Population dynamics and land-use patterns in the southwestern Baltic region during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age (Paperback)

This work aims to study population dynamics and land-use patterns in the South-Western Baltic region during the Neolithic and Bronze Age (4100 to 500 BCE). Understanding demography is essential for comprehending socio-cultural transformations, as demographic patterns have long been recognised as major drivers of social change and complex dynamics. Palaeodemography has gained momentum in archaeology and become a central aspect of the discipline thanks to recent methodological and computational advances. Despite that, the discipline faces several challenges due to the patchiness of archaeological data.

In order to overcome this issue, this study uses a multi-proxy and formal approach aiming to reduce chronological uncertainty and improve spatial resolution, thereby enhancing understanding of regional variations. This study produced two different estimates: labour-based carrying capacity and absolute demographic reconstructions. In none of the study regions the carrying capacity was reached, challenging the hypothesis of a correlation between population dynamics and reaching the full capacity of a region. The study also identified patterns of growth and decline in absolute demographic estimates. These patterns align with the boom and bust phases identified in the literature for many European regions.

However, each sub-area exhibited distinct patterns in terms of absolute change and the timing of peaks, which cannot be observed at regional or supra-regional scales. Despite these differences, global population trends across sub-regions were identifiable, with a general demographic increase during the Early Neolithic, peaking in the Middle Neolithic, followed by a period of lower population densities during the Younger Neolithic. The patterns for the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age varied depending on the region. Comparisons with other studies show that while global trends were identified, some are either smoothed out in large-scale studies or incorrectly identified and points towards the necessity of a more localised, yet formal and fully reproducible, approach to palaeodemography.