LITMIR.BIZ

Fig. 1.6 Shows Tepe Hissar square DF09 where a trench was dug from the top of the mound to the base of the mound, exposing all occupational levels (after Schmidt 1937: fig.27).

      C. 2 Maps, Elevations, and Cross-Sections of 1931 Season

      Leitner undertook the major mapping tasks, completing a contour map of the site (Schmidt 1933: pl. LXXVIII) in September 1931, a map of Damghan and its environs (ibid., pl. LXXVI) in October 1931, and a regional archaeological map (ibid., pl. LXXV) in November 1931. The site survey was fixed by the placement of four benchmarks (BM 1–4). Elevations were based on the highest point, BM-1, the elevation of which was arbitrarily set at +10.0 meters, marked as 00, with depths taken down from this line (Schmidt 1937: DF09, fig. 85). A discrepancy may be noted in that the scale used with the mound sections of 1937 (ibid., fig. 19) end at +20 meters which equals the 00 datum. The elevation system allowed the recording of depths of walls and burials below the 00 datum, which, in the absence of depositional stratigraphic recording, was the main recording method. These depths were plotted on “cross-sections” taken across each excavated “plot” (10 m square) along a center west-east line. Each cross-section recorded the actual walls and burials encountered along the section line, plus depths of other walls and burials in the square projected against it. Apparently no north-south cross-sections were drawn as they are absent in both publication and archives. These “cross-sections” are really elevation profiles, and should not be confused with measured, drawn, stratigraphic sections with numbered depositional strata as are currently in general use—a system which post-dates Schmidt by some 20 years (Wheeler 1956).

      C. 3 Grid System, Quadrants, Plots (Squares), and Plot Record Numbers of 1931 Season

      An east-west, north-south grid system was laid out running through the center of the Main Mound (the highest area), plot DF09. The grid consisted of 100 m square quadrants designated by capital letters of the alphabet running west-to-east (e.g., A–D) and north-to-south (e.g., A–F). Each quadrant was then subdivided into “plots” of 10 square meters, numbered 0–9 west-to-east and north-to-south. Thus, 09 is a “plot” number located by east-west (0) and north-south (9) coordinates within quadrant DF (Schmidt 1933: pl. LXXVIII). At the beginning, before the grid system was in place, Schmidt designated plots being worked by lower case letters of the alphabet (e.g., plot “a,” “b,” etc.). Later the grid coordinates were assigned to these temporary letters in his daily journal: (a=DG10; b=CG60; c=CG61; d=DG96; e=CH95; f=DH05; g=DF19; h=EG06; and i=DF18), a list which also indicates the first squares explored. These plot numbers differ from the “plot record” (pr) numbers that were used to locate artifacts on graphed notebook pages for each 10 meter plot or square in individual “plot books.”

      These plot-record numbers (e.g., pr 10) often appear in the field catalogue of artifacts, and occasionally on plans (e.g., pr 25 on Schmidt 1933: fig. A). Unfortunately, over the years, many of these notebooks have badly deteriorated or disappeared, so the record is not complete. Aside from burial sheets, these notebooks gave the only horizontal locations for the artifacts found. In 1931, Schmidt used the terms Main Mound and the Painted Pottery Flat as area designations; in 1932 the terms North Flat, Red Hill, Treasure Hill, South Hill and the Twins were added (1937: fig. 16). These designations were added after the fact, on photographic plate LXXIX (Schmidt 1933), but do not appear in the text. An additional term, CG Depression, is used informally in 1933 for an older trench between the North Flat and the Red Hill in the CG quadrant.

      C. 4 Field Catalogue of 1931 Season

      In the daily field catalogue, artifacts were recorded sequentially with H-prefixed numbers on the day of recovery. The depth of the object recorded is usually given. In all cases, the burial number is given; from these, depths can be calculated using their placement on cross-sections. Schmidt (1933:338) notes that the plot books also recorded the daily state of the operations. Architectural records also give dates and depths of excavations. Since the field catalogue provides the date of registration for objects recorded on the same day as excavation, artifacts are grouped by date, which, when correlated with dates and depths recorded elsewhere, orders them in vertical clusters. All burials excavated (180 in the top [Building] Level I of the Main Mound; ibid., pp. 392, 439–440, pls. CXLVII, CXLVIII) had individual burial sheets with a drawing of the skeleton and associated remains (ibid., pl. CLII), where artifacts are drawn but not numbered. These burials were not plotted on the excavation plan of the Main Mound in 1931 (ibid., pl. CXII) but were plotted on the DG36 plan from the Painted Pottery Flat (ibid., fig. A), on the CG25 plan between the Main Mound and Red Hill (ibid., fig. B), and on a plot plan for the Main Mound (ibid., pl. CXLVII). Burial plans are not published in 1933 for the other excavated plots (CG60, CG61, DG96, CH95, DH05, EG06) but appear in the final publication of 1937.

      The field catalogue also records the type of object, material, dimensions, and occasionally depth and/or “pr” number. While in Philadelphia, Schmidt assigned objects to his major periods in the margins of his notes. Subsequently, a number of these were changed, showing a shift in his thinking based on his stylistic analysis of the burial ceramics largely in the absence of reference to stratigraphic context. This revision obviated opinions recorded in his daily journal at the time of excavation. Ironically, his original opinions correspond more closely with the results of the 1976 restudy.

      In addition to objects recorded in this catalogue, Schmidt published two plates of painted pottery sherd drawings from Hissar I (1933: pls. LXXXVIII, LXXXIX) without regular catalogue numbers; each item is identified by an H followed by a letter of the alphabet and a number. In a separate typed list entitled “Potsherd Catalogue Tepe Hissar 1931” (Penn Museum Archives, Box 9), 96 sherds are listed as H a1, a2, etc., using the alphabetical plot designations that indicate excavation squares prior to the adoption of the grid system (see above under Grid System). These two plates are not reproduced in 1937.

      C. 5 Plans

      Only three plans are provided for squares excavated in 1931 (Schmidt 1933: fig. A: DG36, fig. B: CG25, and pl. CXII: DF07–09, DG00, DF18–19, DG10, and DF29). These plans are somewhat misleading since they plot more than one building level of architecture on the same plan. The plans make it appear as though the architectural remains in different squares lie on the same level (Schmidt 1937: fig. 84), whereas, in the Main Mound plan of 1931, the base of excavation in DF18 and 19, west of Building 2, is over a meter above the floor level of Building 2 in DG00 and DG10 (Schmidt 1933: pl. CXIII). The examination of extant walls in 1976 showed that they were well-built, of regular brick masonry, with standard dimensions. In the case of the first two plans mentioned above, the burials are plotted with the architecture, sometimes directly over walls. The depth relation to the walls is given in an accompanying cross-section.

      In the case of the Main Mound DF–DG squares, the architectural plan lacks the burials, which are plotted on a separate plan without reference to walls or depth (ibid., pl. CXLVII). This latter information was subsequently provided (Schmidt 1937: figs. 84, 85). The plans are often obscured by height shadings along the walls and superimposed burial numbers. In addition, plans for most excavated squares were not published in 1933, a fact which makes it difficult to reconcile published photographs with textual description (e.g., CG95 Schmidt 1933: pl. LXXXI, p. 343). Walls on plans sometimes bear sketched-in brick lines that provide the direction of the bricks (usually laid as stretchers), brick size (bricks essentially match text dimensions when sketched), and the number of rows of bricks (two or three rows), which indicates approximate wall widths of 60 or 90 cm. These widths match the wall widths in the cross-sections.

      C.

Скачать книгу