2. Cilt - Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı

Because of severe erosion along their outer (western) side, the originalwidth of these Phase 13 fortifications could not be estimated. The betterpreserveddefensive walls that preceded them in OP.M’s Phase 14 were morethan 3 m. wide, extending beyond the trench and current mound slope, andstood nearly 2 m. high (Fig. 4). Shared constructional features show that bothversions belonged to an unchanged tradition in settlement defense. The Phase14 walls suffered intense burning at some stage, and later reinforced by aheavy packing of stones. The contemporary settlement remains unexcavated,but it is again likely that its architecture and organization correspondedclosely with those of Phase 13, without cultural change.On the other hand, a later stage of EB II settlement was associated withthe town defenses for OP. M’s Phase 12, when reinforcements were againadded to the fortified enclosure (Fig. 5). A pivot-stone and crosswall afthe north balk suggest a gate outside the excavation limits; to its south, aninterior room, square in plan with heavy stone foundations, could representpart of a tower overseeing the gate 3 . Beyond it were three rooms/domesticunits, similar to the preceding Phase 13 in their clean brickwork, plastering,interior benches and lack of stone foundations. Like their predecessors, wallswere oriented parallel to the fortified enclosure. Phase 12 room layouts weredifferent, however, and wall buttresses were replaced by plastered niches.Transformations followed the same organic course as in Phase 13: three clearsub-phases shaded by smaller changes of limited overall impact. Fill on aroom floor produced a bronze/copper alloy pin with a spiral-patterned head(Fig. 6) 4 .The two levels in OP. M3 (13 x 9 m.) sufficiently resembled Phases 13 and12 in OP. M that they must bear some relationship. M3’s levels sit at a higherelevation than M’s, but shared their overall ceramic repertoire, architecturalcharacteristics, and orientation, in contrast to later developments here.Coordinating phases across the balk separating OP. M3 from OP. M haschallenged their five mutual seasons, since the two trenches produced little,even nothing, in common. In 2007, they seem at last to have combined forces,although the architectural phases were not precisely synchronous.3 The “tower” provided the long-awaited stratigraphic connection between the fortificationwalling and a datable occupational layer, since its foundations protruded from either side ofthe unexcavated strip for the municipal water pipe (“pipe balk”).4 KNH-1642 [‘07 M 281 l.496], l = 13.5 cm. Copper alloy; complete, but shaft separated into foursegments by corrosion.354