Seriation Method and Its Evaluation

Abstract

Seriation as a scaling technique produces a formal arrangement of units, the significance of which must be inferred. Arrangement per se is a statistical matter, while the inference of significance is archaeological method. Here seriation as an archaeological method for inferring relative chronology is reviewed in terms of its assumptions and the conditions under which it is applicable. From this examination it is concluded that seriations may be inferred to be chronologies when and only when: (1) the comparisons are conducted using historical classes; (2) the units ordered are of comparable duration; (3) the units ordered are from the same cultural tradition; and (4) when the order is repeated through several independent seriations. The means of assessing whether or not a given seriation meets these conditions is considered in detail. Within specifiable limits seriations can be inferred to be chronologies, but these limits are more restricted than generally appreciated.

Rapid evolution of ritual architecture in central Polynesia indicated by precise 230 Th/U coral dating

“…Temporal changes in marae architecture were independently assessed by applying occurrence seriation, an archaeological method for the relative chronological ordering of material phenomena (25)(26)(27). Originally applied to pottery, seriation has recently been used for architecture, including temple and house structures in Hawai'i and marae temples in the Society Islands (28,29).…”

The application of luminescence dating in American archaeology

“…Seriation is another approach to group dating, in which the characteristics of the group determine chronological ordering. One weakness of seriation is that the artifacts used in the seriation must have a systemic relationship to each other, a relationship usually assumed by association [although the method seems to work well only to the extent that the artifacts are related historically and not accidently brought together (Dunnell, 1970;Hunt et al, 1995]. Separating spatial from temporal ordering is also a concern.…”

The Unitary Association Method of Relative Dating and Its Application to Archaeological Data

“…The principles and assumptions underlying various seriation methods have been discussed at length elsewhere (Rouse, 1967;Dunnell, 1970;Cowgill, 1972;LeBlanc, 1975;Marquardt, 1978;Baxter, 1994;Duff, 1996) and are mentioned here only to clarify certain points of comparison.…”