Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:15:18.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulation Models and the Interpretation of Archaeological Diversity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Peter H. McCartney  and
Margaret F. Glass
Peter H. McCartney
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899
Margaret F. Glass
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Simulation of the effects of sample size on diversity was proposed by Kintigh (1984) as a method for investigating assemblage variability. We suggest several modifications to Kintigh's method that recognize (1) the distinction between the diversity and typological composition of an assemblage and (2) differences in the nature of sample size effects on various measures of diversity. These revisions enabled us to identify significant chronological trends in animal resource diversity during the Neolithic of central Europe.

Résumé

Résumé

La simulación de los efectos de la magnitud de la muestra sobre la diversidad fue propuesta por Kintigh (1984) como un método para investigar la variabilidad de conjuntos artefactuales. Sugerimos diversas modifkaciones para el método de Kintigh que consideran (1) la distinción entre la diversidad y la composición tipológica de un conjunto y (2) las diferencias en los tipos de los efectos de la magnitud de la muestra sobre varias mediciones de la diversidad. Con estas revisiones podemos identificar destacadas tendencias cronológicas en la diversidad de los recursos animates durante el período Neolitico de Europa central.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , July 1990 , pp. 521 - 536
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1990 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Blome, W. 1968 Tierknochenfunde aus der spatneolithischen Station Polling. Institut fur Paleoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universitat Miinchen, Munich.Google Scholar
Bobrowsky, P. T., and Ball, B. F. 1989 The Theory and Mechanics of Ecological Diversity in Archaeology. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 4-12. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Boessneck, J. 1956 Tierknochen aus spatneolithischen Siedlungen Bayerns. Studien an vor-und fruhgeschichtlichen Tierreste Bayerns I. Tieranatomisches Institut der Universitat Miinchen, Munich.Google Scholar
Boessneck, J., Jequier, J-P., and Stampfli, H. R. 1963 Seeberg Burgaschisee-Siid, Teil 3: Die Tierreste. Acta Bernensia II. Verlag Stampfli und Cie, Bern.Google Scholar
Bogucki, P. I. 1982 Early Neolithic Subsistence and Settlement in the Polish Lowlands. BAR International Series 150. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.Google Scholar
Busch, A. 1985 Tierknochenfunde aus einer endneolithischen Siedlung bei Riekofen/Ldkr. Regensburg. Institut fur Palaeoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universitat Miinchen, Munich.Google Scholar
Busch, A. 1987 Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations and Assemblage Structure. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6: 336-375.Google Scholar
Christenson, A. L. 1980 Change in the Human Food Niche in Response to Population Growth. In Modeling Change in Prehistoric Subsistence Economies, edited by Earle, T. K. and Christenson, A. L., pp. 31-72. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Clark, G., and Yi, S. 1983 Niche-Width Variation in Cantabrian Archaeofaunas: A Diachronic Study. In Animals and Archaeology 1: Hunters and Their Prey, edited by J. Clutton-Brock and Grigson, C., pp. 183-208. BAR International Series 163. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.Google Scholar
Clason, A. T. 1970 The Animal Bones of the Bandceramik and Middle Age Settlements Near Bylany in Bohemia. Palaeohistoria 14: 1-18.Google Scholar
Clason, A. T. 1977 Die Tierknochen. In Die neolithische Besiedlung bei Hienheim, Ldkr. Kelheim, by Modderman, P. J. R., pp. 101-120. Bayerische Landesamt fur Denkmalpflege, Munich.Google Scholar
Conkey, M. W. 1980 The Identification of Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Aggregation Sites: The Case of Altamira. Current Anthropology 21: 609-630.Google Scholar
DeBoer, W. R., and Moore, J. A. 1983 The Measurement and Meaning of Stylistic Diversity. Nawpa Pacha 20: 147-162.Google Scholar
Driehaus, J. 1960 Die Altheimer Gruppe und das Jungneolithikum in Mitteleuropa. Romisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Mainz.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1989 Diversity in Archaeology: A Group of Measures in Search of Application? In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 142-149. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Eibl, F. 1974 Die Tierknochenfunde aus der neolithischen Station Feldmeilen-Vorderfeld am Zurichsee. I. Die Nicht wiederkduer. Institute ffir Palaoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universitat Miinchen, Munich.Google Scholar
Forster, W. 1974 Die Tierknochenfunde aus der neolithischen Station Feldmeilen-Vorderfeld am Ziirichsee: II. Die Wiederkauer. Institut fur Palaeoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universitat Miinchen, Munich.Google Scholar
Glass, M. F. 1988 Faunal Variability in Late Neolithic Southern Germany. Archaeozoologia 7: 307-318.Google Scholar
Glass, M. F. 1989 Animal Production Systems in Neolithic Central Europe. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation; Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary, Calgary.Google Scholar
Grayson, D. K. 1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Hardesty, D. 1975 The Niche Concept: Suggestions for its Use in Human Ecology. Human Ecology 3: 71-85.Google Scholar
Helmer, J. W. 1986 The 1985-1987 Devon Island Archaeology Project: A Progress Report to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council on the 1985 Season. Ms. on file, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
Helmer, J. W. 1987 Report on the 1986 Devon Island Archaeology Project. Ms. on file, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
Isaac, G. L. 1977 Olorgesailie: Archaeological Studies of a Middle Pleistocene Lake Basin in Kenya. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Jones, G. T., Grayson, D. K., and Beck, C. 1983 Artifact Class Richness and Sample Size in Archaeological Surface Assemblages. In Lulu Linear Punctated: Essays in Honor of George Irving Quimby, edited by Dunnell, R. C. and Grayson, D. K., pp. 55-73. Anthropological Papers No. 72. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Kintigh, K. W. 1984 Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with Simulated Assemblages. American Antiquity 49: 44-54.Google Scholar
Kintigh, K. W. 1989 Sample Size, Significance, and Measures of Diversity. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 25-36. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Leonard, R. D., and Jones, G. T. (editors) 1989 Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Long, A., and Rippeteau, B. 1974 Testing Contemporaneity and Averaging Radiocarbon Dates. American Antiquity 39: 205-215.Google Scholar
McCartney, P. H. 1989 Paleoeskimo Subsistence and Settlement in the High Arctic. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology, University of Calgary, Calgary.Google Scholar
Miiller, H. H. 1964 Die Haustiere der mitteldeutschen Bandkeramiker. Naturwissenschaftliche Beitrag zu Vor-und Friihgeschichte 1. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin.Google Scholar
Odum, E. P. 1971 Fundamentals of Ecology. 3rd ed. Saunders, Toronto.Google Scholar
Peet, R. K. 1974 The Measurement of Species Diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5: 285-307.Google Scholar
Pielou, E. C. 1975 Ecological Diversity. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Reichstein, H. 1977 Bemerkungen zu einigen Tierknochen aus fruhneolithischen Siedlungsgruben von Rosdorf, Kr. Gottingen. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Vrgeschichte 46: 1-26.Google Scholar
Rhode, D. 1988 Measurement of Archaeological Diversity and the Sample-Size Effect. American Antiquity 53: 708-716.Google Scholar
Rindos, D. 1989 Diversity, Variation, and Selection. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 13-23. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rothschild, N. A. 1989 The Effect of Urbanization on Faunal Diversity: A Comparison Between New York City and St. Augustine, Florida, in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 92-99. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L. 1968 Marine Benthic Diversity: A Comparative Study. American Naturalist 48: 675-706.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B. 1989 Formation Processes of Broken K Pueblo: Some Hypotheses. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 37-58. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sherratt, A. G. 1981 Plough and Pastoralism: Aspects of the Secondary Products Revolution. In Pattern of the Past: Studies in Honour of David Clarke, edited by Hodder, I., Isaac, G, and Hammond, N., pp. 261-305. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Simek, J. F. 1989 Structure and Diversity in Intrasite Spatial Analysis. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G. T., pp. 59-68. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Simek, J. F., and Snyder, L. M. 1988 Changing Assemblage Diversity in Perigord Archaeofaunas. In Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, edited by Dibble, H. L. and Montet-White, A., pp. 321-332. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Stampfli, H. R. 1965 Tierreste der Grabung Muddersheim, Kr. Diiren. In Miiddersheim: Eine Ansiedlung der jungeren Bandkeramik im Rheinland, by Schietzal, K., pp. 115-126. Bohlau Verlag, Koln.Google Scholar
Stampfli, H. R. 1980 Tierknochenfunde. In Die Siedlungsreste der Horgener Kultur, edited by Furger, A. R., pp. 141-177. Die neolithischen Ufersiedlungen von Twann 7. Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag, Bern.Google Scholar
Styles, B. W. 1981 Faunal Exploitation and Resource Selection: Early Late Woodland Subsistence in the Lower Illinois Valley. Northwestern University Archaeological Program, Evanston, Illinois.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. H. 1983 The Archaeology of Monitor Valley I: Epistemology. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 58(1), New York.Google Scholar
Tipper, J. C. 1979 Rarefaction and Rarefiction. Paleobiology 5: 423-434.Google Scholar