The Influence of Fear on Population Dynamics in Prehistoric Europe
The Influence of Fear on Population Dynamics in Prehistoric Europe
How Fear of Conflict May Have Shaped the Development of Early European Societies
The population growth of prehistoric Europe, particularly after the last Ice Age, was characterized by periods of rapid expansion followed by significant declines. The reasons behind these fluctuations have long puzzled researchers. A recent study1 by the Complexity Science Hub (CSH) adds new insights into the role that fear of conflict may have played in shaping these population dynamics, suggesting that fear itself may have been as influential as actual conflicts.
The Role of Fear in Shaping Population Patterns
Since the end of the Ice Age, human populations have experienced cycles of growth and decline, with the underlying causes remaining only partially understood. Traditionally, researchers have focused on environmental factors or direct social conflicts as the primary drivers of these changes. However, a study published in the Journal of the Royal Society Interface proposes that fear of conflict, by influencing settlement patterns, may have had a profound impact on how populations developed across Europe.
The Impact of Conflict on Population Dynamics
Wars and conflicts have long been known to cause direct casualties, but their indirect effects—particularly the atmosphere of distress and fear they generate—can be equally impactful. Daniel Kondor of CSH explains,
“Globally, scientists have extensively studied and debated the presence and role of conflicts in prehistory.”
The indirect consequences of fear, such as people abandoning their homes or avoiding certain regions, could have led to significant, long-term population shifts in prehistoric societies, particularly in Neolithic Europe (circa 7,000 BC to 3,000 BC).
The study suggests that fear of conflict led to population declines in areas perceived as dangerous. This, in turn, caused people to cluster in safer locations, such as hilltops, which eventually became overpopulated. Kondor notes,
“Our model shows that fear of conflict led to population declines in potentially dangerous areas. As a result, people concentrated in safer locations, such as hilltops, where overpopulation could lead to higher mortality and lower fertility.”
Archaeological Evidence and Simulation Models
The study’s findings align with empirical archaeological evidence from various Neolithic sites across Europe. Detlef Gronenborn of the Leibniz Centre for Archaeology (LEIZA) in Mainz, Germany, notes that the results from simulation studies closely match archaeological data, such as at the Late Neolithic site of Kapellenberg near Frankfurt, dating to around 3700 BCE. Gronenborn explains,
“We have many instances of a temporal abandonment of open agricultural land, associated with a retreat of groups to well-defended locations and considerable investments in large-scale defense systems like ramparts, palisades, and ditches.”
The Emergence of Social Hierarchies and Political Structures
This concentration of populations in fortified locations may have had broader social implications, including the development of wealth disparities and early political structures. Peter Turchin of CSH suggests that the indirect effects of conflict, driven by fear, could have played a significant role in the emergence of larger political units and early states. Turchin adds,
“This concentration of people in specific, often well-defended locations could have led to increasing wealth disparities and political structures that justified these differences.”
Complexity Science and Archaeology: A New Approach
To investigate these population dynamics, the researchers developed a computational model that simulated population growth and decline in Neolithic Europe. This model was tested against a database of archaeological sites, with radiocarbon age measurements used as proxies for human activity and population size. Kondor explains,
“This allows us to examine the typical amplitudes and timescales of population growth and decline across Europe.”
The interdisciplinary approach of combining complexity science with archaeological evidence has proven fruitful in this study. By integrating mathematical models with historical data, researchers can better understand the rise and fall of complex societies. Turchin explains,
“Using complexity science methods, we develop mathematical models to analyze the rise and fall of complex societies and identify common factors.”
This approach, which includes direct collaboration with archaeologists, exemplifies the potential of interdisciplinary research in uncovering the complexities of human history.
Conclusion
The study sheds new light on the role of fear in shaping the population dynamics of prehistoric Europe. By influencing settlement patterns and social structures, fear of conflict may have been a significant factor in the development of early European societies. As researchers continue to explore these dynamics, the interdisciplinary collaboration between complexity science and archaeology will be crucial in deepening our understanding of human evolution and the factors that shaped our ancestors’ lives.
Kondor, Dániel, Bennett, James S., Gronenborn, Detlef and Turchin, Peter. 2024. Landscape of fear: indirect effects of conflict can account for large-scale population declines in non-state societiesJ. R. Soc. Interface. 21 20240210 http://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2024.0210