Corrigendum: An Attempt to Estimate the Impact of the Spread of Economic Flows on Latenian Urbanization

In the original article, there was a mistake in Figure 2 as published. In the map, there was an error in the labels for n.1 “Meulan” and n.2 “Nanterre.” The corrected Figure 2 appears below.

Additionally, there was an error in the text of the original published article. The status of the city of Orléans during La Tène times was unclear.

A correction has been made to the section Using Rihll and Wilson Model for This Case Study, Exemplary Output, paragraph two:

“As the cost ratio particularly benefits to river paths, it is not surprising that the major flows follow the main rivers. From the 67 input sites, a dozen settlements are particularly underlined by the model. In the Parisian Basin, Meulan, Nanterre, and several other open agglomerations in the surroundings (Bobigny and Epiais-Rhu) seem significantly favored by downstream flows from several confluences (Seine, Oise, Marne). Orléans stands out as remarkable in the Loire Basin. Orléans stands out as remarkable in the Loire Basin. This statement is consistent with both archeological and historical knowledge, which place it as a major economic center of Carnute people⁷. The picture well emphasizes that this prominent status can notably be explained by the role of this city as an intermediary node to travel from the Loire basin to northern areas and the Eure and Seine Rivers. Varennes-sur-Allier and Roanne seem to benefit from the same position as crossroads between terrestrial and fluvial paths on the Allier River on the one hand and upstream Loire River on the other. Finally, Mâcon, Chalon-sur-Saône, and Verdun-sur-le-Doubs are highlighted as the three main nodes of the Saône and Rhône Basin. If Mâcon is still not well known by archeologists, the two others are already pointed out as essential economic hubs on the Saône River by the literature (Billoin et al., 2009; Barral and Lallemand, 2014). Tens of thousands of Roman amphorae were discovered in the River near Chalon-sur-Saône (see Feugnet, 2018).”

The authors apologize for these errors and state that they do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.