Talk:Prehistoric demography

Archaeology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Molecular Biology: Genetics

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Hominid population estimates edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

This section looks very rough and contains obvious errors. E.g. if the life expectancy was 20 it doesn't follow that there were 5 generations per century! (Which would only be the case if the average age at which women gave birth was 20.) 93.96.236.8 (talk) 21:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

The reasoning is sound, it's just a vocabulary error. Instead "5 generations per century", replace by "the population is completely renewed 5 times per century", which is actually what the computation is based on, and voila. Alestane (talk) 06:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

The text may be just great, but the formula should be n^x where n is 2 or more (number of people who survive to give birth per family per generation on average) and x is the number of "renewals/generations". Total. Right? Student7 (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

What about all the hominids who died in infancy? Infant mortality was very high until the late 20th century. Where's the cutoff? Do hominids who died a few days after their birth count in this calculation? Obviously, hominids who don't survive their childhood can't reproduce, which needs to be accounted for in these calculations. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 12:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

That should be accounted for in the "people who survive to give birth." BTW, disease wasn't spread as easily before the founding of cities. Hunger was most likely a leading cause of death before 10,000 years ago. Student7 (talk) 12:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Can't this refer to any demography of any nonliterate culture? edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As it is we have articles here and in classical demography leaving a long gap in the neolithic, bronze age, and early iron age before the relatively restricted classical demography. We probably need something to cover the gap, the neolithic revolution, the urban revolution, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.211.53 (talk) 02:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merge of Paleodemography with Prehistoric demography edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

There appears to be a slight difference in meaning between 'prehistoric demography' or 'archaeological demography' and 'paleodemography',^[1] but not enough to justify two separate articles. Essentially they both refer to the study of demography in prehistory. – Joe (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Since there are no objections, I will go ahead and do the merge. – Joe (talk) 08:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

References

^ "In many respects archaeological demography can be considered synonymous with paleodemography, although perhaps with a subtle emphasis on the cultural (as opposed to biological) implications of modeling past human populations."[1]

Add topic

[1] "In many respects archaeological demography can be considered synonymous with paleodemography, although perhaps with a subtle emphasis on the cultural (as opposed to biological) implications of modeling past human populations."[1]

[1]