| Entry: | Quick update re: groundstones x2 (u. 31224) and x1 (u. 31283).
Groundstone x2 (u. 31224) has numerous specks of possible pigment attached onto its underside. For this reason, I gathered the soil underneath the stone for further analysis (s. 6, same unit).
I also gathered the soil from underneath the perforated grinding stone x1 (u. 31238) for flotation (s. 6, same unit), even though there were no visible traces of pigment or biogenetic remains.
During and after removing the grinding stone x1 (u. 31238), I had the opportunity to clarify its stratigraphic position. In an earlier diary entry (25/8/2013) and in the unit sheet I claimed that the stone was sitting on top of the plaster layer of u. 31238. Had this been the case, this would've meant that the stone was part of a different deposition event than the three groundstones (x1-3) found in the overlying u. 31224.
However, after I removed the grinding stone from the section wall, it turned out that the stone is in fact part of the same unit (31224) as the three other groundstones: the grinding stone was lodged in the reddish-brown layer of 31224. This fill was highly compacted, with very firm, rubbery dark grey clay clumps. The plaster line that made up unit 31238 slumped down under the stone and the fill, perhaps as the result of a sudden impact or long-term pressure from the stone and overlying soil.
In sum, today's observations suggest that:
1) unit 31224 saw intensive deposition and possibly use of groundstone objects, reinforcing the interpretation of the layer as an activity surface;
2) unit 31283 and the overlying sterile fill (lower layer of u. 31224) suggest a paucity of activities involving groundstones, at least in the limited area uncovered by the sondage;
3) grinding stone use continues from u. 31224 to 31210, and this use possibly represents the spatial patterning of activities within a single house; below these units, we may have evidence of an earlier house.
I have updated the unit sheets 31224 and 31238 accordingly. |
