| Entry: | TPC Trench 3 is finally turning up some things! We've removed the topsoil surface layer, as well as one layer underneath, and have uncovered some walls and a skeleton (feat. 3931)-- which, excitingly, doesn't seem to be Islamic like so, so many of the burials that our TPC comrades have. We'll finish revealing it on Saturday, then I'll get my first exposure to the highly specific process we have for documenting burials in 3D now. Unfortunately, some of the burial seems to extend beyond the limits of our trench, so we'll have to extend our trench, continuing its ever-changing shape and size!
On a broader scale, I've had a couple of thoughts I'd love some feedback on, if anyone's reading this and interested:
First is the transformations that our material undergoes, especially early on-- and how important it is (or, conversely, may not be) to document that. For example, with our skeleton, it was one of the workmen that first identified the rib and humerus that came up only a few centimeters under the surface. Then Izettin showed me, and I brought Arek over. We excavated it some more, and the skeleton became more than just ribs and a humerus. Arek then hypothesized that the many breaks in the bones were cut marks, and told Patrycia that that was the case, reifying it in a certain sense. Then Scott came, and pointed out that that couldn't be true, given the articulation of the bones, rendering that interpretation a dead end. And during our conversation, we used the walls around us to make the preliminary assertion that this burial may actually be Neolithic, which is what Arek said on the site tour. And as we excavate, then send the skeleton down for analysis, it will be subject to many, many more transformations and identifications. What the skeleton "is" at any given moment is ephemeral, and it seems strange to me that a database or archive would only preserve a series of final, filtered interpretations. Especially at Çatalhöyük. It seems contrary to a commitment to transparency and multivocality... And seems to black box some key moments in generating the archaeological record. Is there any way to avoid this, practically?
My other thoughts were about the nature of the site tours on Thursdays, and of the excavations versus the labs in general. The site is open at all times, and by their very nature the trenches are open-- their contents are visible; to some extent at least, what is happening in them is available and accessible to anyone who comes by. In contrast, the labs have locked doors (necessarily so!) and aren't open to innumerable visitors. And on Thursdays, the excavators show what they've done to everyone, further opening what it is we do, but the labs never get that opportunity. Is there some (positive, desirable) way to make the labs as "open" as our open trenches are? Is there an interest in it? I hope so.
I realize I've committed the sin of so many other diary entries and put too many words in this box-- but would appreciate any and all responses, either here or in person. I'm the short one in the bandanna-- you can't miss me! |
