Conclusion

147

XIV. CONCLUSION

In relationship to the stated goals of excavation (cf. pg. 14), excavation during the 2012 season in CB-59 was not a complete success, but neither was it a total failure. CB-59 did reveal stratigraphy which suggests an erosional fill (Locus 2) and then a thick layer of darker soil (Locus 3, closed along with the trench). A layer of even darker soil followed, but the trench was closed before a new locus could be declared. Despite increasing our knowledge of Civitate B's stratigraphy, CB-59 failed to reveal any evidence of architecture or habitation and as a result, failed to shed any light on the post holes unearthed in CB-56 and 57.

Failure to yield evidence for architecture or a floor surface associated with the post holes also leaves them in a state of ambiguity in relationship to the area south of them, and if the post holes are part of some light-frame architecture or a hut, excavation in CB-59 revealed that so far no

148

149

evidence for a socle or foundations or a wall of any kind is present. Excavation did reveal that if the 2.7 m (10 Oscan feet) distance between the two posts is not a coincidence, then there is no additional post in the area to the south. Beyond that, CB-59 did not contribute to our understanding of the post holes in CB-56 and 57 or of the terracing feature in CB-53 or the radically different soil in CB-55.

Due to the lateness of the season when work began in CB-59, excavation did not progress as far as in CB-58, but it would be interesting to see what excavation down to the level of the bedrock would reveal. It is possible that such work would help researchers better understand the geology and erosion process in Civitate B, and may yet reveal evidence of non-elite activity.