Fingerprinting conflict: A comparative model with applications to archaeological and historical data

This paper is envisioned as a primarily methodological contribution towards a more sophisticated and systematic approach to conflict research in archaeology and history. Studies of conflicts in these fields have often focused on violence and war. Instead, we offer a more holistic approach to conflict research, taking into account different levels of both escalation and de-escalation that embrace all the possible aspects of a conflict from a mere undeveloped potential over complete annihilation to various countermeasures and stages of resolution. A model taking into account different levels of escalation and de-escalation is presented which embodies our multi-faceted view of conflicts and which also allows for a systematic, comparative analysis of conflict situations anywhere and any time in (pre)history. Through ten relatively detailed European case studies spanning the Bronze Age to the 20th century we demonstrate the comparative potential of our model and suggest ways in which it may help to identify typical patterns in conflict situations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2025-02-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0313895
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Archaeological Research and Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fingerprinting conflict: A comparative model with applications to archaeological and historical data

Andrea Santamaría, Jutta Kneisel, Anna Loy, Lorenz Kienle et al.
1 citations
PLoS ONE
Archaeological Research and Protection
7.46
article

Fingerprinting conflict: A comparative model with applications to archaeological and historical data

Andrea Santamaría, Jutta Kneisel, Anna Loy, Lorenz Kienle, Anna-Theres Andersen, Gerald Schwedler, Oliver Nakoinz, Jens Schneeweiß, Søren Wichmann, Katharina Zerzeropulos, Ralf Bleile, Darja Jonjić, Norbert Nübler
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This paper is envisioned as a primarily methodological contribution towards a more sophisticated and systematic approach to conflict research in archaeology and history. Studies of conflicts in these fields have often focused on violence and war. Instead, we offer a more holistic approach to conflict research, taking into account different levels of both escalation and de-escalation that embrace all the possible aspects of a conflict from a mere undeveloped potential over complete annihilation to various countermeasures and stages of resolution. A model taking into account different levels of escalation and de-escalation is presented which embodies our multi-faceted view of conflicts and which also allows for a systematic, comparative analysis of conflict situations anywhere and any time in (pre)history. Through ten relatively detailed European case studies spanning the Bronze Age to the 20th century we demonstrate the comparative potential of our model and suggest ways in which it may help to identify typical patterns in conflict situations.

PLoS ONEVol. 20(2)
Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (DE), Stiftung Schleswig-Holsteinische Landesmuseen (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Archaeological Research and Protection
7.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.