See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321109420

Mathematical Analysis аnd Modeling of Cultural Dynamics in Europe During

XVI-XX Centuries

Conference Paper · November 2017

DOI: 10.5593/sgemsocial2017/62/S22.004

CITATION READS

1 158

2 authors:

L. A. Dmitrieva Yuri Alexandr Kuperin

Saint Petersburg State University Saint Petersburg State University
44 PUBLICATIONS   195 CITATIONS    17 PUBLICATIONS   28 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

EEG study for altered state of consciousness and for abnormal brain activity View project

All content following this page was uploaded by L. A. Dmitrieva on 16 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 4th International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts SGEM 2017,
www.sgemsocial.org, SGEM2017, 24 - 30 August, 2017,Bulgaria, Conference Proceedings, ISBN 978-619-
7408-24-9 / ISSN 2367-5659, 2017, Book 6, Vol 2, 35-42 pp

Mathematical analysis and modeling of cultural dynamics in Europe during XVI-

XX centuries

L.A.Dmitrieva,Yu.A. Kuperin, I.A.Smirnov

Saint-Petersburg State University, 190034 Russia
E-mail: dopadkar@gmail.com

Abstract: The research focuses on the study and the identification of significant relationships between the observed peaks of
the creative activity in such fields as art, music, literature, philosophy, science and technology. To establish the relationship
between the development of cultural fields and development of society the structural-demographic theory was used, according
to which a state goes through integration and disintegration phases during its existence. According to this, we propose the
hypothesis that a phase of disintegration can be characterized by larger ratings of cultural figures. To test the hypothesis we
used the empirical data processing thirteen secular cycles, which includes the described ones in the works by P.Turchin and
S.A.Nefedov and by us. The research demonstrated, what phases of the selected secular cycles are accounted for the largest
cultural achievements. The relationships between the research results and the specification of secular cycles and cultural fields
were studied. The t-test for means for dependent samples showed that the supposed hypothesis got a confirmation at the
significant statistical level in six cultural fields (literature, art, science, technology, music and philosophy). In frame of the
study mathematical model of the dynamics of culture was also elaborated and tested. The model testing showed statistically
reliable results. Historical interpretation of the results was also given.

Key words: secular cycles, cultural dynamics, statistical methods, mathematical model.

Introduction
The research focuses on the study of culture as a complex self-organizing system. Namely, the aim is to study relationships
between the observed peaks of the creative activity in different societies and in different phase of their development.
Despite intensive studies in this direction, the problem of relationships between cultural and social evolutions still remains
open. Among the scientific researches in this field let us mention in the papers (N. Danilevsky [2,]O. Spengler [13], A.L.
Krober [5], P.A.Sorokin[12], A.J. Toynbee [14], Gray [3-4], Ch. Murray [6], K.K.Pankratov[10], D.K. Simonton and Ting
Shing-Shaing [11], D.V. Panchenko [8-9]). Some authors assume that the cultural bursts take place at the moments of
growing state power and intensive economical development. Others consider that peaks in cultural development occurs
during the periods of political instability and social crisis, i.e. disintegration of societies. The main objective of this work is
to quantitatively establish the essential connection between the peaks of creativity in different societies and at different
levels of social development.

Therefore, our research can be considered as an example of the study in the field of knowledgeknown as
themathematicalhistory or cliodynamics. Our paper consists of two different but related parts. The first part is a statistical
analysis of specific hypotheses about cultural bursts and their relationship with the levels of the state development. The
second part is the construction of a new mathematical model describing the interaction between the bursts of culture and
levels of the state development.
We used further the structural-demographic theory [15] to establish the relationship between the development of cultural
areas and society. According toP.V.Turchinand S.Nefedov [16], it is known that for anychronologicalcycles ofcertain types
the state dynamicsare typical. We mean such dynamical variables as population, the number of elite, forces of the state,
political instability, etc. According to the theory developed in [15-17], a state goes through integration and disintegration
phases. For example, the integration phase is characterized by population growth and low political instability. For the
phase of disintegration, on the contrary, declining population and high political instability are typical. As one of the
motivation for our study we use ideas from the article "History and culture: the phase shift between the economic and
cultural waves in secular cycles" by K.K. Pankratov[10]. In comparison with the quoted paper in the present research we
used а greater number of cultural areas which have been analyzed. The chronological frameworks of secular cycles, as we
assume, are based on more objective assumptions. Finally the division of each secular cycle is based by two (integrative
and disintegrative) rather than threephases. In accordance with this the hypothesis we put forward, concerns the
importance of the late phase of disintegration for the cultural development.
To test this hypothesis not the average per decades characteristics were used, but the percentage of absolute value of the
rating sums described below.So we checked that phases of disintegration are characterized by larger ratings of cultural
figures.This hypothesis was tested for thirteen secular cycles described in our study and in six fields of culture (literature,
art, science, technology, music and philosophy).The study of this problem is based on a quantitative assessment of creative
activity of a cultural figure suggested in the Ch. Murray paper "Human accomplishment: The pursuit of excellence in the
arts and sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950"[6]. This authorproposeda quantitative description ofthe creativeactivity ofthe
representatives ofcultural fields, who livedbetween800 BC1950AD. The data about years of conventional creative peaks of
culture figures, their fields, regions and countries where they worked and special indices are contained in the Murray
paper [6].The mean index for each culture figure has been calculated by means of described in [6]procedures giving the
rating from 1 to 100 for each culture figure.These ratings were aggregated for each decade and after that were distributed
by countries.

The criteria forestablishingthe chronological boundariesforsecular cycles

In this section we used the empirical data processing of thirteen secular cycles. The chronological boundaries of eight of
them have been already described in the papers by P.V. Turchin and S.A. Nefedov[16].We added five new secular cycles for
Greece, Spain, Netherlands, Germany and England, which chronological boundaries were reconstructed in the present
paper by means of data on political instability [12] or the population growth [7], [1]. We also have calculated the necessary
ratings according to the Murray procedure mentioned above [6]. The chronology of the secular cycles is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Chronology of thirteen secular cycles (8 are based on results of [16]). The minus signin the table meansthe years
B.C. The cycles for which chronological boundaries have been added in the present study are shown in italic.
Phase Integration Disintegration
Start Time End Time Start Time End Time
Country: Secular cycle (years) (years) (years) (years)
Greece: Athenian cycle -600 -475 -475 -338
Rome: the Republican cycle -350 -130 -130 -30
Rome: the Principate cycle -27 165 165 285
England: the Plantagenet cycle 1150 1315 1315 1485
England: the Tudor-Stuart cycle 1485 1640 1640 1730
England:the Hanover-Windsorian cycle 1730 1860 1860 1980
France: the Capetian cycle 1150 1315 1315 1450
France: the Valois cycle 1450 1570 1570 1660
France: the Bourboniancycle 1660 1780 1780 1870
Russia: the Romanov cycle 1620 1900 1900 2000
Germany: Hohenzollern cycle 1701 1850 1850 1918
Spain: Habsburg cycle 1470 1580 1580 1700
Netherlands: the Dutch Republic cycle 1566 1650 1650 1795

Let us make some comments to the above table. For example, according to P.A. Sorokin [12]about the internal unrest for
ancient Greece, we can determine the approximate chronological boundaries for the secular cycle of internal political
instability. Namely, we assume that integrationphaselasted600 to475years BC, when the Greek states were quite united.
Phase of disintegration falls on turbulent times, the peak of which was the Peloponnesian War 431-404 years. BC. After this
phase,the Athenianpolis, had lostabout a third ofthe population,gradually falling into the final decay to338 BC.

The beginning of Habsburg control in Spain in 1470 is also characterized by fairly calm political environment and rapid
population growth up to 1580 [7]. After this period, the number of cases of dissatisfaction with the central government
gradually begins to increase. The spoilage of coins and population declines increase up to culminating value, what leads to
the social and political collapse and division of the Spanish Succession in 1700. A similar procedure is valid for determining
the chronological frameworks we used for the other three cases, for which we proposed secular cycles for England,
Germany and the Netherlands.

Below in Table 2 we give the summarized ratings for six cultural fields (literature, art, science, technology, music and
philosophy) in the absolute and percentage forms.
Table 2. Sums of total cultural ratings during the integrative and disintegrative phases.
Phase Integration Disintegration

Abs. value % Abs. value %

Country: Secular cycle
Greece: Athenian cycle 175 18,92% 750 81,08%
Rome: The Republican cycle 45 20,36% 176 79,64%
Rome: The Principate cycle 365 87,53% 52 12,47%
England: The Plantagenet cycle 7 12,73% 48 87,27%
England: The Tudor-Stuart cycle 507 32,58% 1049 67,42%
England:the Hanover-Windsorian cycle 2229 61,44% 1399 38,56%
France: TheCapetiancycle 69 46,31% 80 53,69%
France: TheValoiscycle 253 32,81% 518 67,19%
France: Bourboniancycle 936 27,59% 2457 72,41%
Germany: Hohenzollern cycle 1758 38,84% 2768 61,16%
Spain: Habsburg cycle 67 23,51% 218 76,49%
Netherlands: the Dutch Republic cycle 203 38,52% 324 61,48%
Russia: Romanovcycle 496 53,39% 433 46,61%
Average 38,04% 61,96%

As was noted above we used the structural and demographic theory [16], to establish a link between the development of
the cultural and social fields. According to the theory developed in [15-17], a state goes through integration and
disintegration phases. We used this assumption for statistical processing of data, and for constructing a mathematical
model.

Statistical Data, Their Analysis and Interpretation

In this section we study which phase of the secular cycles peaks coincide with the largest cultural achievements.Below in
Table 2 for both integration and disintegration phases for each cycle we give the ratings summarized over those cultural
figures in six cultural areas (literature, art, science, technology, music and philosophy) which can be found in [6]. The
results are given as well as in the absolute and percentage forms.

From the Table 2 one can see that the most part of the cycles, except Principate cycle in Rome and Hanover-Windsorian
ones, have percentage ratings for disintegrative phase about 70%. Extremely low percentage of cultural rating for the
disintegration phase in the Principate cycle in Rome could be explained by argumentativeness of the secular cycles
chronology for this country. Almost equal sums of the ratings for the integration and disintegration phases during the
Romanov cycle also could have the same explanation or due to the lack of enough data in the Murray work [6] concerning
Russian culture. The statistical analysis of empirical regularity for all thirteen secular cycles gives statistically not
significant result for the cultural rating: (t-test for the dependent samples means gives p > 0.05 (one-tailed) as the
significance level) (See Fig.1, left panel). In other words, the result consists in the fact that the hypothesis that cultural
rating is higher during the disintegration phase than in the integrative phase is not statistically significant for all
considered secular cycles on the 5% significance level. The same analysis for the ten selected cycles, except Principate
cycle in Rome, Hanover-Windsorian cycle and Romanov cycle , gives statistically more significant result: the cultural rating
is greater during the disintegrative phases than during the integrative phases (t-test for the dependent samples means
gives p < 0.001 (one-tailed) as the significance level) (See Fig. 1, right panel).
 Figure 1. The behavior of averaged cultural ratings expressed in percentage
over thirteen secular cycles (left panel) and over ten selected cycles (right panel)

Statistical analysis showed that the proposed hypothesis was proved at the statistically significant level for some countries.
Within the scope of this evidence we can make the preliminary conclusions that the achievements in the considered areas
of culture are most significant in the periods of the state disintegration.
Then, on the basis of this observation, we can interpret the obtained results in frame of the demographic-structural theory.
Thus, the growth of population during a secular cycles in the integrative phase, which is related with availability of
unoccupied of lands, availability of food products, weak social inequality etc., do not produce special necessity for
engaging in cultural activities. The state in the period of disintegrative phase accumulates enough resources, which
activate the trade. This contributes to the expansion of relations between peoples, which includes the exchange of cultural
heritage, such as books, sculptures, etc. On the one hand, the growth of urbanization and number of craftsmen leads to
increasing competition. This encourages masters to improve their skills and can be a cause of the creation of very rare
masterpieces that are called works of art. On the other hand, at the same time increasing number of elite, which is
associated with demonstrative consumption, also leads to high level of demand on the works of art. In general, the
situation is similar to the cultural acme that "begins when the creative team in a productive society comes to leading
positions in the world that this group considers to be significant" [8-9]. In addition, increased competition among
representatives of upper class leads to the gradual replacement of its individual members. This makes these "superfluous
people" to look for other livelihoods. These sources include activities such as art, science, philosophy, and so on. Social
antagonisms and conflicts also partly sublimates in the fields of culture. Gradual impoverishment of the upper classes of
society, on the one hand, and increasing concentration of population in towns, on the other hand, results in interaction of
lumpens and elites. At the same time quite powerful state is able to support internal peace and protection from external
threats and regulate development in the field of culture with the help of financial resources. Firstly, increasing social
potential also could support increasing cultural activity, when struggle for rights and freedom is realized in worthy works
of arts and sciences. The growing number of epidemics, as well as tangible discomfort increases the likelihood of a
personal existential crisis, which may also increase the number of people who are trying to understand the world. In
thoseperiodswhen there is nostate sources in order to maintain order, and wheninternal warsand the riseof
tensioncannotbe compensated bythe culture,most people whocan createworks of art orscience,are dying because
ofepidemics, intercommunal violenceoremigrateto other countries.

The Mathematical Model of Culture

In this section we elaborate and test a novel mathematical model of the cultural dynamics. Partially it is based on the so-
called "selfish elitemodel" constructed by Peter Turchin[15] (some explanation see below or [15]). This model has the
form the set of three linked differential equations. Peter Turchin[15]refers to this model as a "selfish elite"model, because
"elites oppress commoners without any regard for their being, and will transmit some taxes to the state if they have
enough to live on" [15].

In the model proposed in the present paper:

  dP β1 (1 − φ P ) P
= − δ1 PE
 dt 1 + η1 E
 dE P (1 − φ P ) E δ E
 = µ1 P + µ 2 − 2
 dt 1 + η1 E 1 + η2 S

=dS
γ
dE
− σ ES
 dt dt
 2 2
 dC β3 P + β 4 E + µ3 PE
= dt − ρC
 1 + η3 S (1)

we introduce the fourth dynamical variable C (t ) which is the number of cultural figures. The variable C is measured in
hundreds of person.

So our aim is to explain the complex relationship between the cultural and the state development expressed in terms of the
dynamical variable C and such characteristics of a society as the number of the producer population P , the elite number
E and the state expenditures S . Note that the variable C is not included in first three equations of the set (2). At the same
time the variables of the first three equations are included in the fourth equation for a cultural dynamics. This means that
we make the assumption that the variables of first three equations affect the dynamics of the culture, while the dynamics of
culture does not affects the variables of the first three equations. Thisassumptionappearstousquiterealistic.

Therefore, we modify the first three equations of the original Turchin model with new terms in these equations. Firstly, in
the equation for dP / dt we introduce the term −δ1 PE which leads to more rapid decreasing of the producer population.
This is because we assume that in a more general model the population decline is not only due to natural mortality, but
also due to the interaction with the elite. Therefore, where δ1` is the rate at which the population of producers die when
they do not have food, but this parameter also reflects the strength of the interaction between the producers population
and the elite. In the first andthe second equations in our model we have introduced parameters β1 and µ2 linked with
ones in the Turchin model as follows: β ≡ σ 1 p0 and µ 2 ≡ σ 2 p0η1 preserving the sense of the Turchin model parameters. In
1
analogy with the Turchin model (Turchin 2010), the degree of the elite pressure on the producer population and the
degree of the producer population pressure on the elite number is expressed by the denominator 1 + η E (details see in
1
[15]). To compensate an absence of social mobility in the Turchin model, we added the term µ P into the equation for the
1
elite dynamics for dE / dt . It leads to appearance of the elite members from the producer population and restoration of
dynamics in the case of the total nobility destruction. Parameter µ1 is the proportionality constant relating the elite
numbers to the producer population size P . Due to subsistence increasing of the producer population in all considered
P (1 − φ P ) E
cycles, we assume the growth rate of elite is expressed (as in the Turchin model) by the term µ 2 , which takes
1 + η1 E
into account interaction between the producer population and the exploiters population.As it is explained in the Turchin
dE
model (Turchin 2010), the state expenditures S changes with the increasing of elite population due term γ and
dt
decreases due the term −α E . In our model we replaced the linear term α E by the nonlinear term −σ ES , which reflects
the correlation of the elite population and state expenditures. So on our model the parameter σ reflects the strength of
the above correlation.

Based on the reasons, which have been given above, we have added into the mathematical model (1) the following
equation of cultural dynamics:

2 2
dC β3 P + β 4 E + µ3 PE
= − ρC (3),
dt 1 + η3 S

where P is the producer population size, E is the elite population size, S is state expenditures, C is number of cultural
figures, and β3 and β 4 are the parameters of growth rate of cultural figures from the population and from the elite. The
parameter µ3 is a coefficient of the cultural figures replenishment due to interclass interaction. The parameter η3 is a
coefficient of pressure on cultural development, which is provided by state. The parameter ρ is a coefficient of cultural
decreasing if a society is not interested in it. According to our estimates, the last one happens during one generation (about
20-30 years) and gives a value of the parameter ρ in interval from 0.03 to 0.05 (3-5% of persons per year). The proposed
model could be completed by the additional dynamical variables. But we think that it makes the model more complex than
it should be.
At first we test our model, comparing its prediction with empirical data on completed number of the significant Russian
culture figures. For the sake of convenience we give in the Figure 2 the model (2) behavior of all structural variables for the
period of time corresponding to the Romanov cycle in Russia during XVII-XX centuries.

Figure 2. Dynamics of the model (2) variables for Romanov cycle in Russia during XVII-XX centuries. The initial conditions
are: P = 1 , E = 0 , S = 0 , C = 0 . The parameters are: φ = 0.0001 , β1 = 0.011 , δ1 = 0.02 , µ1 = 0.0001 , µ 2 = 0.5 ,
η1 = 0.01 , δ1 = 0.1 , η 2 = 10 , γ = 5 , σ = 0.2 , β3 = 0.0001 , β 4 = 0.0015 , µ3 = 0.0015 , η3 = 1 , ρ = 0.02

The dynamics of the population, elite and state expenditures variables in this case expresses the dynamics of the secular
cycle only qualitatively correct.We must interpret the nature of the dynamics of variables only qualitatively because of the
incompleteness of data required. And also due to complexity and variability of state development during such a long period
of time (about 400 years).
In order to test our model we compare the prediction of the model (1) for the variable C (t ) (denoted as "culture" in Figure
3) with empirical data on the number of the significant Russian culture figures during this period. The database
wascompiledby the authors with data of time births and deaths of famous Russian artists, sculptors, painters, poets,
scientists, philosophers and so on.
Figure 3 shows the dynamics of historical data on total number of famous figures of art, literature, music, philosophy,
science and technology in Russia from 1620 to 1960 according to theproposed model. In the same figure are also given the
empirical data.

Figure 3. Dynamics of the culture variable of the model (2) for the Romanov cycle in Russia during XVII-XX centuries and
empirical data. The model parameters are the same as in Figure 2. Initial conditions are: P = 1 , E = 0 , S = 0 , C = 0 .
Despite the fact that character of other values is conventional, the model qualitatively describes the dynamics of the
2 2
cultural figures number till the beginning of the XX century quite well with high coefficient of determination R ( R =
0.9582).After this time significant difference of model and empirical data could be explained either with a few waves of
immigration or with the reinforced state repressions in 1920-30s.

Of course modeling only of Romanov cycle in Russia during XVII-XX centuries is not sufficient for verification our model
(2). Therefore, we examined also the cycle in Netherlands from 1200 to 2000. Figure 5 shows the dynamics of historical
data on total number of famous figures of art, literature, music, philosophy, science and technology in Netherlands from
1200 to 2000 according to theproposed model. In Figure 5 we also carry out a comparison of the dynamics of the model (2)
with empirical data The character of other values is also conventional, but the model qualitatively describes the dynamics
2 2
of cultural figures number till the beginning of the XX century quite well with high coefficient of determination R ( R
=0.9085).
Figure 4 shows the dynamics of historical data on total number of famous figures of art, literature, music, philosophy,
science and technology in Dutch Republic cycle in Netherlandsduring XIII-XX centuries according to theproposed model. In
the same figure are also given the empirical data.

Figure 4. Dynamics of the model (2) and empirical data for the Dutch Republic cycle in Netherlandsduring XIII-XX
centuries. Initial conditions are: P = 0.2 , E = 0 , S = 0 , C = 0 . The parameters are: φ = 0.0001 , β1 = 0.011 , δ1 = 0.02 ,
µ1 = 0.0001 , µ 2 = 0.5 , η1 = 0.01 , δ1 = 0.1 , η 2 = 10 , γ = 5 , σ = 0.2 , β3 = 0.0001 , β 4 = 0.0015 , µ3 = 0.0015 , η3 = 1 ,
ρ = 0.02 .

It would be possible to test our model on other secular cycle in different countries, which are listed in Table 2. Wedo not
presentthis study in this work first of all dueto the lack of space. And also because thesolution of theoptimization problem
for the parametersof our model for a specificsecular cyclerequires significantcomputing resources. In addition, the given
here results of the simulation show that for the correct choice of the parameters of the proposed model is able qualitatively
describe the dynamics of the culture for any country and any secular cycle, which are listed in Table 2. Such numerical
experiments can be carried out, but we do not consider it necessary to give these results in a journal article.

Conclusion and Discussion

Our studies have included several stages.Namely:

• numerical verification of structural and demographic theory and its models;
• statistical test of hypotheses put forward in this paper;
• developing andnumerical verificationon empirical datathe mathematical model proposed inthis paper.

We have studied the cultural, social and historical status of the problem. Namely, we have carried outa detailed analysis
ofthe literature on theresearch topic.On this basis have been selected the most promising approaches and identified key
contradictions.In addition, we have adequately described the key provisions and models of structural and demographic
theory on the basis of which was carried out the historical interpretation. It was formed a database with ratings of cultural
figures.The collected data were divided into thirteen phases of secular cycles and subjected to statistical processing.As a
result of this analysis, we have put forward the hypothesis that in the framework of structural-demographic theory the
phase of disintegration is characterized by high overall rating cultural figures in the secular cycles. This hypothesis was
confirmed at the level of statistical trends in the six areas of culture.
System analysis of the original mathematical model allowed us to implement computational experiments for this original
model, which were absent in the [8-9].On the basis of these numerical experiments we have developed a new modified
model which can qualitatively reproduce the dynamics of structural and demographic theories, including the dynamics of
culture. For the modified model was carried out its testing on previously collected empirical data for the number of
cultural figures in the different phases of the state dynamics. For the Romanov cycle in Russia during XVII-XX centuries and
for the Dutch Republic cycle in Netherlandsduring XIII-XX centuries the proposed model well approximates the empirical
data.

Acknowledgments
We want to thank Prof. D.V. Panchenko for his interest and support of this study.

REFERENCES

[1]. Alexander, Michael. Application of Mathematical Models to English Secular

Cycles. Cliodynamics7, 2016.– P. 76–108.
[2]. Danilevsky, N. Russia and Europe. Institute of Russian Civilization, Blessing: Moscow, 2011 (in Russian).
[3]. Gray, Ch. E. An Analysis of Graeco-Roman Development. In: American Anthropologist, 1, 60, 1958. P 13-31.
[4]. Gray, Ch. E. A Measurement of Creativity in Western Civilization. In: American Antropologist, 6, 68, 1966. P 1384-1417.
[5]. Kroeber, A.L. Selected: Nature of Culture. ROSSPEN: Moscow, 2004. (in Russian).
[6]. Murray, Ch. Human accomplishment: The pursuit of excellence in the arts and sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950. Harper
Collins: New York, 2003.
[7]. McEvedy, C., Jones, R. Atlas of world population history. Penguin: New York, 1978.
[8]. Panchenko, D.V. The Cultural Florescence of Fifth-Century Athens in Comparative Perspective. In: Il quintosecolo.
Studi di filosofiaantica in onore di Livio Rossetti, a cura di StefaniaGiombini e Flavia Marcacci. Aguaplano: Città di Castello,
2010.Pp. 215-227.
[9]. Panchenko, D.V. Cultural flowering in Athens in V century BC in comparative-historical interpretation. In: Journal of
Ancient History. Nauka: Moscow, 2,2012. - P. 142-154. (in Russian).
[10]. Pankratov, K.K. History and Culture: the phase shift between the economic and cultural waves in secular cycles In:
History and Mathematics: Conceptual space and the search direction. LKI: Moscow, 2008. P. 134-162 (in Russian).
[11]. Simonton, D.K.,Ting Shing-Shaing. Creativity in Eastern and Western Civilizations: The Lessons of Historiometry. In:
Managment an Organization Review, 6, 3, 2010. - P. 239-350.
[12]. Sorokin, P.A. Social and Cultural Dynamics. Astrel: Moscow, 2006 (in Russian).
[13]. Spengler, O. Decline of the West. Thought: Moscow, 1-2, 1998 (in Russian).
[14]. Toynbee, A.J. Study of History: Origin, growth and decay of civilizations. AST: Moscow, 2009. (in Russian).
[15]. Turchin, P.V. Historical Dynamics: Towards a theoretical history. LKI: Moscow, 2010. (in Russian).
[16]. Turchin, P.,Nefedov S. Secular cycles. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 2009.
[17]. Turchin, P. Ages of discord: Structural-Demographic Analysis of American History. – Beresta Books, 2016.

View publication stats