The Evolution of Social Behavior George J.

Gumerman
in the Prehistoric American Santa Fe Institute
1399 Hyde Park Road
Southwest Santa Fe, NM 87501
Alan C. Swedlund
Department of Anthropology
University of Massachusetts–
Amherst
Jeffrey S. Dean
Laboratory of Tree-Ring
Abstract Long House Valley, located in the Black Mesa area
of northeastern Arizona (USA), was inhabited by the Kayenta Research
Anasazi from circa 1800 B.C. to circa A.D. 1300. These people The University of Arizona
were prehistoric precursors of the modern Pueblo cultures of Joshua M. Epstein
the Colorado Plateau. A rich paleoenvironmental record,
Center on Social and
based on alluvial geomorphology, palynology, and
dendroclimatology, permits the accurate quantitative Economic Dynamics
reconstruction of annual uctuations in potential agricultural The Brookings Institution
production (kg maize/hectare). The archaeological record of and
Anasazi farming groups from A.D. 200 to 1300 provides Santa Fe Institute
information on a millennium of sociocultural stasis,
variability, change, and adaptation. We report on a
multi-agent computational model of this society that closely
reproduces the main features of its actual history, including
population ebb and ow, changing spatial settlement Keywords
Agent-based modeling, Anasazi,
patterns, and eventual rapid decline. The agents in the model
prehistory, American Southwest,
are monoagriculturalists, who decide both where to situate environmental reconstruction,
their Želds and where to locate their settlements. cultural evolution

1 Introduction

A central question that anthropologists have asked for generations concerns how cul-
tures evolve or transform themselves from simple to more complex forms. Traditional
study of human social change and cultural evolution has resulted in many useful gener-
alizations concerning the trajectory of change through prehistory and classiŽcations of
types of organization. It is increasingly clear, however, that four fundamental problems
have hindered the development of a powerful, uniŽed theory for understanding change
in human social norms and behaviors over long periods of time.
The Žrst of these problems is the use of whole societies as the unit of analysis. Group-
level effects, however, must themselves be explained. Sustained cooperative behavior
with people beyond close kin is achieved in most human societies, and increasingly
hierarchical political structures do emerge through time in many cases. Successful
explanation and the possibility of developing fundamental theory for understanding
these processes depend on understanding behavior at the level of the individual or
the family [8]. Among the advantages of such base-level approaches is that they allow
speciŽc modeling of peoples’ behavioral ranges and norms and their adaptive strategies
as community size and structure change.
Second, in addition to subsuming the behavior of individuals within that of larger
social units, traditional analyses integrate environmental variability over space. Current

°
c 2003 Massachusetts Institute of Technology ArtiŽcial Life 9: 435–444 (2003)
G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

research indicates that stable strategies for interpersonal interactions in a heterogeneous,

spatially extended population may be very different from those in a homogeneous
population in which space is ignored [11]. Most social interactions and relationships in
human societies before the recent advent of rapid transportation and communication
were local in nature.
Third, cultures have been considered to be homogeneous, tending toward maximiza-
tion of Žtness for their members. Little consideration was given to historical processes
in shaping evolutionary trajectories or to nonadaptive aspects of cultural practice.
Finally, most discussions of cultural evolution have failed to take into account the
mechanisms of cultural inheritance and the effects of changes in modes of transmission
through time [2, 3]. Understanding culture as an inheritance system is fundamental to
understanding culture change through time.
The ArtiŽcial Anasazi project is at the juncture of theory building and experimenta-
tion. We use agent-based modeling to test the Žt between actual archaeological and
environmental data collected over many years and simulations using various rules about
how households interact with one another and with their natural environment. By sys-
tematically altering demographic, social, and environmental conditions, as well as the
rules of interaction, we expect that a clearer picture will emerge as to why the Anasazi
followed the evolutionary trajectory we recognize from archaeological investigation.
Our long range goal is to develop agent-based simulations to understand the interac-
tion of environment and human behavior and their role in the evolution of culture.

2 The Study Area

The test area for exploring the use of agent-based modeling for understanding social
evolution is the prehistoric American Southwest from about A.D. 200 to 1450 using a
culture archaeologists refer to as the Anasazi and a locality called Long House Valley.
The Anasazi are the ancestors of the present day Pueblo peoples, such as the Hopi, the
Zuni, the Acoma, and the groups along the Rio Grande in New Mexico. A commonly
held view is that technological, social, and linguistic complexity coevolve. Anasazi cul-
tural development underscores the interdependence of these aspects of culture. The
Anasazi were a technologically simple agricultural society whose major food source
was maize supplemented by beans, squash, wild plants, and game. In the A.D. 200 to
1450 period the only major technological changes that are archaeologically veriŽable
are agricultural intensiŽcation (terracing and ditch irrigation) and the introduction of a
more efŽcient system for grinding maize. During this time, however, there is evidence
of greatly increased social complexity. Contemporary Pueblo people have complicated
social systems made up of sodalities (distinct social associations) including clans, moi-
eties (division of the village into two units), feast groups, religious societies and cults (68
different ceremonial groups have been recorded), war societies, healing groups, winter
and summer governments, and village governments. Details of the groups come from
historical documents and contemporary ethnographies. The economic, religious, and
social realms of Pueblo society are so tightly integrated it is difŽcult to understand them
as separate elements of the society.
Long House Valley, a 180 km2 landform in northeastern Arizona, provides a re-
alistic archaeological test of the agent-based modeling of settlement and economic
behavior among subsistence-level agricultural societies in marginal habitats. This area
is well suited for such a test for a number of reasons. First, it is a topographically
bounded, self-contained landscape that can be realistically reproduced on a computer.
Second, a rich paleoenvironmental record, based on alluvial geomorphology, palynol-
ogy, and dendroclimatology, permits the accurate quantitative reconstruction of annual

436 ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

uctuations in potential agricultural production in kilograms of maize per hectare [6].

Combined, these factors permit the computerized creation of a dynamic resource land-
scape that accurately replicates actual conditions in the valley from A.D. 200 to the
present. The agents of the simulation interact with one another and with their environ-
ment on this landscape. Third, tree-ring chronology provides annual calendric dating.
Fourth, intensive archaeological research, involving a 100% survey of the area supple-
mented by limited excavations, creates a database on human behavior during the last
2,000 years that constitutes the real-world target for the modeling [7]. Finally, histori-
cal and ethnographic reports of contemporary Pueblo groups provide anthropological
analogs for prehistoric human behavior.
Between roughly 7000 and 1800 B.C., the valley was sparsely occupied by people
who depended on hunting and gathering. The introduction of maize around 1800 B.C.
began the transition to a food-producing economy and the beginning of the Anasazi cul-
tural tradition, which persisted until the abandonment of the region around A.D. 1300.
Long House Valley provides archaeological data on economic, settlement, social, and
religious conditions among a localized Anasazi population. These archaeological data
provide evidence of stasis, variability, and change against which the agent-based sim-
ulation of human behavior on the dynamic, artiŽcial Long House Valley landscape can
be judged.
We have tested a large number of hypotheses about the Long House Valley Anasazi
[6, 1], but we focus on only two issues here: (1) the role of environment in explain-
ing the population dynamics of settlement placement, the large population increase
after A.D. 1000, and the complete abandonment of the region around A.D. 1300; and
(2) the size of simulated and actual settlements that were selected and abandoned under
various environmental, demographic, and social conditions in different years.

3 Methods

The ArtiŽcial Anasazi Project is an agent-based modeling study based on the Sugarscape
model created by Joshua M. Epstein and Robert Axtell [10]. The project was created to
provide an empirical, real-world evaluation of the principles and procedures embodied
in the Sugarscape model and to explore the ways in which bottom-up, agent-based
computer simulations can illuminate human behavior in a real world setting. The land-
scape (analogous to Sugarscape) is created from reconstructed environmental variables
and is populated by artiŽcial agents—in this case households, the basic social unit of
local Anasazi society. Agent demographic and marriage characteristics and nutritional
requirements are derived from ethnographic studies of historical Pueblo groups and
other subsistence agriculturists.
The simulations take place on this landscape of annual variations in potential maize
production values based on empirical reconstructions of low- and high-frequency paleo-
environmental variability in the study area. The production values represent as closely
as possible the actual production potential of various segments of the Long House
Valley environment over the period of study. In general, the reconstructed environment
for maize agriculture can be characterized as dramatically improving about A.D. 1000,
suffering a deterioration in the mid 1100s, and improving until the late 1200s, when
there is a major environmental disruption involving the Great Drought (1276–1299),
falling alluvial water table levels, severe oodplain erosion, and changes in the seasonal
patterning of precipitation [5]. On this landscape, the agents of the ArtiŽcial Anasazi
model play out their lives, adapting to changes in their physical and social environments.
The Žrst step was to enter relevant environmental data, and data on real site location
and size. Simulations using these landscapes vary in a number of ways. The initial

ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4 437

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

population of agents (households) can be scattered randomly or placed where they

actually existed at some initial year. The simulations reported here were begun with the
number of agents (households) actually present in the valley during the initial year with
the households distributed randomly across the artiŽcial landscape. The environmental
parameters may be left as they were originally reconstructed or adjusted to enhance or
reduce maize production. Finally, and most importantly, the rules by which the agents
operate may be changed. The simulation has 22 user-controlled variables that govern
both agent interactions and interaction with the annually changing environment.
Agent (household) behavior on the production landscape is governed by agent at-
tributes and a set of simple rules entrained sequentially. Standard demographic tables
for subsistence agriculturalists are used to determine nutritional requirements, marriage
ages and reproduction rates, and household Žssioning and longevity. A household
(agent) consists of Žve individuals, two parents and three children, each with nutri-
tional requirements that are represented in the model by 160 kg of maize per person
per year for a total requirement of 800 kg of maize per household per year. Because
ethnographic data indicate that modern Puebloans try to keep at least two years’ worth
of corn on hand, our agents attempt to have at least two years’ supply (1600 kg) in
storage after the harvest in September. An internal clock tracks the amount of maize
each household has in storage. This quantity is diminished each month by the amount
consumed by the household and is replenished once a year by the amount harvested
at the end of the growing season. The amount harvested equals the reconstructed po-
tential production of the household’s farmland minus a variable percentage that reects
fallowing, insect damage, and reservation of seed corn. Every April, each household
assesses the status of its food supply, adding what it expects to have in storage by
harvest time to the predicted yield of its farmplot for the coming growing season based
on the previous year’s production. If the expected stored amount plus the predicted
yield exceeds 1600 kg, the household decides to maintain its current Želds and stay
where it is. If the sum is less than 1600 kg, the household decides to move to a more
productive location where sufŽcient yield can be expected.
Movement rules for agents are triggered when a new household is created by the
marriage of a resident female or when a household determines in April that the amount
of stored maize plus the predicted maize production of its current farmplot cannot
sustain it for the coming year. Once a household decides to move to a more productive
location, it employs three sufŽciency criteria for selecting new farmland: (1) the plot
must be currently unfarmed; (2) the plot must be currently uninhabited; and (3) the
plot must have a minimum estimated potential maize production of 160 kg of maize
per household member. There are also three sufŽciency criteria for selecting residential
sites: (1) the site must be within 2 km of the farmplot; (2) the site must be unfarmed;
and (3) the site must be less productive than the selected farmplot. If more than one
site meets the sufŽciency criteria, the site selected is the one with closest access to
domestic water. The fact that potential residential locations need not be unoccupied
allows the development of multihousehold settlements.
How closely the simulations mimic the historical data provides the most obvious test
of model adequacy, or “generative sufŽciency” in the terminology of Epstein [9]. We
must ask: Do these exceedingly simple rules for household behavior, when subjected
to the parallel computation of other agents and reacting to a dynamic environment,
produce the complex behavior that actually did evolve, or are more complex rules
necessary? When it is free to vary, does the population trajectory follow the recon-
structed curve, and does the population aggregate into villages when we know the
population actually did? Does the simulated population crash at A.D. 1300, as we know
it did? Do the simulated settlement sizes and population densities closely associated
with hierarchy known for the area emerge through time?

438 ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

4 Results and Discussion

While potentially enormously informative, agent-based simulations remain theoretical

constructs unless their outcomes are independently evaluated against actual cases that
involve similar entities, landscapes, and behavior. The degree of Žt between the results
of a simulation and comparable real-world situations allows the explanatory power of
the sociocultural model encoded in the simulation’s structure to be objectively assessed.
Lack of Žt implies that the model is in some way inadequate. Such “failures” are likely
to be as informative as successes, because they illuminate deŽciencies of explanation
and indicate potentially fruitful new research approaches. Departures of real human
behavior from the expectations of a model identify potential causal variables not in-
cluded in the model or specify new evidence to be sought in the archaeological record
of human activities.
The most appropriate comparisons between the model and the real world begin at
A.D. 400 with the same number of randomly located simulated households as in that
year’s actual historical situation, as well as the environmental situation as it has been
reconstructed for each year. The simulation of household and Želd locations, as well as
the size of each community (the number of households at each site), runs on an annual
basis, operating under the movement rules on the changing resource landscape. A map
of annual simulated Želd locations and household residence locations and sizes runs
simultaneously with a map of the actual archaeological and environmental data so that
the real and simulated population dynamics and residence locations can be compared
(Figures 1, 2, 3). In addition, time series plots and histograms illustrate annual variation
in simulated and actual population numbers, aggregation of population, location and
size of residences by environmental zone, simulated amounts of maize stored and
harvested, and the number of households that Žssion, die out, or leave the valley.

² Real Long House Valley : Around 1150, largely in response to changes in productive
potential, the inhabitants began to aggregate in localities particularly suitable for
farming under the changing hydrologic and climatic conditions. This change in
population distribution initiated a trend toward increasing sociocultural complexity,
a development driven by problems resulting from increasing settlement size and
population density. Among these problems are coordinating the activities of larger
groups of people, task allocation, conict resolution, and the accumulation,
storage, control, and redistribution of critical resources such as food and domestic
water. An important outcome of this trend was the development of a settlement
hierarchy that, by A.D. 1250, involved four levels of organization: the individual
habitation site, the central pueblo, the site cluster of 5 to 20 habitation sites focused
on a central pueblo, and the valley as a whole. This settlement system is evident in
the concentration of sites in favorable localities with empty areas in between, the
structured spatial and conŽgurational relationships among sites within clusters, and
line-of-sight relationships between the clusters’ central pueblos.
² ArtiŽcial Long House Valley : The simulation exhibits the demographic markers of
the real situation. The greatest similarity is the development of site clusters in the
same localities as the actual ones (Figures 1, 2) and the replication of the location
and size of the site of Long House itself (Figure 2). In the ArtiŽcial Anasazi source
code, hierarchy of any kind is not explicitly modeled. However, in the historical
record there is an extremely high correlation between organizational hierarchy and
settlement clustering. Clustering does emerge from the model, and on this basis we
guardedly infer the presence of hierarchy. Rather than producing a site organi-
zational hierarchy in which the population is distributed across several kinds of

ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4 439

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

Figure 1. Simulated population distribution on the reconstructed environment (right) and the actual situation (left)
in A.D. 1170. Hatching on both sides is the simulated land under cultivation. Gray represents the depth of the
water table. Darker gray represents higher water table, lighter gray represents lower water table. White is
unfarmable. Dots, triangles, and squares represent settlements. Dots D 5 or fewer households. Triangles D 6 to
20. Squares D 21 or more. Settlements tend to be clustered in the same places, but simulated settlements are more
aggregated. The positions of the largest settlements in the simulated and actual situations are within 100 m of one
another—the square on the upper arm of the narrow canyon on the left. This is the actual site of Long House after
which the valley was named.

settlement unit, the simulation tends to pack people into a few large sites that
correspond to each real site cluster (Figure 2). Given the agent rules, this seems a
reasonable Žt, and population size and distribution similarities indicate that the
artiŽcial version of the complexity trajectory is in many ways equivalent to the
actual situation. As shown by the smaller sites and more scattered settlements in
the real valley at A.D. 1100 (Figure 1), settlement clustering and size growth begin
somewhat earlier in the model than in the actual valley. This difference likely is
due to lags in the response of the real Anasazi to signiŽcant environmental changes.

By A.D. 1170 (Figure 1), population concentrations have developed in the same
localities in both the real and simulated valleys. In both cases, a large unoccupied area
has appeared in the middle of the valley, and site density is much reduced along the
eastern margin of the valley oor. Also in both cases, the settlement distributions result
from combinations of three environmental factors: (1) the valley oor, which is subject
to alluvial deposition and erosion and is therefore a poor place to establish residences;
(2) arable land near which settlements can be located; and (3) domestic water resources

440 ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

Figure 2. Simulated population distribution on the reconstructed environment (right) and the actual situation (left)
in A.D . 1270. Symbols are the same as in Figure 1. In both cases the population has begun to move out of the
southern part of the valley because of erosion and a drop in the water table.

that were concentrated along the northwestern margin of the valley oor between
A.D. 1130 and 1180 and after A.D. 1250. Large sites in the simulation are equivalent to
groups of small sites in the real world. Early in the process, neither system exhibits
a hierarchical settlement structure. By A.D. 1270 (Figure 2), the actual Long House
Valley was the locus of the fully developed settlement organizational hierarchy. This
development is evident in the spatial association of sites of different size (see legend)
on the left image. The simulation (right image) shows less site size differentiation than
the real valley, with most of the population packed into large sites. Nevertheless, some
differentiation is evident along the northwestern margin of the valley. In addition, the
simulation accurately captures the concentration of sites in the northern part of the
valley, the clustering of sites, and the location and size of the largest actual site in the
valley, Long House.
Comparing the simulated (Figure 4) and real time trajectories of site sizes gener-
ates some provocative inferences. The number of simulated sites with more than 39
households peaks around A.D. 1100, remains high for nearly two centuries, and drops
precipitously at the end of the 13th century, with the largest sites disappearing shortly
after A.D. 1300. In contrast, simulated sites with fewer than 40 households maintain a
fairly stable proŽle and increase in number after the late 13th-century population crash
and demise of the large settlements. While the rapid decline of the large sites mirrors
the Anasazi abandonment of the real valley around A.D. 1300, the persistence of small
to medium sites in the simulation contrasts sharply with the abandonment of all real
sites at that time.

ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4 441

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

Figure 3. Simulated population distribution on the reconstructed environment (right) the actual situation (left) in
A.D. 1305. Symbols are the same as in Fig. 1. The actual population has abandoned the valley, but there are still
settlements in the simulated version.

The different responses by the simulated and real Anasazi to the environmental crisis
of the late 13th century have important explanatory implications. It has long been clear
[4] that even the seriously degraded post-A.D. 1275 environment of the valley could
have supported a certain number of people and that the deleterious environmental
conditions would not have forced all the Anasazi to depart. A smaller population could
have sustained itself by abandoning large settlements and dispersing into smaller com-
munities situated near the few locations that remained agriculturally productive. The
ArtiŽcial Anasazi do precisely that, the reduced population shifting from large, aggre-
gated communities into smaller settlements (Figure 4) scattered across the northern
part of the valley where isolated pockets of farmable land still exist (Figure 3). That
the real Anasazi employed a different option indicates that environmental degradation
was not responsible for the complete abandonment of the valley and that other, un-
doubtedly social, factors were involved in the Žnal emigration. That these social factors
included the unwillingness or inability to forsake the relatively high level of social com-
plexity embedded in the hierarchical settlement system of the late 13th century for a
simpler, disaggregated social system is supported by the ready dispersion of the ArtiŽ-
cial Anasazi, who, driven primarily by environmental constraints, lacked such cultural
inhibitions.
All the evidence indicates that by A.D. 1305, the real Anasazi (Figure 3, left) had
abandoned the valley. The ArtiŽcial Anasazi (Figure 3, right), however, survived by
spreading out across the part of the valley that remained productive even under the

442 ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

Figure 4. Changes in simulated settlement size. Large settlements (¸ 80 households) develop rapidly after A.D. 1050,
 uctuate in size for 200 years, and disappear abruptly after A.D. 1300. In sharp contrast, the number of smaller sites
(4 to 9 households) tends to increase gradually until after A .D. 1300, when it increases more rapidly.

worsened environmental circumstances of the post-1300 period. This difference ac-

curately reects the fact that the real Anasazi could have stayed on by farming the
northern valley oor and dispersing into medium-size communities [4]. The environ-
mentally unnecessary total abandonment of the real valley undoubtedly reects the
pull of social factors drawing people to the distant communities established by previ-
ous emigrants from Long House Valley. Elements of this social attraction would have
included maintaining a large enough pool of potential marriage partners, fulŽlling cer-
emonial and social obligations to their former neighbors, and retaining achieved levels
of sociocultural complexity.

5 Conclusion

In summary, agent-based models are laboratories where competing hypotheses and

explanations about Anasazi behavior can be tested and judged in a disciplined, empir-
ical way. The simple agents posited here explain important aspects of Anasazi history
while leaving other important aspects unaccounted for. Site distribution and density
are well approximated by the agent-based simulations. Countless simulations have
been run, and the results we report here are quite robust. The hierarchical structure
identiŽed in the archaeological context can be more closely approximated with some
logical modiŽcations to the settlement rules in the simulations. The explicit modeling
of hierarchical social structures is a planned topic of future model development. The
departure between real Anasazi and ArtiŽcial Anasazi in the Žnal period of settlement

ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4 443

G. J. Gumerman, A. C. Swedlund, J. S. Dean, and J. M. Epstein Prehistoric American Southwest

is a fascinating challenge. The pattern of abandonment is observed in many regions of

the prehistoric Anasazi at approximately this same time.
With agent-based modeling, we can systematically alter the quantitative parameters
or make qualitative changes that introduce completely new, and even unlikely, elements
into the artiŽcial world of the simulation. In terms of the ArtiŽcial Anasazi model, we
can experiment with agent attributes, such as fecundity or food consumption, and we
can introduce new elements, such as mobile raiders, environmental catastrophes, or
epidemics. Actual environmental constraints might have been the trigger to induce
many of the Anasazi to abandon the region; however, social or ideological factors were
responsible for the complete abandonment of the valley. Demographic and epidemi-
ological models may be utilized to derive additional parameters for the agent-based
modeling. We have also considered synergies among variables in the real context that
we have not yet experimented with in the modeling efforts. In this analysis, using
this bottom-up approach to modeling prehistoric settlement behaviors, we have greatly
improved our understanding of the underlying processes involved in the population
dynamics.

References
1. Axtell, R. L., Epstein, J. M., Dean, J. S., Gumerman, G. J., Swedlund, A. C., and Harburger,
J., Chakravarty, S., Hammond, R., Parker, J., & Parker, M. (2002). Population growth and
collapse in a multiagent model of the Kayenta Anasazi in Long House Valley. In
B. J. L. Berry, L. D. Kiel, & E. Elliott (Eds.), Adaptive agents, intelligence, and emergent
human organization: Capturing complexity through agent-based modeling
(pp. 7275–7279). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 99
(Suppl. 3).
2. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
3. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: A
quantitative approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Dean, J. S. (1969). Chronological analysis of Tsegi Phase sites in northeastern Arizona
(Papers of the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research, No. 3). Tucson: The University of Arizona
Press.
5. Dean, J. S. (1996). Demography, environment, and subsistence stress. In J. Tainter &
B. B. Tainter (Eds.), Evolving complexity and environmental risk in the prehistoric southwest
(pp. 25–56). Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
6. Dean, J. S., Gumerman, G. J., Epstein, J. M., Axtell, R. L., Swedlund, A. C., Parker, M. T., &
McCarroll, S. (2000). Understanding Anasazi culture change through agent-based modeling.
In T. Kohler & G. Gumerman (Eds.), Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies:
Agent-Based Modeling of Social and Spatial Processes (pp. 179–205). New York & London:
Oxford University Press.
7. Dean, J. S., Lindsay, A. J., Jr., & Robinson, W. J. (1978). Prehistoric settlement in Long
House Valley, northeastern Arizona. In R. C. Euler & G. J. Gumerman (Eds.), Investigations
of the Southwestern Anthropological Research Group: an experiment in archaeological
cooperation, Proceedings of the 1976 Conference (pp. 25–44). Flagstaff, AZ: Flagstaff
Museum of Northern Arizona, Bulletin 50.
8. DeVore, I. (1988). Prospects for a synthesis in the human behavioral sciences. In D. Pines
(Ed.), Emerging syntheses in science (pp. 53–65). Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
9. Epstein, J. M. (1999). Agent based computational models and generative social science.
Complexity, 4, 41–60.
10. Epstein, J. M., & Axtell, R. L. (1996). Growing artiŽcial societies: Social science from the
bottom up. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Brookings Institution.
11. Lindgren, K., & Nordahl, M. G. (1994). Evolutionary dynamics of spatial games. ArtiŽcial
Life, 1, 73–104.

444 ArtiŽcial Life Volume 9, Number 4