.bk A16 .fl L617FAB.J .fd -M726-A.J***L617FAB.J .fn revised Rx10 gB .rd L617 .ri fAB a 3 pr is the most recent structure in A16, so it and its brickfall must be excavated first. ;-NS a3 is the youngest structure in A16 ;so it and its brickfall must be excavated first. ;-NS changed to text file text L617fAB.T Brick sizes The bricks of a1 and a2 are an average of 8cm high, while the bricks of a3, those of brickfalls f25, f27, and f21 and those of structures in A11 are all 10-12 cm high. This marked difference is very important for reaching conclusions about the chronology of the settlement levels in A16 as well as in A11. endtext list1 a lf L617fAB.T 1 2 endlist list1 f lf L617fAB.T 25 27 21 endlist -SG We are involved now in working through thick topsoil layers in k3 and k4 to reach the brickfall that we assume lies below. Once we have reached brickfall throughout A16, we will clean and perhaps photograph the situation in loci k2, k3, k4, k7, k8. Once documented, we will begin removing the brickfall, slowly in k7 and k8 where walls appear in the south (only of k7 for now, while k8 is still somewhat covered with backfill) and more quickly in k3 and k4 where, due to the sections in k6 and k1, we believe that the brickfall is thick. We hope then to come down on a3 and related features, which must be dug first, since we believe that they are the most recent in A16. Work in k1, k5 and k6 is minimal, mostly staff looking for floors and structural components. list1 k sg see Incidentals\strategy under 2001-6-17 2 3 4 7 8 1 6 endlist a 1 I99 This aggregate, f4 in particular, is abutted by f25, the brickfall which covers a2 and may originate from a3, giving us a good indication of the time sequence between these three structures. a 2 C99 When cleaning this square, gB and the newer members of the staff discovered a floor (f29) that was associated with the rest of a2. I99 This aggregate is covered by brickfall f25 (which is actually in k5, but clearly is present in k6) which instead abuts a1 in k5. This means that a2 is earlier in date than a1, and a3 to the E seems to also be abutted (or even the point of origin) by a brickfall f21 which seems the same as f25. a 3 B11 This structure was found without digging at all in k7 - workmen found it by merely scraping and cleaning the topsoil. Immediately, three walls with a white plaster appeared in the far south of the square, and an extent of clearly defined brickfall to the North. .bk A16 .fl L617FAB.J .fd N217LR.J***L617FAB.J .rd L617 .ri fAB ; -DY We began the second week of excavation today. Today is Sunday, but on Saturday we continued to remove the backfill since the staff could not be present for the whole time. We worked in loci 1-7, coming down quite a bit in k2 k3 and k4. We have several distinct pieces we are working on. k6 contains the earliest structure, a2; work there is limited to scraping the walls and following the floor, which is merely a few centimeters below the level where we stopped work last season. k1 and k5 contain a structure (a1) that is hard to define, a U shaped structure with three walls that do not bond with each other, in fact the rows of bricks with which the walls were created do not even seem to bond with themselves: vertical cracks are visible from the top that go through several courses of bricks. This is the most complex question for the moment in A16: the stratigraphic situation within a1 and the connection to the cut and brickfall that is in k1. k2, k3 and k4 are all in topsoil layers, and we are coming quickly down to the brickfall that is present in k1 and k6 and seems to continue under these northern loci. Lastly k7: here we have immediately the brickfall we are expecting in k2,k3 and k4, with no topsoil. In the southern portion of the square there is even no brickfall: we see the faces of three walls (a3), beautifully plastered. The rooms open to the south, so A15 can expect to find walls relating to the same structure, but there may be a doorway, so there may be further rooms of the same structure under k7. k7 slopes up to the N sharply: could this be an indication of the Tell rising under a3, or large, well preserved portions of a3? ;-NS The bricks of a1 and a2 are an average of 8cm high, while +the bricks of a3, the brickfall f25, f27, and f21 and the structures in A11 are all 10-12 cm high. This marked difference is very important for reaching conclusions about the chronology of the area AH. a 1 C05 This aggregate is a bit puzzling at this point. We are faced with the following situation: There are three walls, forming a U with the opening to the W-SW. These walls seem to be at least 2 1/2 bricks wide, at times perhaps as thick as 3 1/2 bricks wide. The wall to the SW, f5, and the wall to the NW, f7, is composed of rows of bricks that are not bonded to each other, as if there were 2 or 3 single brick walls that were running parallel to each other with no space in between the rows. f5 could be a bench, since there are so few rows of bricks remaining, and the base of the wall seems to drop in elevation as the wall goes towards the SE. The accumulations are also puzzling: f3 is what we have defined the ac that is enclosed within the U shape of the walls, but it is unclear if f24 is a part of the aggregate or not. If it is, then the walls do not come down to the floor we presume is below. We presume a floor because the nearly intact pots i2 and i4, which sit in f24, must rest on a common floor, which runs under f24. So why are the walls founded so much higher than the floor? We may consider the fact that the walls are a later structure, and that f24 is an earlier accumulation. But if this is the case, why are i4 and i2 in exactly the opposite corners of the room a1 and intact, despite the building that was built on top of them?