2004 TRENCHES PF 5E, 10, & 15 Katherine Blanchard, Field Supervisor Laura Crowley, Assistant Field Supervisor Week 7 - Final Report: Field Students: Abby Christofferson Sanda Heinz Andrew McClellan Volunteer: Lynn Makowsky   Back: Lynn Makowsky and Andrew McClellan. Front, left to right: Laura Crowley, Sanda Heinz, and Katy Blanchard. The season has ended. The trenches were backfilled in record time-I have never seen such a productive bucket line in my time here. We finished half a day earlier than expected. It is still bittersweet to see your trench one moment and then turn around and realize that it is no longer visible. A sense of completion is sometimes just as sad as it is happy. Katy Blanchard photographs post holes; Jess Galloway draws Feature 2 rubble. Since the last update, we had one day of excavation. The rubble from our wall was shot in by the total station and drawn by Jess Galloway and then we removed it. Luckily, there were no large surprises waiting within the spill. We photographed the newest carbon features in order to get a carbon specialist's opinion on their extraction for next year. Abby, Sanda, Laura, Andrew and Lynn had spent weeks carefully defining and pedestooling these rocks, avoiding them every time they walked around the trench and in the extraction of the Feature 2 material; and in one fell swoop, I had them take them all out. Sanda Heinz and her suggestive circular block. Because of my trench's diligent work this season, we finished on time. Ultimate goals for the season change as finds are found and walls discovered. And in my opinion, we completed all the goals I set forth for the trench this year. The trench is at our cosidetto floor level and until the loci to the east are opened next season, we couldn't excavate any further in this area. We did not find the bottom of the wall in the corner of PF 5E, but with the discovery of new circular carbon features, I do not mind the stopping in progress in that trench. Katy Blanchard explains PF 15 during final trench tours. During my final trench tour I found myself saying out loud the theory I believe the most: our heat related anomaly could in fact be a kiln, meaning that the cosidetto floor level's high carbon, low terracotta content is explainable to its relation to the HRA. This could explain why it didn't seem to continue into the corner of the building-if it were in fact a floor level it would appear all the way to the wall. And what if our newly exposed wall were indeed evidence of another room of the building? It is already longer than the interior wall of the building, meaning that if this were indeed another chamber to the structure it would be larger than the one excavated with an entirely different set of stratigraphy and artifacts. Final photo of Trenches PF 5E and 15 as seen from the southeast corner of the trench. Dr. Warden asked me during the trench tour what I believed the relationship of the new postholes to the structure would be. While I felt as if I had thought about it before, I found myself giving a brief answer that I later wasn't satisfied with, forcing me to think about it all day. [One of the things that is beneficial about trench tours is that questions are asked] And so I say it now: the cosidetto floor level (high activity soil) is related to the wall and the visible structure. This I feel confident in saying. The circular carbon features represent the bottom most section of a post. Meaning that the post rested in the soil below the floor but was used in the floor. Thus, the postholes, while below the active level, are indicative of activity at a higher level. The hole itself rests in the sterile soil below and doesn't reflect an earlier phase. If we excavate through the floor level next year, we will likely find more postholes. Circular carbon features--postholes in Trench PF 5E and 5E/15 scarp. This weekend I drew the finds from Feature 2, finding many joins and associated pieces from things we found throughout this area of the trench. I started thinking about these pieces more while working with them in the lab, and I realized that I do not want to toss around the phrase Banqueting vessel because of its connotations. [It's the same reason I insist to the students that the heat related anomaly is not called a kiln until it has a shape-if you give it a name, you start to assume about its surroundings. The cosidetto floor level also remains slightly vague in terminology. Feature 2 is not yet called a pit. And the circular carbon features are only colloquially known as postholes.] While the large "birdbath" vessel is similar to other banqueting vessels, all we can say for sure is that it is a vessel with a stand that merely could have been used in a dining context (but doesn't have to be). We also have a coarseware stand, and as of this weekend I think I can say that we have many pieces of its associated bowl. The full width tile that Andrew discussed in his student journal last week has a join to a piece of tile that we removed on Thursday, making it a full-width as well as full-length tile. Its deepest end must have rested on some level that is deeper than our vessels. Is this a pit? Our stratigraphy doesn't confirm this assumption. This is a question that I hope to answer next year. Above and below: Katy Blanchard shows a vessel profile from Feature 2 of PF 15.   Katy Blanchard and the "birdbath" vessel from PF 15. I look forward to the answers that next season can bring to this season's questions: What is the relationship of the circular carbon features to the cosidetto floor level and the structure? What is the relationship of the newly exposed wall to the structure? What is the heat related anomaly? Is Feature 2 a pit? And if so, why were these things thrown into a pit, since only some vessels were broken beforehand but the "birdbath" was broken only in situ? I would like to take this chance to give one last BIG thank you to my trench team this season: Abby, Sanda, Andrew, Lynn and my assistant Laura. Sanda Heinz, Lynn Makowsky, and Andrew McClellan await completion of Feature 2 photography before their final day of excavation.   Assistant Field Supervisor Laura Crowley (left) and Lynn Makowsky.   View from the east of Trenches PF 5E and 15. Final photo of Trenches PF 5E and 15 as seen from the northeast.   Left: Sanda Heinz with the rim sherd she excavated in PF 15. Right: Andrew McClellan demonstrates the correct use of a cover tile.   Above and below: nearly intact vessel from Feature 2 of PF 15.   Backfilling Trenches PF 5E, 10, and 15.   Survey plan of all Podere Funghi trenches (prior to addition of hand drawn details) showing building, kilns, and hearth.   For photographs of key finds from trenches in the recent season, see Finds.     Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 - Final Report Director, Gregory Warden gwarden@mail.smu.edu Director, Michael Thomas michael.thomas@tufts.edu While the team is in Italy during the summer field season, send e-mail to: mvap3@dada.it To email an individual on the team, enter the person's last name in the subject heading. Excavation house phone: 055-844-9834, or, when calling from the US: 011-39-55-844-9834. Introduction | 2004 Field Season | Poggio Colla Field School | What’s New | Staff | Students Site History | Directors' Diaries | Student Diaries | Excavation Friends | Facilities | Conservation | Surveys Robert Belanger | Katherine Blanchard | Josh Moran | Caitlin Vacanti | Ivo van der Graaff | Robert Vander Poppen QuickTime VR | Site Set-Up | Dig Daily Life | Excavation Process | Field Manual | Lectures | Season's End Archives | Finds | Research Projects | Publications | Bibliography | Mugello Area | Home