Abstract
Demographic change is increasingly cited as an explanation for many of the patterns seen in the Palaeolithic archaeological record, following the assumption of a relationship between population size and material culture espoused by dual inheritance theory. However, the empirical testing of this relationship relies on the ability to extract information about past population patterns from the archaeological record. Using the extensive and well-studied record of the Upper Palaeolithic (∼39,500–11,500calBP) hunter–gatherers of Southwestern France as a case-study, this paper compares the evidence for changes in relative population size as seen in three popular archaeological proxies for demographic change (site counts, site sizes, and occupation intensity estimates). These proxies present conflicting results across the sequence; a finding which is explored through the impact of taphonomic biases and past research agendas. Numbers of sheltered sites and quantities of retouched stone tools are suggested to be the most reliable demographic proxies. The problem of equifinality of interpretation in archaeological proxies for demography is examined for the Aurignacian and Gravettian periods in the region, with changes in lithic raw material, faunal acquisition strategies, and hunter–gatherer mobility all potentially contributing to the patterns documented.
Highlights
Archaeological theories about the role of demography in social and cultural change have developed a new lease of life recently through their investigation within human behavioural ecological and evolutionary frameworks
Drawing on life history theory, several scholars have advocated studying the long-term population trends documented in the archaeological record from the perspective of the decisions of individuals, designed to maximise their reproductive success (Boone, 2002; Hammel and Howell, 1987; Hill, 1993; Read and LeBlanc, 2003; Shennan, 2002, 2009). Concomitant with this interest in the role of the individual in demographic change is the study of material culture within a framework of dual inheritance theory (Boyd and Richerson, 1985; Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman, 1981), which maintains that in addition to a biological inheritance system, humans possess a cultural inheritance system which is subject to similar evolutionary processes
While similarities are seen in places, the distributions of open-air and sheltered sites differ throughout the Upper Palaeolithic, even when open-air sites are corrected for taphonomic bias
Summary
Archaeological theories about the role of demography in social and cultural change have developed a new lease of life recently through their investigation within human behavioural ecological and evolutionary frameworks. Drawing on life history theory, several scholars have advocated studying the long-term population trends documented in the archaeological record from the perspective of the decisions of individuals, designed to maximise their reproductive success (Boone, 2002; Hammel and Howell, 1987; Hill, 1993; Read and LeBlanc, 2003; Shennan, 2002, 2009) Concomitant with this interest in the role of the individual in demographic change is the study of material culture within a framework of dual inheritance theory (Boyd and Richerson, 1985; Cavalli-Sforza and Feldman, 1981), which maintains that in addition to a biological inheritance system, humans possess a cultural inheritance system which is subject to similar evolutionary processes. The area spans approximately 1.5 degrees in latitude, from 44°300N in Lot-et-Garonne, to 45°700N in Charente-Maritime, and covers 50,000 km, the area available for occupation was undoubtedly larger in the late Pleistocene and has since been reduced due to rises in global sea-levels and altering coastlines (Lambeck et al, 2002)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
