Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-04T01:29:28.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seriation Methods for Archaeological Materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Alan E. Gelfand
Alan E. Gelfand*
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, University of Connecticut
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper considers two recently developed mathematical techniques in archaeological seriation. Both techniques take as given, a similarity matrix between the objects to be ordered. The first method is a "linkage" procedure, while the second (and preferred) is an "averaging" procedure. The second method, though a bit more mathematical, has been very successful in application to real data. Both techniques have several good features which will be considered. For both illustrative and comparative purposes, the methods have been applied to several sets of archaeological data considered by other researchers. As the comparisons will show, the results have been surprisingly good. More specifically, for such comparisons to be made, a criterion for comparing the "goodness" of different serial orders for a particular set of data is of great interest. A criterion, or "goodness of fit" index of this type will be developed and interpreted as well as used for the comparisons of interest. Lastly, a section is devoted to more general discussion of what sorts of data are suitable for reduction by seriation techniques.

Type
Articles
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , July 1971 , pp. 263 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brainerd, G. W. 1951 The place of chronological ordering in archaeological analysis. American Antiquity 16:301–313.Google Scholar
Gelfand, A. E. n.d. Mathematical methods in archaeological seriation. First Congress on Mathematics and Statistics in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences, Proceedings. S. R. R. Academy Press, Bucharest. (In press).Google Scholar
Kendall, D. G. 1963 A statistical approach to Flinders Petrie’s sequence dating. International Statistical Institute, Bulletin 40:657–680.Google Scholar
Kendall, D. G. n.d. Seriation from abundance matrices. First Congress on Mathematics and Statistics in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences, Proceedings. S. R. R. Academy Press. Bucharest. (In press).Google Scholar
Kruskal, J. B. 1964 Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a non-metric hypothesis. Psychometrika 29:1–27.Google Scholar
Meggers, B. J., and Evans, C. 1957 Archaeological investigation in the mouth of the Amazon. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 167.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C., and Sterud, G. 1969 Close-proximity analysis: A rapid method for the ordering of archaeological materials. American Antiquity 34:265–277.Google Scholar
Robinson, W. S. 1951 A method for chronologically ordering archaeological deposits. American Antiquity 16:293–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackett, J. R. 1966 Quantitative analysis of Upper Paleolithic stone tools. American Anthropologist 68:356–394.Google Scholar
Shepard, R. N., and Carroll, J. D. 1966 Parametric representation of nonlinear data structures. International Symposium on Multivariate Analysis, Proceedings, edited by P. R. Krishnaiah, pp. 561–592. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Sternin, H. 1965 Statistical methods of time sequencing. Department of Statistics Technical Report 112, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Sterud, G. 1967 Seriation techniques in archaeology. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar