Discriminant function analyses in archaeology: are classification rates too good to be true?

The use of discriminant function analyses (DFA) in archaeological and related research is on the increase, however many of the assumptions of this method receive a mixed treatment in the literature. Statisticians frequently use complex statistical models to investigate analytical parameters, but such idealised datasets may be hard to relate to “real-life” examples and the literature difficult to assess. Using two faunal datasets that are more typical of archaeological and related research, one comprised of size-corrected linear measurements of bovid humeri and another of 3D geometric morphometric (GMM) shape data of African monkey skulls, and two simulated datasets, we illustrate some of the most important but often ignored issues of DFA. We specifically show why it is paramount to address “over-fitting” by cross-validation when applying this method and how the probability of correctly classifying cases by chance can be properly and explicitly taken into account.     

Roovesmore Fort,and Stones Inscribed with Oghams,in the Parish of Aglish,County Cork

The results of excavations carried out in the Roman civil settlement at Heronbridge, two kilometres from the legionary fortress at Chester (Deva), since its discovery in 1929 are summarized and the overall history and character of the site assessed. Evidence from other provinces is deployed to show that the existence of two, nucleated civilian settlements in the immediate vicinity of a legionary fortress was a common, rather than an irregular, occurrence. The possible reasons for this phenomenon of ‘Siedlungsdualität’ are discussed and it is suggested that the more distant settlement, unlike the canabae, lay outside the boundaries of the prata legionis.