The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Neolithic Farming in Central Europe
Abstract
Neolithic Farming in Central Europe examines the nature of the earliest crop cultivation, a subject that illuminates the lives of Neolithic farming families and the day-to-day reality of the transition from hunting and gathering to farming. Debate surrounding the nature of crop husbandry in Neolithic central Europe has focussed on the permanence of cultivation, its intensity and its seasonality: variables that carry different implications for Neolithic society. Amy Bogaard reviews the archaeological evidence for four major competing models of Neolithic crop husbandry - shifting cultivation, extensive plough cultivation, floodplain cultivation and intensive garden cultivation - and evaluates charred crop and weed assemblages. Her conclusions identify the most appropriate model of cultivation, and highlight the consequences of these agricultural practices for our understanding of Neolithic societies in central Europe.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“4. The model can be considered independent from general theory (in the sense of Bogaard 2004) because it is independent from our assumptions about Native American subsistence practices on the Georgia Coast and their knowledge of the landscape.”
From Integrating Archaeological Theory and Predictive Modeling: a Live Report from the Scene (2012) · cites this paper as Bogaard 2004
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bogaard, A., Heaton, T. H. E., Poulton, P., & Merbach, I. (2007) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2006.04.009 · Cited by 696
Self-citation‘Garden agriculture’ and the nature of early farming in Europe and the Near East
Bogaard, A. (2005) · World Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00438240500094572 · Cited by 226
Self-citationIntegrating Archaeological Theory and Predictive Modeling: a Live Report from the Scene
Verhagen, P., & Whitley, T. G. (2012) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-011-9102-7 · Cited by 190
Oelze, V. M., Siebert, A., Nicklisch, N., Meller, H., Dresely, V., & Alt, K. W. (2011) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.08.027 · Cited by 115
Non-human genetics, agricultural origins and historical linguistics in South Asia
Fuller, D. Q. (2007) · Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology Series · doi:10.1007/1-4020-5562-5_18 · Cited by 87
Metadata
- Authors
- Bogaard, A.
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2004-09-16
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review