| Entry: | Today I have accomplished eventually exploration of post-retrieval pit F.7872 recorded in SE part of B.132. I must admit it was a grand struggle for me to excavate complex deposit (U.31553) and identify differences between the infill and surrounding sediments that were truncated by the a deep (95cm) double based cut (U.31552). The challenge was to understand the nature of activities that caused the extensive devastation of the floor U.31540 as well as adjacent features (e.g. bench F.7879, walls: F.7878, F.7876). Since the very first day of exploration it was obvious that the outline recorded on the top of the pit must be revised completely due to distinctive separation, that divided the cut into two oval holes, within lower segment of the feature. From that moment there could be only one interpretation involving revealed evidence. Taking additionally into consideration the location and vast demolition concentrated on the Eastern limit of B.132 (Walls – F.7878, F.7876) it was clear that the digging activities occurred in order to re-gain wooden posts set on the both sides of the E-wall.
Fortunately during lab-hours, Ceren had good timing coming to ask me about one of the flotation sample that I collected. The chat that took place afterward that windy afternoon might be considered as the best example of Reflexivity and Reflexive Method in practice. We started talking about post retrieval pits and their peculiarities from different perspectives. I presented to Ceren the result of my current work using ugly sketch performed ad hoc with unhidden excitement. And she, with real calm started sharing with me her experiences and notions that she gained upon the observation in modern villages. At that time I realized that without her knowledge and contribution in the issue the final interpretation of the pit would have been incomplete and rough. She brought home my perception of use wooden posts as a frame and important constructional elements without whom the stability of the mud-brick structure might have been endangered. All of the above developed more insight into circumstances staying behind a desire of re-gaining and re-using the wooden posts in Neolithic.
From these points of views it is clear that the post-retrieval pit as an exploration category should be treated and interpret twofold. The feature represents the digging activities, frequently related with vast destruction which concentrated on taking out the vital building material. On the other hand, the mentioned above accomplishments would have not happened if there had not been there wooden post situated. The latter notion together with particular placements of those kinds of features give important insight into constructional techniques developed by the inhabitants of the Neolithic settlement and builders’ experience . |
