The Population of Late Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Britain
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11003396 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher Smith (0000-0002-6049-5514, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1992 |
| Volume | 58 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 37-40 |
| Publication date | 1992-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0079-497X • E-ISSN: 2050-2729 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0079497x00004084 |
| OpenAlex | W1975103976 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 1 |
In the absence of direct evidence, archaeologists interested in the demography of stone age hunter-gatherer societies are forced to turn their attention to sites as the unit of analysis. The distribution of sites and their varying density across space and through time have been considered to be acceptable, proxy, population records (see for example Constandse-Westermann & Newell 1984,158–64). This note is a contribution to these studies, but one which is not based on the site as a unit of analysis. Smith & Openshaw (1989) have argued that the conventional archaeological site is a poor unit of analysis in considering regional settlement patterns. It is poorly defined and the recorded distribution of sites is potentially subject to too much distortion by post-depositional factors such as geomorphological processes and landuse practices, and biases inherent in archaeological method
Archaeological record · Archaeology · Distribution (mathematics · Geography · Hunter-gatherer · Land use · Mesolithic · Population · Proxy (statistics · Settlement (finance · Sociology · Statistics · Unit (ring theory · Archaeology and ancient environmental studies · Demography · Ecology · Geology and Paleoclimatology Research · Mathematics · Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
| Citations per year | 0.07 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1998 - 2010 (13) |
| Highly cited | No |