| Entry: | Phasing the 4040 buildings has always been a bit of a nightmare for Shahina. Too much lateral excavation and too little in depth excavation done in an area where we were presumed to document a happy neighborhood ended up showing us that in fact the mound, at least at its northern end was not stratified uniformly laterally. So Shahina had to pull piece strands of time for clusters of buildings built abutting each other, with very little information on when which building was built first.
Despite all of the shortcomings, using every bit of evidence that she had, she was able to demonstrate that the upper most buildings observed in the 4040 roughly either belong to 4040.G or 4040.H, with a few exceptions of later occupations. Building 5 and other buildings partially exposed under others was roughly assigned to 4040.F. The southern end of the 4040 had clusters of buildings allocated to 4040.H while the northern end of the buildings showed to be earlier in occupation at 4040.G. Obviously I am simplifying the inherent complexities which have been thoroughly discussed in Volume 7. In the end, the project decided focus on levels 4040.G and 4040.F, with the construction of the shelter in its current location.
Ian summarizes the new phasing of the mound in Vol 7 where he notes that 4040.G is equivalent to South.O, South.N and South.M (Mellaart’s Levels VIA, VIB and VII) while 4040.F seems to be equivalent South.L and South K (Mellaart’s Levels VIII and IX).
When put this way, in nutshell the issue with the North Shelter levels seems to be this: there are more or less three building horizons that seem to span, material culture wise, in comparison to the South at least 5 building levels.
Could there ever be a way of refining such a stratigraphic strand when only three consecutive building horizons that have been uncovered through excavation? Could further excavating another level, for example, the building below B.132, actually tighten the sequence above?
In any case, this is what I have so far, much of it is open to discussion:
B.132 is the oldest building we have, which can be placed within 4040.G. This places the construction of B.77 and its middens to 4040.F. Space 490 and 489 would have been contemporary with B.77 (4040.F). B.108, built above the open spaces can be placed into 4040.H.
There is a direct link between B.77 and B.131 - in that the construction of B.77 cuts the walls and internal features (such as 2 niches and 1 oven) of B.131. B.131 on the other hand would have had to had another wall to the south supporting these niches and the oven which were carved beyond the extent of the building’s southern walls. For the longest time I have speculated that these walls would have been B.132’s walls. If that is the case, then B.131 would be placed in 4040.F with building 132. In this scenario, B.132 would have been abandoned right around the construction of B.77. The area would have been used as an open space until the construction of B.129 which happened after the destruction of B.77. The nature of this open space remains interesting - it seems to have been not used as a midden / activity area as we have no evidence for it. But the infill of B.131 was very much churned around and therefore could be evidence being exposed to the elements for some time. I imagine it would be a long time - if the number of burials within a building correlate with a building’s length in occupation, then B.77 should be one of those buildings used for a relatively long time. Further analysis of the infill of B.131, (22635), might be useful in understanding these temporalities.
In the scenario above, B.131 would be contemporary with B.132 at 4040.F and B.129 would be placed to 4040.H. What doesn't seem to fit in this scenario is the nature of the constructional materials used in building - they are very different in nature and definitely reflect different ways of processing constructional materials and building (more on that another time).
However, there is also a possibility (which I realized after a discussion I had with Justine regarding the eastern wall of B.131 and the later niche cut into it) that the builders of B.132 could have built a support wall abutting their southern wall while B.132 was being used as a ‘graveyard’ (sp. 602). Arek had found a number of walls in the northeastern corner of B.132 a posteriori its abandonment. Could one of these walls be such a feature that has also been truncated by the construction of B77? This is something I have to look into.
If that is the case, then we can place B.132 to an earlier level, 4040.E, which would place the burial ground to 4040.F together with B.131.
The architecture and the use of clay rich backswamp clays place B.132, to me reflect an earlier level of building construction than B.5, which is comfortably placed within 4040.G.
Shahina had an inclination to place B.77 to 4040.F, but she could not be sure.
Perhaps the difference in one level might not be so huge for some, but if we could know that it was the case, it would certainly make the dating of the North Area even more robust.
Construction material wise, B.52 seems to be most similar to B.132 which speculatively places them to the same level: 4040.F. I know that most specialists think B.52 belonged to 4040.G - perhaps this might be something that might be worth looking into again?
B.114 can also be placed into 4040.G - thanks to the work Justine is doing in Space 85 and also through circumstantial evidence of the burning of the outer face of its western wall through the fire that took place in B.77.
B.113 was built shortly after B.114 and can also be placed to 4040.G. I believe that this shortly lived building (very little occupational sequence is left) was destroyed due to the fire in B.77. However this is also speculative and open to discussion.
I could go on but I think this has been a long enough diary post. Like I said, I’ve been thinking about the north sequencing a lot and I am happy to discuss it with others. |
