| Entry: | We now know more about the mudbrick-and-slab constellation in the middle of room 105.
In the morning, I worked on the brick and mortar structure (u. 18372). I sampled the structure for phytoliths (s. 1) and took 30 litres of flotation samples (s. 2) and an archive sample (s. 3). The brick and mortar were ordinary in composition, with bone and pottery inclusions; according to JHB, some of the pottery was Neolithic and thus most likely derived from waste disposed from the East Mound.
Meanwhile, JHB removed the stone slab (X1, u. 31210) that was partly lodged in the brick and mortar structure. JHB excavated and sampled the vicinity and surface below the groundstone slab, as he'd previously discovered that the slab was surrounded by organic plant material. A small flotation sample (s. 1, u. 31221) and phytoliths (s. 2, u. 31221) were taken from underneath the slab. Another flotation sample (34 litres; s. 13, u. 31210) was taken from the area west of the slab because this area had already yielded plant remains (hackleberries?) (s. 6, u. 31210).
The underside of the slab had minor concentrations of orange silt that I've only encountered underneath the mudbrıck and mortar structure. Also, two mudbricks could be distinguished right underneath where the slab had been sitting. I believe this is due to preferential preservation, as the bricks would've been protected from erosion by the slab.
JHB just gave me a brief tour about the slab. It's 23 kg and made out of andesite with typical crystalline inclusions. It's probable that the stone was originally sourced from the nearby volcanoes. However, it's possible that the stone was introduced from the East Mound rather than directly from the source, like so much of the mudbrick material.
The slab has both worked and unworked surfaces. The sides are at right angles from the bottom and top surfaces and have been chipped, with little evidence of use-wear. The upper edges are slightly rounded.
The bottom surface is slightly convex, with unworked surfaces at the ends of the slab while the middle portion has evidence of minor wear. The bottom surface also has a round, slightly darkened indentation with fine concentrations of orange pigment; in my opinion the pigment is of the same colour as the orange silt from the fill underneath the slab, but JHB is not entirely convinced. Unfortunately, the orange silt is now lost from the context, but there might still be some left in the fill that was underneath the brick and mortar structure. However, the fact that the silt can be found beneath a structure that must be contemporaneous with the slab calls into question whether the silt and the pigment are the same thing.
The top surface is concave, with evidence of reroughing and various degrees of use-wear. It's possible to distinguish two main working surfaces. The one that was closer to the brick and mortar structure is wider and slightly more worn (?) than the one that was further away from the structure. The end furthest away from the structure has been left unwashed for residue analysis.
For interpreting the relationship between the slab and the brick and mortar structure, the most interesting detail is the very end of the slab. As already noted, the end was lodged into the structure for the length of c. 7 cm. At this end, the concavity of the slab rapidly levels off in the space of 1 cm before giving way to a blunt, convex end that was lodged within the structure. In addition to this change in the slab's figure, it's interesting that the end does not show the kind of wear or reworking that characterises the rest of the top surface.
JHB believes that these details may help interpret the brick and mortar structure. As the end of the slab has not been worn and reworked like the rest of the surface, the slab probably was an integral part of the structure and used on the spot intensively enough for these distinct features to emerge. This in turn means that however unlikely the slab-and-mudbrick constellation might seem, it was probably intentional. The mudbrick structure was built to include the slab, most likely to create a kind of workbench. Thus, even though all this was situated within and on top of fill materıal, we have a surface - not a floor - where stuff was processed for some time. I should be careful not to extrapolate this too far, but perhaps this is the nature of building 105: maybe there will not be distinctive floors, just fill interdigitated with activity surfaces.
We'll know more in the final days as I've started a sondage by the eastern buttress with the aim to figure out how deep the brick and mortar structure goes and whether there is anything that we could distinguish as a floor. The fill (u. 31221) definitely goes deeper down as I've already come across the usual bones and pottery sherds. There's also a small stone slab or groundstone waiting to the lifted from the fill. |
