| Entry: | I didn't get to finish my report yesterday as we had our first evening seminar led by Ian, on what we're doing here.
Ian worked for the morning in space 107 with Ali and Henry joined us in the afternoon. Ali numbered the unit he excavated yesterday as (1098), a small area of dense and compact clay. No samples were taken and described retrospectively. Unit (1099) was then defined comprising fine lenses of ash debris interleaved with clay, this is still under excavation. Basically all the units excavated so far in this space represent some form of dumped debris which appears to correspond with spaces 105, 106 and what we can see pre building in area 108.
Naomi has broken through! The blocking came out as unit (1086), (ought to have had a feature number).The discussion we had yesterday was whether the blocking was sealed at the top by a later wall or or whether it went to the top, it was very difficult to define due to heavy erosion. We wont know and can only record the two options as they imply different heights to the opening. I must check with Naomi what she thinks now that the blocking is out. The north opening jamb has a fairly thick plaster sequence whereas the southern is very fragmentary and worn. The wall plaster appears continuous with the floor plaster which has a shallow step down into space 108. In the centre of the threshold is a linear cut which appears to have been cut immediately prior to the blocking, the reason being that the floor layers are cut not worn or on a slope. If associated with the insertion of the blocking it may have been cut as a keying exersize. Colin and Atakhan have digitised the floors and once the feature is photographed the floors can come out, then the wall to the south, the north wall wont be ready until we know what is happening to the space on the other side. I would then like to keep an arbitrary section at this wall alignment and excavate the whole of space 107, although I don't think we'll be allowed to.The post floor pits have been excavated, cut (1080) to the north and cut (1500) to the south filled by (1096), overlain by what Naomi decided was a recut (1095) filled by (1075), I didn't agree with her and saw it as an upper fill.. From what Mellaart left us in this section we can only see that the pits post date the pre-blocking floors. The cuts were sealed by an 'infill' layer (1058), but I was wandering whether these cuts represent a mid sequence activity as foundation consolidation for the features Mellaart records in level VII. As well as the platform in this NE corner there was also a 'pillar' mid way along the east wall, fragments of which may survive but it's very eroded and we're not sure what these pillars look like and also one in the NE corner of the room, which appears to be still extant and comprises a shallow 'pillar' constructed in plaster. The cuts are in these two locations and both undercut the wall very slightly, why under cut a wall (unless loose material erosion), could that have been for underpinning? This then leads to the possibility that the building was structurally unstable and possibly the reason for blocking up the opening and inserting pillars was for structural support. This whole hypothesis is based on the floors being pre blocking which may not be the case at all. Now we have 3 possible reasons for the blocking; to build a wall over the extant one, as structural support and/or to make space for a platform, thats not to mention the falling out neighbours! The anomaly is however the 'infill' (1058).
I think I'll summerise the other two spaces tomorrow as I'm a bit tired. One has a fair number of thought processes during the day, times that by the number of people excavating and you end with alot to re-cap.Entered By: Shahina Farid |
