8589356525

24

JACEK LECH

Fig. 27. Sąspów, Cracow dist. Cross section of shaft No 1 and portion of Shaft No 2

a — shafi walls; b — rcconstructcd shaft walls; c — limits of layers; d — soil and subsoil; e — locss;/— Karstic clay with flint nodules; g — loess with artifacts, flint nodules and fragments; h — grey-bluish loess loam; i — Karstic clay with locss,artifacts, flint nodules and fragments;; — location ofcollected charcoal sample for

>⁴C dating - (Bln-1461) 3345±60 b.c.; k — location of collected charcoal sample for i«C dating (GrN-7052C) 3375--90 b.c.

order to reach thc flint rich Karstic clay, shafts were sunk right through thc locss layer. Shafts in their top part had an oval shape. Shaft No 1 was 8 m diameter at the mouth, and narrowcd to 5 m. This leads me to bclicvc. that the shafts wcre sunk ovcr a relatively large area As soon as the top of the Karstic clay layer was reached at about 2-2.5 m dccp, the size of the shaft was reduced. As a result, a shclf was formed (Fig. 27). It allowed the

Fig. 28. Sąspów, Cracow dist. Boundary of filling in shaft No 1 with layer of e!uvial clay containing flint nodules. Scalę 2m

Photo by J.Lech

workman to lift flint nodules and waste to the surface. Ali communication within the shaft — getting in, and out, as well as moving the rock — was directed through this place. Probably bctween the surface and the shelf there was an additional step. Shafts wcre usually sunk in the flint bearing layer to 2-3 m (Fig. 28), scldom less. The depth of shaft No 1 reaches 4.3 m below the present ground Ievel, which means approx. 4 m below the ground surface in the prehistorie period. The depth of shaft No 2 amounted to 4.8-5.1 m, the width of its top part was of approx. 5 x 4 m. The depth of shaft No 8 amounted to approx. 5m and the width to approx. 5.5x4 m. The smallest of the workings at Sąspów — shaft No 7 was 3.5 m deep with a mouth 4x3.5 m in diameter. Generally speaking, thc Sąspów shafts are 3-5 m deep, with thc diameter of the top part varying between 6 and 4 m. On the basis of this work, we can say that thc method adopted in working shaft No 1 and No 2 was by no means the only one. The various sizes and shapes of shafts suggest the existence of somc differences in the methods of working (Lech 1971; 1972; 1975b; 1981).

Similar workings to these occur on the territory of other mines. Shafts at Tuśimice were sunk through the