Abstract
The decision theoretical components of two, structurally very different models on the origins of agriculture - Flannery's systemic, decision theoretical model and Cohen's monocausal, demographic model - are analyzed. Beyond that, it is examined to what extent their theoretical assumptions meet the existing archaeological data. It can be demonstrated that Flannery's approach allows a much more differentiated modelling of the process of integration and development of agriculture as it is discernible from the archaeological data than Cohen's approach.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
