Migration has been largely ignored by archeologists for the last two decades. Yet prehistoric demography and population studies are accepted as central concerns, and neither of these can be studied profitably without an understanding of migration. Recent books by Rouse and Renfrew have resurrected migration as a subject of serious analysis. It is proposed here that systems‐oriented archeologists, in rejecting migration, have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Traditional archeological approaches to migration fall short because a methodology for examining prehistoric migration must be dependent upon an understanding of the general structure of migration as a patterned human behavior. Aspects of such a structure are suggested and an application to a particular case in Eastern Europe is described.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 606 citations exist upstream.