacts these estimates in combination with site span in the developmental and terminal phases. The application of the model to a dataset from the Cucuteni-Trypillia mega-site Nebelivka in present-day Ukraine approximates the overwhelming impact of the “projected household size” component on Nebelivka’s time-averaged Gini index.","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","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/s10816-026-09781-5","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
House size in early agricultural societies is assumed to be mutually conditioned by the “projected” maximal size of a household and its material wealth. This paper presents a probabilistic model distinguishing the impact of these factors on Gini-index inequality estimates derived from the distribution of house floor areas in early agriculturalist groups characterized by a periodic relocation to a new place(s), available construction space within a settlement, and individual houses inhabited by nuclear families. Accordingly, the model is a step towards a large-scale comparative framework with reliable indices of material wealth inequality. In addition, we analyze the impact of population size and settlement span on the variation in house floor areas during three phases of a settlement’s life: formative, developmental, and terminal. The results reveal that during the formative phase of settlement, population structure rather than the population size of the initial settlers is the primary driver of the “projected household size” component of Gini estimates for the analyzed subset of early agriculturalists. Population structure also impacts these estimates in combination with site span in the developmental and terminal phases. The application of the model to a dataset from the Cucuteni-Trypillia mega-site Nebelivka in present-day Ukraine approximates the overwhelming impact of the “projected household size” component on Nebelivka’s time-averaged Gini index.
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