| Entry: | B.132 is obviously huge edifice whose extent easily could astonish visitor. If you stand on the western edge of the research area facing towards the East below you can see the wide surface of undulated floors and UBIQUITOUS HOLES that dominate within the interior of Sp.531. One may say that the good quality of a cheese can be judged by the number of holes. In case of the mentioned building, however, the presence of so many different types of pits that truncated major part of the room is annoying. Sometimes I think there is more gaps than real building. I must admit that from the point of view an excavator who had to explore most of their in-fills and expose enormous cuts the work evoked varied feelings. Most of them implicated heart break. At that time as well as now, each time when I stand and look at the building from the West few questions come to my mind: WHY THEY had done such a terrible cavity to the building they lived and worked ? and: where the hell was the illustrious Neolithic respect and sensitivity for the house ?
The biggest pits were executed during the abandonment phase in order to retrieve wooden posts set on the particular spots as constructional elements. The extents of those are impressive as for the covered area as for their depth. The same feelings regard to B.160 (South) and B.119 (North). In the both there we could also evidence massive post-retrieval pits. Worth noticing is that the placements of the pits in B.119 are exactly the same as in B.132.
What I can feel standing still on my spot - above the trench - when I turn my head towards the North? – Only sincere jealous. My dear neighbors, who work there in B.131, they do not have to look out on their steps, they have no terrible openings, and their floors look nice. The difference between those two neighboring buildings (131 and 132) concerns mainly in abandonment practices and varied ways of treatment undertaken in the last stages of the use. B.131 was totally burnt, and there is no such an evidence in B.132. However, why the residents of the first structure did not take the timbers from the interior? Their charred remains and imprints of their actual shapes can be noticed next to the walls as well as within the central part of the room. The same circumstances could be seen in B.77 and B.80 (perhaps also in B.52 ?).
If the posts/timbers were really employed as constructional elements that supported the roof - Does it mean, that the conflagration took place within roofed (closed) area. It is difficult to understand how it could be: To Set and keep fire for long time there must have been constant access to the oxygen – how then people provided the fire causing hard-backed furniture only employing a hole in the roof. How it could be also possible to collect and gather there the huge amount of fuel via the same (small) hole playing the role of the only entrance to the building.
The presented above two ways of abandonment treatments and related with them conditions as well as circumstances and consequences are really intriguing. |
