DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.15680#0029
THE EXCAVATION.
9
talus south of this line as far down as our rights extended, revealed every-
where the faces of small walls like retaining revetments, with cross walls
in certain places. These were of poor cbaracter, often resting merely on earth.
No continuous outward face could be hitupon anywhere, such as was so easily
found farther west. We were, however, much hampered for space in which to
dig. The prohibition against either throwing earth or allowing stones to roll
into the cultivation below maile it impossible to follow up the line of wall
cleared to westward, and we soon found ourselves at the foot of the talus and
the end of our territory, but not at any clear limit of the city. Though,
therefore, the inward face of a fortification had seemed to emerge clearly
enough, the outer face (the crucial test) was never found. If these remains
in the talus are of a fortification, its character is meaner than that of the
Great Wall to west.
Perhaps this lower eastern half of the town stood less in need of Strang
• 4.—The S.W. Angle and Bastion of tue Great Wall, ahoye the Ekoüed B.w.
mural defence. This supposition can only be justified on the theory that
the low fields to south and east are ancient sea lagoons, dried through the
gradual creation of the barrier beach of bouldeis which now fends off the
sea (Fig. 3). The arguinent which I used in the Preliininary Report (B.S.A.
iv. pp. 7, <S), that only on that theory could a sufficient harbour be found for
this obsidian-exporting centre in early times, is a strong one, and would be
conclusive if so much sea-erosion had not taken place {c.g. on the west of
the town) that the original coast line cannot now be known (Fig. 4). The
matter cannot at present be lifted out of the region of conjecture. We can
only say that we failed satisfactorily to settle the fortification question on the
south-east and east, and that it is only by further exploration that it can
be settled.
9
talus south of this line as far down as our rights extended, revealed every-
where the faces of small walls like retaining revetments, with cross walls
in certain places. These were of poor cbaracter, often resting merely on earth.
No continuous outward face could be hitupon anywhere, such as was so easily
found farther west. We were, however, much hampered for space in which to
dig. The prohibition against either throwing earth or allowing stones to roll
into the cultivation below maile it impossible to follow up the line of wall
cleared to westward, and we soon found ourselves at the foot of the talus and
the end of our territory, but not at any clear limit of the city. Though,
therefore, the inward face of a fortification had seemed to emerge clearly
enough, the outer face (the crucial test) was never found. If these remains
in the talus are of a fortification, its character is meaner than that of the
Great Wall to west.
Perhaps this lower eastern half of the town stood less in need of Strang
• 4.—The S.W. Angle and Bastion of tue Great Wall, ahoye the Ekoüed B.w.
mural defence. This supposition can only be justified on the theory that
the low fields to south and east are ancient sea lagoons, dried through the
gradual creation of the barrier beach of bouldeis which now fends off the
sea (Fig. 3). The arguinent which I used in the Preliininary Report (B.S.A.
iv. pp. 7, <S), that only on that theory could a sufficient harbour be found for
this obsidian-exporting centre in early times, is a strong one, and would be
conclusive if so much sea-erosion had not taken place {c.g. on the west of
the town) that the original coast line cannot now be known (Fig. 4). The
matter cannot at present be lifted out of the region of conjecture. We can
only say that we failed satisfactorily to settle the fortification question on the
south-east and east, and that it is only by further exploration that it can
be settled.