A seriation-based chronology was attempted for the Palace Lands Site site. (see Neiman, Galle, and Wheeler 2003 for technical details). DAACS attempted seriations with ceramic assemblages derived from four levels of stratigraphic aggregation. First, following methods employed with other Archive sites, DAACS seriated ceramic assemblages, with more than 5 sherds, from individual stratified contexts and from stratigraphic groups -- groups of contexts that field records indicate were part of a single stratigraphic layer or deposit. Stratigraphic groups have a SG-prefix, which precedes the group number (e.g. SG01 equals Stratigraphic Group 1). Second, because the Palace Lands site contains multiple, discrete subsurface features, DAACS also attempted seriations in which artifacts from all the contexts and stratigraphic groups within a single feature were used to create assemblages; for example, all four layers (SG01, SG02, SG03, SG04) from the single subfloor pit (F01). We also attempted a seriation of feature-derived assemblages, in which the four layers from the subfloor pit were treated separately. Finally, we attempted a seriation of the assemblages from the subfloor pit (F01) and 3 feature groups on the site: FG02(the three ditch segments [F04, F05, F06], FG03 (the line of postholes [F07 through F21 and F31 through F36] just south of the ditch segments, and FG04 (a second line of postholes [F22 through F29]). A fourth feature group, FG01 (the brick chimney base [F02] and its builder’s trench [F03]) had no associated artifacts. In none of these attempts could correspondence analysis resolve an unambiguous chronological signal from variation among assemblages in the frequencies of mean-ceramic-date types.

While our attempts at seriation were unsuccessful, the pattern of MCD-types associated with the features on the site suggests significant chronological differences among them. As the table below shows, the subfloor pit has a terminus post quem (TPQ) of 1765, based on a sherd of Debased Scratch-Blue white salt-glazed stoneware. The ditch segments (FG02) and the two fence lines (FG03 and FG04) have later TPQs of 1787, 1787 (American Stoneware, Painted Under Freehand, Blue ) and 1775 (Pearlware) respectively.

The table suggests that the ditch segments and 2 fence lines are significantly later than the subfloor pit. And because the hearth foundation is aligned with the fences, and not the subfloor pit, the hearth may be later still. Plowzone artifact distributions provide further evidence for this idea. The plowzone on the site contains both large numbers of ceramics from the third quarter of the 18th-century and from the second quarter of the 19th-century and later, but not the intermediate period.

This suggests that there are two discrete periods of domestic occupation at the site, separated by a period of abandonment. The features, including F01, FG02, FG03, and FG04, contain many artifacts from the 18th-century occupation. On the other hand, the later artifacts are entirely missing from the features, indicating that the ditch and fence line feature groups were sealed before the second domestic occupation on the site began, sometime after 1820. The brick hearth likely heated the house associated with the second occupation. Finally, plowzone studies show that most of the later ceramics (e.g. Ironstone) were deposited south of FG04, the southern fence line, suggesting that it was standing when the brick heath was constructed at the beginning of the second occupation. This would explain why the hearth is aligned with the fence.

This scenario also explains why attempts at seriation failed. Because the site had been abandoned when the ditch segments and fence lines were dug, their fill contained chronologically similar assemblages that had been deposited long before sediment in which they were found.

To sum up then, the Palace Lands Site seems to have two phases of domestic occupation, separated by a hiatus during which the ditches and fences were dug. Assemblages of artifacts stratified in the features represent the first phase. Artifact assemblages from the third phase are entirely contained in the plowzone. During the hiatus, only a few, stray domestic artifacts were deposited on the site, presumably from domestic activity taking place elsewhere in the vicinity. Because only a single phase is represented in the stratified deposits at this site, DAACS has not assigned phases to them.

The stratigraphic relationships among stratigraphic groups and unassigned contexts are summarized in the Harris Matrix for the site.