Chap. 2
Location, excavation, nomenclature
Localisation, fouille, nomenclature
p. 23-40
Résumés
This chapter groups together information about the location and geographical context of the site, the history of its discovery and first test excavation in 2009, the excavation strategy, methods and techniques implemented from 2011 to 2016, the general organisation of the site and the nomenclature used for describing the different excavated areas. More specifically, this chapter reports on the different events that influenced and sometimes drastically changed the course of the excavation. This was especially true in 2013, when the plot owner prohibited access to the Central Sector, precluding completion of the excavation of the Communal building and its immediate surroundings. This forced the research to expand to the peripheral areas, namely Sectors B and F, where several unsuspected residential buildings were found and studied. For all these round buildings, the general excavation strategy consisted in mechanical surface stripping, followed by a careful stratigraphic excavation of their fills conducted in quadrant trenches separated from each other by berms, in order to preserve and study profiles. All the non-reworked sediments were water sieved, and additional flotation and fine-mesh sieving were implemented for subsamples from the most interesting structures or stratigraphic units.
Ce chapitre regroupe des informations sur la localisation et le contexte géographique du site, sur l’histoire de la découverte et de la première fouille-diagnostique de 2009, sur la stratégie, les méthodes et les techniques de fouille mises en œuvre de 2011 à 2016, sur l’organisation générale du site et sur la nomenclature utilisée pour décrire les différentes zones fouillées. Plus spécifiquement, il fait état des différents événements ayant influencé et parfois fortement infléchi le cours de la fouille. Ce fut le cas en 2013, lorsque le propriétaire de la parcelle interdit l’accès au Secteur central, empêchant l’achèvement de la fouille du Bâtiment communautaire et de ses environs immédiats, initiée lors des campagnes 2011 et 2012. Cette situation a stoppé la fouille en 2013. Elle a amené les recherches à s’étendre aux zones périphériques, où des prospections géophysiques et de grands décapages mécaniques ont été menés en 2014, aboutissant à la découverte de trois bâtiments résidentiels au nord-ouest du site (Secteur F) et de 26 autres constructions comparables sur l’épaulement séparant la moyenne de la basse terrasse (Secteur B). La fouille du Secteur F s’est déroulée principalement en 2014 et s’est achevée en 2015, alors que celle du plus vaste Secteur B a réellement débutée en 2015 pour s’achever durant la campagne de 2016. Pour tous ces bâtiments plus ou moins circulaires, la stratégie générale de fouille a consisté en un décapage mécanique de surface, suivi d’une fouille stratigraphique soigneuse de leur comblement, menée par quadrants séparés les uns des autres par des bermes, ces dernières permettant la préservation de coupes et leur décryptage détaillé. Tous les sédiments non remaniés ont été tamisés à l’eau et des sous-échantillons de sédiments des structures ou des unités stratigraphiques les plus significatives ont été soumis à la flottation et à un tamisage à maille fine destinés à recueillir les vestiges archéobotaniques et microfauniques. Les résultats archéologiques réunis dans ce volume résultent de 164 jours effectifs de travail (2400 jours/homme). Elles ont concerné près de 30 décapages aux résultats très inégaux. Avec les sondages préliminaires de 2009 et le profil de la route qui longe la bordure orientale du site, les Secteurs Central, F et B ont apporté la quasi-totalité des informations. Ils ont permis de fouiller les restes de 37 bâtiments, et de délimiter les vestiges préservés du village, qui s’étendent sur plus d’un demi-hectare (5 582 m²).
Texte intégral
1. Location, topography, toponymy
1Cyprus is an oceanic island with a surface of 9,250 km2 that emerged from the bottom of the Eastern Mediterranean oceanic crust during the Tertiary period. It was never connected to the continent, located at least 70–80 km away, even during the Late Glacial regression (references in Vigne et al. 2014). The island is composed of three main geographical domains (fig. 2-1, A). To the south, the massive Troodos Mountains, composed of effusive rocks from the oceanic plate (ophiolitic series), extend 60 km east-west for 25 km north-south, culminating at 1 952 m a.s.l. The much narrower Kyrenia Mountains (or Pentadactylos) stretch 160 km (100 mi) along the northern coast and culminate at 1 024 m a.s.l. They are composed of sedimentary rocks (Permian to the Miocene) pushed up by a collision of the African and Eurasian plates (sedimentary arch). In between, lies the flat and dry Mesorea Plain, composed of the last marine and lagoon Plio-Pleistocene deposits before the complete connection of the two mountain chains.
2Klimonas is located at the north-eastern extremity of the vast Limassol depression, which stretches along the south coast of Cyprus, from the Akrotiri Peninsula in the west, to the boundary of the Pyrgos Plain in the east (fig. 2-1, B), where the Cypro-PPNB site of Shillourokambos is located. This depression was activated by the neotectonic subsidence of the thick marine sedimentary deposits of Moni (clay), Lefkhara (marble, limestone, with flint) and Pakhna-Koronia (limestone) series, which progressively flooded the southern foothills of the Troodos Mountains from the Cretaceous to the Miocene, during the emergence of Cyprus as an island. In its eastern termination, around Klimonas, this depression is composed of a series of limestone tiers topped with the Miocene limestone of the Pakhna-Koronia bioclastic formation, extending down in steps from the Armenokhori Plateau to the seashore (fig. 2-1, B; Briois et al. 2015).
3The topography of the northeast region of the Municipality of Ayios Tychonas is characterized by a series of relatively contrasted reliefs. These result from the incision of the north and east terminations of the Limassol depression by the deep and long thalweg of the Athiaki Stream, running north to the village, from the northwest to the south, and by one of its small tributaries coming from the Armenokhori Plateau straight to the south (fig. 2-1, C). Klimonas is located north of and above this confluence, between 135 and 145 m a.s.l., on three large natural terraces gently tilting to the south (fig. 2-2). To the north, these terraces were delimitated by the 5–8-m-high cliff of Miocene Pakhna-Koronia limestones, which was destroyed by the construction of a large building in 2008 (fig. 2-3). To the west, it is limited by the currently dry above-mentioned tributary of the Athiaki Stream, which runs along a large fault line. The now-destroyed Cypro-PPNA site of Throumbovounos (Briois et al. 2015) is located at the top of the small hill that creates the right bank of this small valley. To the east, the site was cut by a small road running south to north up to the lower step of Armenokhori, between the site and a deep depression created by a short secondary Athiaki tributary. To the south, the site vanishes into the slope, which has been deeply modified by human activity, especially artificial cultivation terraces. The lower part of the slope was covered with the fluvial terraces of the Athiaki Stream (chap. 3).
4According to P. Mylona, Klimonas means “vineyard” in Cypriot, while Athiaki means “small river”, a word phonetically close to Atiaghi, which means “flint”, probably referring to the massive flint outcrops still visible at the western head of the watershed.
2. Discovery of the site
5Catherine Petit-Aupert (Rennes University) and collaborators detected the site of Klimonas in 1989, whilst carrying out a series of systematic surveys of the country hinterland of Amathous, one of the major ancient city-kingdoms of Cyprus. Wisely, they did not restrict their survey to the time period of the city’s occupation, between c. 800 cal BC and the 7th century AD, but indexed and sampled all the nearby archaeological sites, including a series of prehistorical ones. In 1991, two of the authors (J. G. and F. B.) examined these materials and identified several original Neolithic series. After visiting the corresponding locations, they decided to make test excavations in the most important areas, in order to check their archaeological potential. Hesitating between Shillourokambos and Klimonas, they finally opted for the former, where successful excavations were carried out from 1992 to 2004. This site has subsequently become an important reference for the Cypro-PPNB (8500 to 7000 cal BC; Guilaine et al. 2011, 2021).
6This is why, until 2009, Klimonas was only known through a general description of the location and a rather small sample of archaeological items collected during a series of short surveys (Briois et al. 2005, p. 42-47). Surface surveys evidenced numerous flint scatters across a large area (eight plots), but the main concentrations seemed to be located in just two plots (168 and 169, fig. 2-2), which potentially represented the main places of occupation. This impression was strengthened by the existence of a thick grey-brown layer in the profile adjoining the road which cuts the site near its eastern limit. These surveys indicated two periods: (1) a very early Pre-Pottery Neolithic (with complete and fragmented unretouched or retouched blades, different kinds of angled burins and scrapers and two Byblos-type projectile points, with a short tang); (2) a Neolithic occupation with Sotira potsherds. It was because these diachronic finds seemed to be mixed in thick colluvial deposits that Klimonas was considered less interesting than Shillourokambos, and that the latter was excavated first.
7Over time, we observed that the site was becoming more and more endangered due to building pressure (fig. 2-3), particularly marked in the neighbouring vicinity of Limassol. Our fear that the site might be destroyed prompted us to alert the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus. In parallel, observations made by two of the authors (F. B. and J.-D. V.) on the road profile evidenced both the presence of PPNA flint arrowheads and well-preserved Suinae bones. In 2009, permission was granted for test excavations to assess the stratigraphic and cultural content of the deposits more accurately.
3. Test excavations (October 2009)
8The test evaluations conducted in October 2009 aimed primarily to ascertain if there were any undisturbed early PPN deposits, as well as estimating the potential of the site. The general strategy consisted of a series of 11 trenches limited to two plots, 168 and 169, adjacent to the road profile where dense archaeological deposits had been observed. The trenches were roughly arranged at the main intersection point of three north-south lines and four east-west lines (fig. 2-4, 2-5). A uniform approach to the excavation of each trench was adopted (fig. 2-6, A): (i) mechanical scraping 2 m wide and c. 5 m long down to the first archaeological layer, if any, otherwise to the bedrock; (ii) partial, 1 m wide, mechanical trenching of any archaeological layer down to the bedrock; (iii) manual test excavation of any archaeological layer found during mechanical scraping (Vigne et al. 2011).
9Several test trenches yielded evidence of undisturbed deposits dating to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (Vigne et al. 2011), especially 168-5, on the middle terrace, which yielded a lot of flint, pendants and bone items, with a strange vertical excavation, a 0.3-0.4-m-wide channel and a portion of flat surface. We did not initially realise that this was the edge of the Communal building (fig. 2-6, B). Two other test trenches (168-7, 169-3) located on the upper terrace edge, ended in a “channel”, which can be now interpreted as the foundation trenches of earth building walls (168-7, 169-3; fig. 2.-4). A fourth (168-3) evidenced a rich flint knapping workshop.
10In addition, the rejuvenation and study of the road profile (Vigne et al. 2011; chap. 3) evidenced a high degree of erosion on the site, due to a combination of Pottery Neolithic pit excavations, historical drainage, cultivation activities and naturally large incisive gullies running towards the east.
4. Excavations in the Central Sector (2011, 2012)
4.1. Excavation process and strategy
11Two seasons were devoted to the study of the Central Sector, focusing on the 2009 test excavations 168-3, 168-5 and 168-6.
12The first days of the 2011 season played a decisive role in the orientation of the excavation strategy. The initial mechanical then manual stripping of the southeast zone only revealed rather eroded features dating either to the Sotira or PPN times. However, we rapidly evidenced the perfectly circular delimitation of a 10 m diameter, named Structure 10 (St 10; fig. 2-7, A), and subsequently focused on the excavation of this totally unexpected monumental feature, which rapidly appeared to be the first Cypriot manifestation of well-known continent PPNA communal buildings (fig. 2-7, B).
13Most of the 2011 season was devoted to the excavation of the southern part of this feature, in the form of a 1-m-wide trench (span 37), intersecting the structure from the north to the east-west diameter (starting from the 168-5 test trench of 2009), and a separate cautious stratigraphic excavation of the southeast and southwest quadrant of the circle. The total surface excavated in this way represented about three-fifths of the southern extension of St 10, which was more eroded in the extreme southern part than elsewhere. During the 2012 season, following the same methods, the two northern quadrants, where fills should have been the thickest (in fact, c. 80 cm thick) and the best preserved (actually widely disrupted by Sotira pits), were excavated separately to leave a north-south berm. This provided an opportunity to detect the presence of earth benches and to study the complex northeast entrance of the building (fig. 2-8).
14The excavation was often complicated by difficult-to-detect secondary disturbances, namely Sotira earth extraction pits or silos that reworked the underlying deposits. However, in the end, we had access to a north-south (span B) and west-east (span 37) profile of the fills, and a precise planimetric description of the numerous Stratigraphic Units (SU) and structures in the large St 10 excavation. By resisting the temptation to empty fills quickly in order to access the base, we accumulated a lot of information on the complex and unsuspected history of successive demolition and re-building phases (Vigne et al. 2012; chap. 5 and 11).
15At the end of the 2011 season, the numerous highly eroded structures (trenches, post holes, fire places, etc.) excavated in the southeast area were recorded, and some were excavated (fig. 2-8). In 2012, we extended this reconnaissance excavation strategy to the northern areas, including the large zone of surface colluvial deposits evidenced in 2009 in the 168-1 and 168-6 test excavations. Here, we stripped a large area and recorded the stratigraphic units visible on the surface, in addition to a small northern trench excavated in row C (fig. 2-8). Although at that time we planned to excavate the east area in 2013, we started exploring it in 2012, owing to another 1-m-wide trench stretching to the east and spanning trench 37 opened in 2011, inside the St 10 building. This east trench (GR-37) also established a connection between the 168-5 and 168-3 test excavations of 2019 (fig. 2-8). As the aim was simple reconnaissance, we avoided excavating the main earth built structures that appeared in this trench.
16We recorded a total of 208 structures and 52 stratigraphic units in the Central Sector.
4.2. Information collection and storage
17We distinguished two categories of archaeological features: the Stratigraphic Units (SU; US in French), which are not strictly delimited layers of sediment with homogeneous colour, texture and archaeological finds; and the Structures (St), which are composed of a clearly different and strictly spatially delimited internal sediment with respect to the external sedimentological formation(s). The Structures (St) were numbered from 1 to n, in order of their discovery. The SU included in a St were identified by the name of their St followed by a number from 1 to n, separated by a dot (e.g., St 10.6). The SUs independant from a structure were numbered separately for each area of the Central Sector: starting from 1000 for the Communal building and southeast area, 2000 for the east area and 5000 for the north area.
18Topographical records were created with a total station (TS) and processed by one of the authors (R. T.). All the observations, successive hypotheses and advancements were recorded in the excavation diary (J.-D. V.). In parallel, photos of excavation progress were taken regularly and numerically stored throughout the day (J.-D. V.). Successive digital plans of the excavation area were printed each day and completed by hand in the field, then updated every evening (R. T. and J.-D. V.). Special attention was paid to the analyses and recording of profiles, under the responsibility of one of the authors (Y. F.). A standard description sheet was manually filled in by the excavator for each of the stratigraphic units and structures, then digitalized and numerically and physically stored. Simultaneously, an exact drawing of the plan and profile of all the main structures and SUs was recorded by hand, then digitalized in vector format (®Adobe Illustrator) under the supervision of Y. F. and J.-D. V. Most of this information is accessible in the numerical appendices of this volume, under Digital Object Identifier (DOI).
19A ®Stratifiant database (Desachy 2008), established and administered by Chloé Martin, CNRS, was regularly updated with excavation information in 2011 (but not in 2012). Every feature or SU form in the database comprises all the attached related documents. The package automatically produced a Harris matrix of the site.
4.3. Logistics, processing archaeological material, sieving and sampling
20During the course of the excavation, some of the flint, macrolithic and bone material were collected separately with respect to their SU or St provenance. The three-dimensional location was recorded for a small number of remarkable specimens. All the undisturbed sediment deposits were sieved in the field using either a 3-or-5-mm mesh, dry in 2011 and under running water in 2012. Due to the extreme abundance of flint material, it was collected from sieve refuse rather than during the excavation. In 2011, the flint was washed and sorted in the excavation house, but in 2012, it was sorted directly in the field, without a second washing, in order to preliminarily sort debris (fig. 2-9, A).
21From 2012 onwards, the logistics were improved by the installation of a container, the permanent presence of a generator and two vacuum cleaners on the site. The rental of an aerial work platform with a maximum height of 16 m above the site made it possible to take much better photographs.
22For collecting macrofauna, seeds and charcoal remains, flotation and sieving using 2- and 1-mm meshes were massively carried out in 2012, under the responsibility of M. Tengberg, MNHN (fig. 2-9, B). All sieve refuse was sorted under a stereo-microscope (see chap. 23, 24, 25, 28).
23The rare charcoals collected in 2011 were poorly preserved. Therefore, A. Zazzo, CNRS, applied a new approach to collecting charcoal in 2012, mainly by breaking open clods of earth before wet sieving and directly taking out the relatively good quality charcoals, especially for SU 10.2 (Building 3).
24Sedimentological and micromorphological studies focused mainly on the base of the east-west profile from St 10, by J. Wattez, Inrap and P. Mylona, MNHN, in 2012.
25In 2013, the bottom of the building was covered with a geotextile and refilled with sand, almost up to the original level.
4.4. Difficulties encountered
26The abundance of flint in the fills of the Communal building (about 1 tonne for the entire 2012 season) made the work cumbersome and complicated the excavation workflow.
27Another challenge consisted in discriminating the original primary or even secondary PPNA fills that had accumulated in the building, from the fills of more or less large pits excavated during the 5th millennium Sotira occupation phase of the site. Indeed, the latter were refilled shortly after digging with the locally extracted sediment, very rich in PPNA material. The distinction was made all the more difficult by the numerous bioturbations due to the development of vegetation and the very superficial position of the building remains, which blurred the limit between primary fills and secondary pit refilling. Only the presence of one or two often very small pottery sherds or, more rarely, of fallow deer or caprine bone fragments, made it clear, though too late, that we had been excavating reworked sediments, sometimes for several days. This was especially the case for the two one-metre-large St 190 and St 191 Sotira pits, which destroyed the thickest preserved PPNA structures and SUs of the north edge of the Communal building (fig. 2-10; chap. 4).
5. Delimitation of the extension of the preserved deposits (February and May 2014)
5.1. Strategic re-orientation: geophysical survey and mechanical stripping of the peripheral sectors
28The third excavation season should have resulted in the completion of the Communal building (St 10) excavation, the base of which remained to be studied, and the excavation of the east area. However, as the Cypriot Department of Antiquities could not obtain the expropriation of the land and the proprietor refused to authorize excavations, we found out at the last minute that it would not be possible to excavate in this area for several years. It was decided, therefore, that the 2013 season had to be re-oriented into a post-excavation and geomorphological prospection season, and that a new strategy of site exploration around the Central Sector needed to be developed in order to find other putative PPNA building areas.
29The exploration of plots 165 to the south, and 167 to the west (fig. 2-2, 2-11) was conducted in two steps: an extensive geophysical survey in March 2014 by two of the authors (C. B. and A. T.), then a series of mechanical stripping aiming to confirm the archaeological origin of the geophysical signals.
30The magnetic survey was conducted using a Caesium gradiometer G-858 (Geometrics) and the electromagnetic survey with a Slingram device, the CMD Mini Explorer (Gf Instruments, Brno), which simultaneously measures magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity at three different depths. The study area covered a little less than one hectare, divided between the three terraces and the meadow below. A series of strong electromagnetic anomalies were detected (Benech et al. 2017). The mechanical stripping focused on these signals distributed across five sectors (fig. 2-2 and appendix 2-1): A (west of the middle terrace: four long parallel tracks), B (lower terrace south to A: a large rectangle), C (southwest extremity of the lower terrace: two short tracks), D (lowest part of the lower terrace south to B: small quadrilateral) and E (upper part of the lower terrace south to the Central Sector: two short tracks). This allowed the source of the geophysical anomalies to be characterized and enhanced our interpretation of the magnetic and electromagnetic maps. The surveys provided more environmental than archaeological information, which was particularly helpful in restoring the pedological and geological context of the site (Benech et al. 2017; chap. 3). Archaeological remains visible on the magnetic map were usually from historical periods, as the Neolithic structures were generally too small to be individualized. The response of the magnetic signal was dominated by large amplitude anomalies related to the nature of the soil, with the highest anomalies being due to the presence of ultramafic rock elements (fig. 2-12).
5.2. Additional tests and the discovery of new PPNA buildings
31After the first day of mechanical stripping, it was clear that none of the geophysical signals corresponded to PPNA archaeological features, and therefore there were no preserved PPNA features in the western part of the middle and lower terraces, except for some highly eroded small buildings on the north fringe of Sector B (fig. 2-13, A). We therefore took advantage of the presence of the mechanical shovel to excavate some terraces that were too small to be geophysically surveyed, especially on the upper terrace (Sectors F and G) and on the edge between the middle and lower terraces (trenches B).
32Sector G did not provide any Neolithic remains (appendix 2-1), but the first stripping of Sector F immediately provided PPNA remains (fig. 2-13, B). These soon turned out to be the well-preserved foundation of a 6-m partly-embedded round earth building (B800), smaller but similar in its overall design to the Communal building from the Central Sector. The location of this discovery resembled the PPN remains found at the bottom of the two above-mentioned 2009 test trenches in the upper terrace (168-7 and 169-3), which were still enigmatic. Along with the renewal and study of the CR2 road profile (fig. 2-2, appendix 2-2), northeast of the Central Sector, it became clear that the PPNA village actually stretched to the upper terrace, at least on its southern edge.
33Building B800 from Sector F appeared to be a good representation of these upper terrace PPNA buildings, but, after ten days of excavation, we realized that once we had finished studying the building, we would have no further opportunity to prolong excavations at Klimonas, given that access to plots 168 and 169 was precluded by the owner. Therefore, new mechanical tests were conducted immediately. These proved to be negative in Sector F (TF2 and TF3, fig. 2-2). However, they were much more successful in the northwest angle of plot 165, between the south limit of the Central Sector and the two above-mentioned eroded buildings of Sector B, a ledge of about 40 square metres, too small and uneven to be geophysically surveyed (fig. 2-14). In this area, considered as the upper part of Sector B, one long (TB1) and three short trenches (TB2-4) revealed wide and deep deposits dating to the PPNA which were excavated in 2015 and 2016.
6. Excavation in Sector F (2014–2016)
34Sector F was mostly excavated during the 2014 season, and yielded the well-preserved remains of the large building B800, together with the external fire pit St 801. The last discovered feature and the final survey go back to 2015. A smaller test excavation in 2016 evidenced the presence of two other buildings (906 and 907) close to the east edge of B800.
35The fills of building B800 were only preserved in its northern half. The rocky floor of the south half was directly topped by thin arable soil and badly preserved in its southernmost extension (fig. 2-15, B).
36The excavation strategy and techniques were the same as for the Communal building: manual stratigraphic excavation in four quadrants (NW, NE, SE, SW), creating north-south berms which provided north-south and east-west profiles (fig. 2-15, B-C); collection of material according to SUs or Sts, except for remarkable items (plotted as “isolated” finds: ISO-F); systematic water sieving using 5- or 3-mm meshes on site, flotation tests using 1-mm mesh wet-sieving, systematic sampling of micromorphological blocks; recording excavation information though the diary journal and photos, total station 3D mapping, orthophotos and scaled drawings of the profiles. Here again, it was especially difficult to differentiate the original PPNA fills from those of numerous Sotira pits, which sometimes even dug into the rocky floor of the B800 building (fig. 2-15, C). It was only after studying the material, especially the animal bones (presence of fallow deer or Caprini), that we were able to disentangle these complex stratigraphic situations.
37Excavation of the peripheral wall trench and most of the post holes and pits dug into the rocky floor of the building was difficult due to the presence of solid limestone pedological concretions that sometimes required the use of a hammer and chisel. After the excavation, the base of the building was covered with a geotextile and refilled with sand up to the original level.
7. Excavations in Sector B (2014–2016)
7.1. Excavation season 2015
38The 2014 season revealed the highly eroded remains of two PPNA buildings (B01 and B02) at the north boundary of the 471 m² stripped zone on the Sector B lower terrace (fig. 2-2 and 2-13, A; appendix 2-1), and important and diverse PPNA deposits on the lower topographical step of the upper terrace (Trenches T1-4, fig. 2-14) i.e., the middle terrace of the site. The 2015 Sector B excavation, therefore, aimed to explore the area located between these two test excavations. A 395 m² window was mechanically then manually stripped for this purpose, centred around trenches TB1 to TB4 down to the lower terrace 2014 trench (fig. 2-16, A-B). This led to the discovery of the remains of about twenty buildings.
39The hollow structures (pits, post holes, foundation trench) of three very eroded buildings (B03, B04, B07), located to the west and southwest ends of the Sector B upper terrace, were fully excavated during the 2015 season. The adjoining eastern Zone (a) was simply stripped and the main surface features recorded. Here, the limit between the archaeological fills and the paler substratum outlined a succession of arcs suggesting the existence of four buildings terraced into the slope (B05, B06, B07, B08, fig. 2-16, B), and the presence of a large spread of stones, as well as the outcropping of a coated floor probably related to a fifth edifice (B09). Zone (a) was not excavated in 2015.
40Efforts were mainly concentrated around TB2 where a thick infill was detected during the 2014 surveys. The lower part (Zone (b), fig. 2-17) yielded a set of stratigraphic units and wall portions, in spite of severe surface bioturbation and slope erosion. The layout of these features was carefully recorded in plans, profiles and photos, but it was not possible to unravel the sequence of the construction, demolition and infilling phases affecting this sector in 2015, because the deposits had been disturbed by two large and still enigmatic hollows at that time. We could only confidently ascertain that a narrow corridor of levelled and coated floors at the base of the slope was broken up by a jumble of four narrow curvilinear ditches interpreted as foundation trenches (B13, B14, B15, B23) and by diverse -structures (combustion pit, cupmark sealed in the floor, fig. 2-18). This complex pointed to the presence of at least two buildings beneath the thick and intricate infills and was deferred for study until the 2016 season.
41The high part, Zone (c), corresponding to one individual building (B10, fig. 2-17), was also excavated using the same strategy as for the St 10 and B800 buildings, i.e., successive stratigraphic excavation in quadrants providing east-west and north-south profiles of the building’s fills.
42The eastern part of the upper terrace of Sector B was manually cleared, and a series of surveys brought to light the existence of a least one large building in Zone (d) (B18, B28, B16?), adjoined in the south by two other highly eroded buildings cut into the slope (Zone (e), B19 and B21). Further to the east, in Zone (f), which is very near to the southeast area of the Central Sector, a number of agricultural structures and silos were found, dating from the Neolithic, as well as pottery and two additional buildings (B20 and B22), together with some short sections of foundation trenches relating to other buildings. These zones (d-e-f) were not excavated in 2015.
7.2. Excavation season 2016
43The main aim of the 2016 campaign was to enhance the description and understanding of the diversity and chronological and spatial dynamics of the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic, based on the study of zones (a) to (e) in Sector B. It was also a good opportunity to amass additional information relating to the techno--economic, environmental and socio-cultural domains. In spite of the abundant finds collected up until then, no domestic or artisanal zone had been found. It was thus necessary to pay particular attention to the objects in the primary infills and to the bioarchaeological remains that they were likely to contain (retrieved by flotation and fine-mesh sieving with the same strategy and techniques as during previous seasons).
44Careful protection of the zones excavated in 2015 prevented any damage and enabled us to manually reopen the site very quickly. The excavation was carried out in three stages:
Exploration of the infills in profile, by reserving perpendicular berms oriented along a north-south (CPN) and an east-west axis (CPE), and, in top view, by excavating the rectangles delimited by these berms, referred to as Sector B trenches (TB, fig. 2-19, appendix 2-3).
Removal of the berms and clearing of the floors and fills of the buildings’ foundation trenches. After this second stage, all the buildings were systematically recorded and plotted at a scale of 1/20e. A series of photographs was taken from a mobile platform, resulting in an almost overhead view about 15 m above the ground.
Study of the foundation trenches, floors and internal structures of the buildings, by excavating in section and from above for the hollowed-out structures. About fifteen blocks of sediment were sampled from the wall, floor and hearth profiles for -sedimentological and micromorphological analyses.
45The in situ PPN sediments were sieved under running water on the site, using 5 and 3 mm meshes. Over 4 000 litres of sediments corresponding to primary fills or the infilling of -foundation trenches or combustion pits were processed by flotation using 0,2 mm meshes for seeds and charcoal. Some of the sediments were also wet sieved using a fine mesh (2 and 1 mm) to collect microfauna.
8. Conclusion
46The excavations reported in this volume result from 164 effective days of work (2 400 days/person) on nearly 30 trenches (see recapitulation of the nomenclature in appendix 2-4), with very disparate results. Together with some of the 2009 preliminary test excavations, and the road profile, the Central, F and B Sectors provided almost all the information (fig. 2-20). The excavation of 33 building remains and the possible presence of four additional buildings, brought to light a total of 37 buildings. The excavation also enabled us to delimit the village, or at least the preserved remains of the village, which stretch over more than half a hectare (5 582 m²).
47At the end of the 2016 season, the study of Sectors F and B was completed. It was still prohibited to excavate on Plot 168, to complete the study of the Communal building and adjacent areas. As Plot 169 was owned by the same person, it was also impossible to expand the excavation of buildings 906 and 907 (Sector F) or to excavate the rest of the upper terrace, near the 2009 test trenches. As a huge amount of information had already been collected and needed to be organized, studied and published, because it was necessary to preserve parts of the site for posterity, and because the procedures for the purchase and protection of the site initiated by the Cypriot Government threatened to be long-lasting, it was decided to end excavations at Klimonas. The 2017, 2018 and 2019 seasons of the “Neolithisation of Cyprus” French mission were therefore devoted to some final geomorphological surveys and, moreover, to studying the material.
Annexe
KLIMONAS-Ch02-A01, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.c48dcgfj
Description of the mechanical stripping conducted in 2014 at Klimonas and comparison with the geophysical observations • Description du décapage mécanique réalisé en 2014 à Klimonas. Comparaison avec les observations géophysiques
Jean‑Denis VIGNE (CNRS), Christophe BENECH (CNRS), Yodrick FRANEL (Inrap), Pantelitsa MYLONA (MNHN), Alain TABBAGH (Sorbonne-Université), Régis TOUQUET (Inrap)
KLIMONAS-Ch02-A02, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.ad407u7e
Description of the CR2 profile (2014) from the Klimonas road (upper terrace) • Description de la coupe de la route CR2 de Klimonas (terrasse supérieure)
Yodrick FRANEL (Inrap), Pantelitsa MYLONA (MNHN)
KLIMONAS-Ch02-A03, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.059074j1
Klimonas 2016, Sector B, upper terrace: location of the profiles and trenches (TB) designed for studying the secondary fillings of the buildings in Zones (a), (b), (c) and (d) • Klimonas 2016, Secteur B, terrasse supérieure : localisation des profils et des tranchées (TB) mis en place pour l’étude des remplissages secondaires des bâtiments des zones (a), (b), (c) et (d)
Jean‑Denis VIGNE (CNRS)
KLIMONAS-Ch02-A04, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.e8eb4e0i
Nomenclature of the different excavations conducted at Klimonas • Nomenclature des différentes fouilles menées à Klimonas
Jean‑Denis VIGNE (CNRS)
Auteurs
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Les allées sépulcrales du Bassin parisien à la fin du Néolithique
L’exemple de La Chaussée-Tirancourt
Arnaud Blin
2018
Les sépultures individuelles campaniformes en France
Laure Salanova et Yaramila Tcheremissinoff (dir.)
2011
La grotte-abri de Peyrazet (Creysse, Lot, France) au Magdalénien
Originalité fonctionnelle d’un habitat des derniers chasseurs de rennes du Quercy
Mathieu Langlais et Véronique Laroulandie (dir.)
2021
Klimonas
An Early Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village in Cyprus
Jean-Denis Vigne, François Briois et Jean Guilaine (dir.)
2024