Object of this thesis is the study of ancient spaces, their organization, function and perception by the people who created and lived them.

The focus of this thesis is the architectural evidence from the residential area of the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique periods at the centre of the oasis of Tayma, NW Arabia.

Excavated between 2004 and 2015, the rather well-preserved sequence of occupation levels supported their detailed investigation. The main aims of this study were to identify the spatial configuration of the domestic buildings and to understand how political, economic and social dynamics influenced the perception and conception of space in an urban environment. In this research, about space and its use, space syntax plays a key role.

Space syntax is a technique used in spatial analysis to capture the set of abstract rules that define the spatial configuration at a defined moment of its period of use and through different occupations.

Considering a large set of evidence and performing a multidisciplinary approach, this research shed new light on the spatial configuration of the buildings and on the changes that occurred between 2 nd and 6 th c. CE at Tayma. The main results of the analyses included: identifying access to individual buildings and movement within them and determining the functional differentiation of living spaces.

This research puts Tayma into the large-scale changes attested between the Nabataean and Roman periods by several other archaeological sites in NW Arabia, as the spatial configuration at this site during this period seems to have considerably changed. On the other hand, the transition to the Late Antique period shows clear signs of continuity attested by the buildings which often reuse the spatial configuration from the Roman period. This interpretation might point either to an absence of large investments of resources, or to a continuity in the use of domestic spaces.

iii RÉSUMÉ La présente thèse est une étude des espaces anciens, de leur organisation, de leur fonction et de leur perception par les personnes qui les créèrent et y vécurent.

Cette thèse se focalise sur les restes architecturaux de la zone résidentielle, située au coeur

FIGURES

Figure 199: Overlapping of all justified graphs per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods), including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (visitor-inhabitant relationship) ........... 277

Figure 200: Overlapping of all justified graphs per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods) , including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (inhabitant-inhabitant relationship) .... 278 Weigel 2019,108,Table 1) The first section of this chapter briefly presents the research background and motivation for the choice of topic, while the second section focuses on the research questions. The last section provides an outline of this thesis.

xx

TABLES

RESEARCH BACKGROUND

The notion of space (whether built space, personal space, social space, etc.) has been theorised in diverse research fields, including sociology and architecture, since the 1950s and 1960s. It was mainly in the 1970s that the analysis of this notion, through spatial analysis, was applied to archaeology. The diversity of methods used in this type of analysis depicts well the multitude of perspectives from which space can be examined. Space syntax analysis, as a technique for spatial analysis, was coined by Bill Hillier and his team in the 1970s to analyse spatial configuration mathematically and theorise its socio-cultural meaning. Since then it has been received with positive and negative feedback by scholars all over the world. Space syntax analysis is, fortunately, not a technique that has stagnated, and its methods have been revised not only by the original team but also by several scholars who understood that it must be critically adapted to individual case study. There have been numerous case studies that have applied this space syntax technique to archaeological evidence; usually in its more basic version to understand the use of space. Regardless of the quantity of previous case studies, each one provides an understanding of how space was used in a very particular context, such as in this thesis.

The residential area, located at the centre of the oasis of Tayma in North-West Arabia (NW Arabia), has been and is currently being studied from a range of different perspectives, including the classification and analysis of pottery, 2 object classification and the diachronic analysis of individual buildings. 3 However, a systematic study of building plans has not yet been done. The focus has mainly been on understanding individual occupation levels (OLs 4 ) in the residential area and not from a diachronic perspective. The state of preservation of thirteen buildings belonging to three continuous levels of occupation dated to the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods, turned out to be suitable for carrying out a space syntax analysis. Nevertheless, although this technique is applicable to the present case study, it must still be critically reviewed and adapted to maximise any attainable results.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Tayma is an oasis in NW Arabia between the Nafūd desert to the East and the Hijaz Mountains to the West, extending over an area of 9.23 km 2 and with an almost continuous occupation from the 3 rd millennium BCE onward. A wide range of political, social and economic dynamics shaped the development of the oasis of Tayma between the Nabataean and the Late Antique Periods, which is the focus of the present study. One of the main hypotheses supporting this thesis is that an urban environment is charged with meaning, 5 which is based on the assumption that the aforementioned dynamics made an impact on how space was understood at an everyday level at this crossroad on the Frankincense Road. This hypothesis, if accepted, leads to the question of how space was perceived and conceived, i.e. the organisation between public and private spaces; access to the buildings and to individual rooms; movement within buildings; and the interaction between various types of spaces. In short, the use of space.

2 Francelin Tourtet, personal communication: PhD thesis in preparation by Francelin Tourtet at the Freie Universität Berlin: "Pottery at the oasis of Tayma (Kingdom of Saudi-Arabia): Chronological, typological and technological studies". 3 Weigel in press; Kohl unpublished BA thesis. 4 Occupation level (OL), see Chapter II, Section 3.3. 5 Hillier and Hanson 2005.

In the intrasite spatial analysis, architectural evidence from the residential area at Tayma is at the centre of the analysis, focusing on three occupation levels, namely those of the Nabataean (OL E-South:4 and OL F:4), Roman (OL E-South:3 and OL F:3) and Late Antique

(OL E-South:2 and OL F:2) Periods.

According to Hanson, a genotype is a "particular type of numerical consistency in spatial patterning" 6 , a set of abstract rules that defines a spatial configuration. The genotype then displays itself in phenotypes, that is in each single building. Results of this kind of analysis provide an understanding about the form (the formal property of space -that is the spatial configuration) and the function (the purpose of a building) of a building. 7 The former can be obtained through a space syntax analysis, while the latter requires a discussion of the results within their contexts. The aim is to understand if a genotype can be attributed to each of the periods in the analysis, which is manifested through a variety of phenotypes. 8

First, it is necessary to gain a basic understanding of the results obtained that can be from the space syntax analysis proposed in this case study. More precisely, how is the access to and movement through each building (phenotype)? Are there differences between individuals accessing the building from the outside -visitors -and those already moving insideinhabitants?

Second, the results need to be understood within a wider setting, embedded in the context of the residential area as a whole. Assuming that there is a "value as a settlement space" 9 in the already existing spatial configuration, the question that arises is: is there continuity in the spatial patterns brought to light? If the answer is positive -one set of rules defining the spatial configuration (genotype) that extends through all periods -this would mean that there is a "vertical construct" 10 based on repetition of those rules and not variation. The residential area could be represented by one set, independently of the period. A negative answer -more than one set of rules (genotypes) could be observed -would mean that verticality does not exist and that each occupation is based on variation due to a comprehensive change of dynamics. Each period at the residential area could be represented by a changing set of rules defining the spatial configuration. 6 Hanson 1998, 32. 7 Foster 1989, 42. 8 Specific terminology used for space syntax technique (genotype, phenotype, spatial configuration, etc. ) will be explained in more detail in Chapter III. 9 Bailey 1990, 42. 10 Bailey 1990, 24. More concretely: are genotypes bound to each period in the residential area or are they cross-period phenomena? What impact did the Nabataean influence or the Roman annexation have on daily life at the oasis of Tayma? Can such influences be seen in the archaeological record on a domestic level, i.e. the architectural evidence?

It is hoped that this analysis will provide an understanding of the degree of influence that the political, social and/or economic dynamics had on the spatial configuration of the residential area, taking into consideration the mathematically captured use of space.

THESIS OUTLINE

Chapter II will start with an overview of the historical dynamics in NW Arabia for the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods. The second section will present the oasis of Tayma, including the history of research, the site-specific technicalities (temporal and spatial denominations used) and the embedment of the development of the oasis within the wider NW Arabian context, first in the earlier periods up until the Nabataean Period and then for the periods analysed in this research. The third section will present information about the residential area as the case study, including its location and chronostratigraphy.

Chapter III will present the methodological framework of this research. The first three sections will describe the methodology of spatial analysis, the space syntax technique and GIS as a tool with special attention given to the space syntax technique as it is the main analytical method in this thesis. The fourth section will define concepts that are significant for this case study and the fifth section will review the methodological framework and defines a workflow for the analysis of the residential area.

Chapter IV will provide a description and space syntax analysis for each of the buildings from the residential area (phenotypes) from the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods separately.

Chapter V will comprise of two sections, the first will present a synchronic analysis and the second a diachronic analysis of the residential area. The former will be based on the descriptions and space syntax analyses in Chapter IV and the latter compares these.

Chapter VI will discuss the results of the space syntax analyses to determine the genotypes that the buildings (phenotypes) comply with. In the first section the possibility of a cross-period genotype will be discussed, in the second section one genotype per period and the third section will bring forward a new proposition.

Chapter VII will explore, in two sections, the results of the research by embedding those within the context of the oasis of Tayma and NW Arabia, including a comparison with other sites. The third section will address the limitation encountered during analysis. The last section will comprise concluding remarks that examine the political, social and economic dynamics that could have had an impact on the development of the residential area.

Chapter VIII will restate the main research questions and results before providing an evaluation of the limitations encountered during research and the significance of the results.

The third and last section will suggest possible avenues for further research based on this study.

CHAPTER II SPATIOTEMPORAL FRAMEWORK

The first section of this chapter presents an outline of the historical dynamics of NW Arabia, from the Nabataean Period to the Late Antique Period, which is the chronological focus of the present case study. The second section focuses on the oasis of Tayma: it starts with the research history of the site, followed by site-related specifics and finishes with an historical overview of Tayma in the NW Arabian context. The last section introduces the residential area as the case study of this research by locating it geographically and chronologically. For the present case study, the overall historical dynamics between the Nabataean and Late Antique Periods will be delineated for NW Arabia to serve an embedment for the later presentation of the oasis of Tayma, located in that region.

NW ARABIAN

The origin of the Nabataeans is still uncertain, they were probably nomads with tribal roots, 12 however they became sedentary between the 4 th and the 1 st century BCE. 13 The Nabatean Kingdom reached its fullest extension in the 1 st century CE (Figure 1), covering an area from south Syria until the south part of NW Arabia, the Sinai and part of Negev 14 with 11 For a detailed account of the research history of the Arabian Peninsula see Eichmann 2011. 12 Wenning 2007, 25. For a detailed account of the Nabataean history and sources see [START_REF] Hackl | Quellen zur Geschichte der Nabatäer: Textsammlung mit Übersetzung und Kommentar[END_REF][START_REF] Politis | 2 of the International Conference "The World of the Herods and the Nabataeans[END_REF]. 13 Macdonald 1991, 115. 14 Macdonald et al. 2015, 28. borders that varied strongly. 15 The most southern city was Hegra (modern Mada'in Saleh),

while Dadan, about 20 km further south, was already outside of the domain of Nabataean influence and instead under the authority of the Lihyanite Dynasty. 16 To the east evidence of the Nabataean Kingdom is attested as far as Duma (modern Dumat al-Jandal).17 They developed a strong presence in the trade of incense between Arabia and the Mediterranean.18

There were three major cities, Petra, Bosra and Hegra: Petra and Bosra as political, economic and cultural centres; [START_REF] Wenning | The Nabataeans in History[END_REF] Hegra as a trade centre and frontier post; 20 The capital of the kingdom was Petra, later moved by the last Nabataean king Rabbel II (70/1-106 CE) to Bosra 21 because of the political and economic decline of Petra in the 1 st century CE. 22 This decline had been caused by the collapse of the Nabataean trading network, 23 which was caused by the shift of the land trade routes between South Arabia and Egypt to the Red Sea. 24 The Nabatean Kingdom had already passed their peak of force and Roman military forces under Syrian legate Cornelius Palma 25 seemed not to have encountered resistance when entering the Arabian Peninsula. 26 Unfortunately, sources are scarce for this period.

Nevertheless, trade traffic with the Romans was already known from the period before, 27 leading to the presumption that a shift of power occurred in NW Arabia. The evidence of destruction in the 2 nd century CE that can be found in some archaeological contexts have not been proved to be directly due to the Roman incursion and could have been a natural reaction of the population to new rulers. 28 Whether the reason for annexation was politically strategic or economic is still unclear. 29 The Roman Empire annexed the Nabataean Kingdom in 106 CE 30 and the Provincia Arabia was established by Emperor Trajan. 31 According to Ptolemy the Provincia was divided into three parts: Arabia Petraea, Arabia Deserta and Arabia Felix. 32 The provincial governors' headquarters 33 was maybe established in Bosra. 34 The exact borders of the Provincia Arabia are still unclear, 35 Hegra being the southernmost known city. 36 It is in Hegra and Duma that 30 Bowersock 1971, 231;Hoyland 2001, 73;Retsö 2003, 625;Macdonald 2009, 297;Wynbrandt 2010, 14;Tourtet and Weigel 2015, 388;Wenning 2007, 25;[START_REF] Macdonald | Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century[END_REF], 28. 31 Macdonald et al. 2015, 72. 32 Macdonald 2009, 298. 33 Fiema et al. 2015, 377. 34 Macdonald et al. 2015, 30-32. 35 Macdonald 2009, 300 ff. 36 Macdonald et al. 2015, 30;Nehmé 2009, 40. garrisons were stationed for better control of the area. 37 Strong building activities are attested for Petra at that time, while other sites do not show such activities in their archaeological evidence. 38 The first coinage read adquisita and not capta, suggesting a peaceful annexation;

although some indirect literature suggest confrontations, 39 as mentioned above. The Nabataeans seem to have integrated themselves into the new form of governance by changing the meaning of their own nomenclature. 40 At first, in the 1 st and 2 nd centuries CE there was no change in the NW Arabian trade network. 41 From the 3 rd century CE onwards the trade routes shifted constantly; the new connections being the Persian Gulf -Mesopotamia -Armenia -North Syria and South Arabia -Ethiopia -Red Sea. 42 This led to a disintegration of Arabia north of Hegra as part of the trade network, favouring the maritime to the land routes from South Arabia towards Egypt and the Mediterranean. 43 NW Arabia was abandoned by the Romans at the end of the 3 rd century CE onwards, 44 giving space to the formation of local governments. 45 The causes of this decline have been explained with the crisis of the economic power of Rome and the conflicts with Persia. 46 The Provincia Arabia is reorganised under the reign of Diocletian in the 4 th century CE. 47 Petra is now capital of Palaestina Salutaris, later Tertia, which integrates south Jordan, Negev and maybe the Sinai (Figure 2). 48 37 Nehmé 2009, 38. 38 Such as in Hegra -Mada'in Saleh, Area 9 (Fiema et al. 2015, 380). 39 Fiema et al. 2015, 375-76;Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, 52. 40 MacDonald wrote an interesting article about this subject; in particular: "As this happened, the concept of Nbtw would have changed from one of tribal identity, to being a subject of the Nabataean king, and, after the annexation, to having one's origins in a particular geographical and cultural area (Macdonald 1991, 106)". 41 Fiema et al. 2015, 383. 42 Fiema et al. 2015, 383-84. 43 Potts 1988, 135. 44 Macdonald et al. 2015, 32. 45 Macdonald et al. 2015, 33. 46 Schiettecatte 2013, 12. 47 Fiema et al. 2015, 385. 48 Fiema et al. 2015, 385. The idea that a decline occurred during the Late Antique Period is somewhat controversial, Schiettecatte wrote an interesting article discussing the various factors that had an impact on this so-called decline. 49 He argues that what seems to be a decline, such as the end of the monetarised economy and reduction of epigraphic sources, are more of a sign of transformation. 50 The 4 th and 5 th centuries CE are further characterised by an aridification of the climate, depopulation and disintegration of the urban system connecting NW Arabian oases.

51 49 Schiettecatte 2013. 50 Schiettecatte 2013, 9-10. 51 Schiettecatte 2013, 11-13. At the end of the 4 th century CE the Arab tribes slowly take over control of the areas south and east of Aila (Aqaba). 52 3). 58 The site extends over an area of 9.23 km 2 and has had an almost continuous occupation and still is today. 59 The oasis of Tayma is located in a hyper-arid region. 60 To the north of the site is a former seasonal lake (sebkha) of about 19 km 2 that after starting to dry out between 8000 BP and 4000 BP, became silty marshes (Figure 4). 61

52 [START_REF] Fiema | Provincia Arabia: Nabataea, the Emergence of Arabic as a Written Language, and Graeco-Arabica[END_REF], 385-86. 53 Fiema et al. 2015, 386;[START_REF] Nehmé | Quelques éléments de réflexion sur Hégra et sa région à partir du IIe siècle après J.-C." In L'Arabie à la veille de l'Islam: bilan clinique. Table ronde tenue au Collège de France, Paris, les 28 et 29 août 2006, dans le cadre du projet de l'Agence nationale de la recherche "De l'Antiquité tardive à l'Islam[END_REF], 39. 54 Fiema et al. 2015, 387. 55 Nehmé 2009, 39. 56 Fiema et al. 2015, 388. 57 For a general description of the oasis of Tayma see

History of research at the oasis of Tayma

Explorations at the oasis of Tayma reach as far back as the mid-1840s: 62 Wallin made the first description of Tayma in 1848; Guarmani passed through the site in 1864; 63 The long history of research led to a large amount of evidence from the oasis of Tayma.

Besides the archaeological evidence, many more sources were collected, such as archaeozoological evidence 71 and epigraphic evidence. 72 Furthermore, Tayma is mentioned in the Bible (Isa.21:14, Jer.25:23, Job.6:19, Gen.25:13-15, Cro.1:29-30, Gen.25:3), by Arabian 62 Based on Bawden, Edens, and Miller 1980, 73-74. For a detailed account of the exploration in NW Arabia see also Eichmann 2011. 63 Guarmani 1938. 64 Doughty 1936. 65 Huber 1891. 66 Euting 1896. Today the Tayma stone is in the Louvre Museum (accession number AO 1505). 67 Jaussen and Savignac 1997. 68

Tayma: site-specific technicalities

The following part describes terms used to classify spatial and chronological data at the site of Tayma. The outer city wall comprises an area of about 9.23 km 2 . The internal division of this wall is composed of seven compounds (A, A1, B, C, D, E, W), which extend over an area of about 2 km 2 . 74 All compounds, except for Compound W, are located within the archaeological area of Qrayyah (Figure 5), which extends over an area of about 0.74 km 2 . 75 A modern fence surrounds the area to protect the site (Figure 6). 76 73 Eichmann 2009, 59;Hausleiter 2011, 103. 74 Bawden, Edens, andMiller 1980, 75-76. 75 Sometimes called Qrayyan or Qraya. 76 Eichmann et al. 2012, 72. The long-term interdisciplinary research at the oasis of Tayma produced a vast amount of information pertaining, among others, to archaeological, archaeozoological, palynological, hydrological, mineralogical fields. This resulted in the definition of twelve occupations named Single excavation areas follow the overall chronological division of the site (OPs) and are further subdivided into occupation levels (OLs), considering the data produced through research at that location. 79 They are attributed first independently from other areas and then put into concordance (Table 2). They are numbered from the latest occupation ("1") until the first (n), according to the following scheme: "OL" area:n, as in OL F:3.

Building stages (BS) are a further subdivision specific to each excavation area and corresponding to the single building activities that have been identified within each OL. They are micro-levels of occupation and are named after the latest building activity ("a") until the first stage of a new occupation level (n), according to the following scheme: "OL" area:OLn, as in OL F:2b.

Each building and its internal stages have a different label, according to the following scheme: area-"b"no. of building, as in F-b2. The same applies to the streets and alleys, according to the following scheme: area-"s"no. of street as in F-s1. 77 According to the latest publication: Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018. 78 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, Table 1. 79 Eichmann et al. 2011, 65. The earliest archaeological evidence at the oasis of Tayma is a lithic production from the Late Neolithic (OP 12; for OP indications see Table 2). 80 The first indication for an oasis culture dates to the late 5 th to 4 th millennium BCE (OP 11c), nevertheless not necessarily the proof for a permanent sedentary life form. 81 This is evidenced by palynological analysis of grape and fig that attested a date of 6000 calBP. 82 Evidence of disc-shaped carnelian beads and associated drill tools found on the eastern side of the sebkha indicate a production site dated to the 4 th millennium BC (OP 11b). 83 The city wall, enclosing and subdividing the site, is dated, according to the latest investigation 84 , to the beginning of the 3 rd millennium BCE (OP 10). 85 About 18.20 km of the wall are preserved, reaching up to 8 m in height. The building techniques and construction materials (stone or mudbrick) used are different for various wall units. 86 It is attested that there has been a continuous occupation of the oasis from the 3 rd /2 nd millennium BCE up until today. 87 Nevertheless, there are some older evidence: pottery -Reddish Coarse Ware (RCW) -from the Late 4 th millennium/early 3 rd millennium and a C14-date indicating a date of 3323-2928 calBC) underneath the outer wall (OP 11a). 88 At the centre of the oasis of Tayma evidence has been found, indicating a form of settlement from the late 3 rd millennium/2 nd millennium on (OP 9). 89 Notable of the Early 2 nd millennium BCE are burials outside the wall (al-Nasim site), containing ceremonial bronze 80 For a detailed description see Purschwitz 2017; see also Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 20. 81 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 20. 82 Dinies et al. 2016, 69, 70-71, 72-73. 83 Purschwitz 2017. 84 Hausleiter 2018, 362. 85 A sample of Area W9 resulted in 3323-2928 calBC: "TA 17356, SU 5908: Charcoal (ficus carica identified by R. Neef, Scientific Division at the Head Office of the DAI, Berlin; analyzed by the Center for Applied Isotope Studies, University of Georgia, Athens, GA; sample no. UGAMS 24656; Radiocarbon date: 4430±25; 2σ range, probability 95.4%; calibrated with OxCal v4.2.4. (Hausleiter 2018, 384, footnote 24)". 86 Hausleiter 2018, 362 . 87 Hausleiter 2011, 103, 109;[START_REF] Tourtet | Taymāʾ in the Nabataean Kingdom and in Provincia Arabia[END_REF]Weigel 2015, 385. 88 Hausleiter 2018, 383-84;Hausleiter andEichmann 2018, 25. 89 Hausleiter andZur 2016, 137, footnote 20;Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 25. For a detailed study see Lora 2017. weapons connected to the Syro-Levant. 90 Dispersed evidence of the Mid to Late 2 nd millennium BCE (OP 8) do not give an exact notion of the site, nevertheless they indicate contacts with Egypt 91 and that there was a continuous form of settlement, evidenced by the presence of Qurayyah Painted Ware at the outer city wall and the central part of the site of Tayma. 92 Tayma is from the 1 st millennium BCE onward 93 , particularly in the Early Iron Age (12 th to 9 th centuries BCE -OP 7) 94 , an area of cultural contact, along the commercial routes of incense between South Arabia, the East Mediterranean, Syro-Mesopotamia, Egypt 95 and the Levant 96 (Figure 7). An architectural complex with a large building -Building O-b1 -is located further south of the central part of the site, in Compound C, and dates to the Early Iron Age. 97 There are also indications of commerce between Arabia and Assyria, despite a strongly hostile component accompanying their relationship. 98 South Arabia plays hereby an important role not only for being the origin of frankincense and myrrh but also for the arriving spices from South Asia and the Far East. 99 In this context, the oasis of Tayma was one of the important providers of water along the trade routes. 100 The Mid-to-Late Iron Age (9 th to 6 th century BCE -OP 6) 101 is defined by the Babylonian occupation, when king Nabonidus conquered and stayed ten years in Tayma (552-542 BCE). 102 The reason Nabonidus took an interest in the oasis of Tayma is still a point of discussion. Some scholars say that he had a religious reason, while others propose economic or political reasons. 103 90 For a detailed description see Hausleiter and Zur 2016; see also Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 23-27. 91 For a detailed description see Sperveslage 2013; see also Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 27-28. 92 For a detailed study of Qurayyah Painted Ware (QPW) see Intilia 2016. 93 Hausleiter 2011, 103. 94 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018. 95 Hausleiter 2011, 103;[START_REF] Sperveslage | Ägyptische Einflüsse auf der Arabischen Halbinsel in vorislamischer Zeit am Beispiel der Oase von Tayma[END_REF]. 96 Macdonald 1997;Hausleiter andZur 2016. 97 Hausleiter andZur 2016, 138-39. For a detailed study see contributions entitled "Area O" by Andrea Intilia in the Tayma report in the ATLAL -The journal of Saudi Arabian Archaeology. 98 Hausleiter 2012, 820-23. 99 Macdonald et al. 2015, 16. 100 Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, 7-8. 101 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018. 102 Schaudig 2001;Macdonald et al. 2015, 16-17;[START_REF] Dougherty | Nabonidus and Belshazzar: A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo-Babylonian Empire[END_REF], Chapter X; the most detailed information can be read in [START_REF] Beaulieu | The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556-539 B[END_REF], 149ff. 103 Hoyland 2001, 62;Groom 1981, 198;Dougherty 1980, 138-60. Figure 7: Arabian trade network (Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, Karte 2.) The 5 th century BCE to 3 rd century BCE (OP 5) 104 is when the Lihyanite Dynasty 105 puts Tayma under their influence from their capital Dadan 106 ; at which point Hegra might also have been under the Lihyanite domain. 107 The conflicts between the two oases are attested in inscriptions 108 and influence through the presence of statues and Aramaic inscriptions. 109 The domination ended with the decline of the Kingdom of Lihyan, when the Nabataeans expanded 104 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018. 105 Hausleiter 2011, 109-18. For a more detailed study about the Kingdom of Lihyan see Rohmer and Charloux 2015. Rohmer proposes a new dating for the Lihyanite dominance, presented at the ICAANE 2016: "A Revised Chronological Framework for Northwest Arabia in the Late 1st Millennium BC. New Evidence from Excavations in the al-Ula Area". 106 Macdonald 1997, 336; Hausleiter 2011, 116. 107 Rohmer and Charloux 2015, 309. 108 Macdonald 1997, 336;Hausleiter 2011, 116;[START_REF] Macdonald | Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century[END_REF], 18. 109 Eichmann et al. 2012, 82. their border further south 110 and established themselves in Hegra in the 1 st century BCE. 111 The outer walls cease to be used during that time, while inner walls were constructed to contain the settlement at a reduced size. 112 A temple -Building E-b1 -of 500 m 2 was built in the central part of the site most likely during the 4 th or 3 rd century BC and was used, with various alterations, until the Late Roman Period. 113 South of the temple, evidence of a residential area, including a multi-storey building -Building E-b9 -has been uncovered. 114 The residential area was then in use until its abandonment after the Late Antique Period. The above-mentioned Building O-b1 had in the meantime been destroyed by a fire and a Hellenistic burial ground built above. 115

The oasis of Tayma between the Nabataean and Late Antique Periods (OP 4 -OP 3a)

Nabataean influence on Tayma can be seen in the archaeological record between the 2 nd century BCE and the early 2 nd century CE (OP 4). 116 When integrated into the Nabataean Kingdom, Tayma showed no signs of violence. 117 The date of this incorporation remains unclear, but it is assumed to be around the 1 st century BCE, the latest at the turn of the era. The evidence of an inscription that mentions King Aretas IV 118 might indicate a connection with Hegra, the Nabataean southern centre for that period. 119 Under the Nabataean influence, Tayma seemed to have maintained a regional status with a certain independency 120 and a possible presence in the Nabataean trade activities. 121 The analysis of pottery finds in the residential area revealed parallels to the north, Petra, and to the south, Hegra. 122 110 Hoyland 2001, 68. 111 Macdonald et al. 2015, 20;Nehmé 2011b. 112 Hausleiter 2011, 118. 113 For a complete study of Building E-b1 see Lora 2017.. 114 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 34. For a detailed study of Building E-b9 see Weigel 2019. The subsequent occupations of this residential area, between the Nabataean and Late Antique Periods, are in analysis in the present research. 115 A PhD thesis analyses the burial ground in detail: Petiti 2013. 116 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 36. 117 Tourtet and Weigel 2015, 388. 118 [START_REF] Tourtet | Taymāʾ in the Nabataean Kingdom and in Provincia Arabia[END_REF]Weigel 2015, 388. 119 Hausleiter 2011, 118;Nehmé 2011b. 120 Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, 307. 121 Nehmé 2011b, 139. 122 Tourtet and Weigel 2015, 399-400. Tayma was integrated during the Roman Period (OP 3b) into the Provincia Arabia in 106 CE, showing also here no sign of resistance. 123 Strong building activities, that are usual after annexation, have not been proven in Tayma. 124 The presence of copper, tin and lead in the central part indicates that Tayma had to be connected through a long-distance trade, since neither were acquired locally. 125 Pottery from the residential area at the centre of the site revealed ties to the Levant, as have also the architectural traits. 126 The building furthest north of the residential area (Building E-b9) has its northern part razed to build an enclosure for Building E-b1. 127 During the Late Roman Period (OP 3b), 3 rd /4 th century CE, an 18000 m 2 large complex -Building E-b6 (Figure 8) -was built to the northwest of the residential area under analysis in this research. 128 The later built enclosure of this complex reaches the residential area from the northwest, interrupts where the buildings were standing, and continues to the other side in the direction southeast.

After the Romans abandoned NW Arabia, the oasis of Tayma was ruled by Jewish families according to Islamic sources. 129 A Nabataean inscription dated to 203 AD containing Jewish names except for one might indicate such a presence in Tayma but does not confirm this statement with certainty. 130 The residential area is abandoned at the centre of the site during the Islamic Period (OP 2), shifting occupation to the northwest. 131 123 Tourtet andWeigel 2015, 388. 124 Tourtet andWeigel 2015, 388. 125 For a detailed analysis see Liu et al. 2015. 126 Tourtet and Weigel 2015, 399-400. 127 Lora 2017, 37;Weigel 2019, 111. 128 Hausleiter andEichmann 2018, 37;Hausleiter 2011, 118. 129 Macdonald et al. 2015, 33. 130 For a presentation and discussion of this inscription see Al-Najem and Macdonald 2009. 131 Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, 37-38.

CASE STUDY: THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AT THE OASIS OF TAYMA

The residential area in analysis in this research has been unearthed in Area E-South and Area F. They were excavated in 2005-2009, 2011-2012 and 2014-2015. Each area follows their own occupation level (OL) terminology; Area E-South and Area F have initially been excavated separately but have later been identified as having a shared stratigraphy (often named under the joint name "Area E-South/F"). This was already identified in the 2005/2006 excavation report, when the excavator at the time, Christoph Purschwitz, put forward that Area F seemed connected with the southern part of Area E (Area E-South). 132 132 Eichmann et al. 2011, 89.

Location

The uncovered residential area is in the northern part of Qrayyah (Figure 6), in the central Compound E, Area E-South 133 and Area F (Figure 9), and extends over an area of about 1600 m 2 . 134 A slope of the surface to the northwest defines the natural elevation of the two areas, causing a favourable environment for the development of wadis. 135 This resulted in a mound of 18 m in height over the surroundings. 136 Figure 9: Residential area (Area E-South and Area F), S of Building E-b1, in Qrayyah. 133 A subdivision of Area E. Area E includes Area E-South, E-b1 and Area E-East. 134 "Area E-South/F" by Friedrich Weigel in Hausleiter and Al-Najem 2015. 135 Eichmann et al. 2010, 131. 136 Eichmann et al. 2011, 90.

Chronostratigraphy

The archaeological remains uncovered in Area E-South and Area F were attributed to maybe the 3 rd to 2 nd millennium BCE and from 4 th /3 rd century BCE until the 6 th century137 with some modern evidence of the 19 th /20 th century CE (Table 3). Dating the occupation levels is based on pottery studies and 14 C-dating.

The earliest evidence, maybe dated to the Early/Middle Bronze Age (3 rd /2 nd millennium BCE), is from Area F (OL F:5) and perhaps Area E-South (OL E-South:5) but, unfortunately, they are not enough to distinguish single buildings. This is followed by a hiatus in the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in both areas. The Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods are the better attested in the residential area and twenty-one buildings have been identified in total (Table 4). Two buildings have been uncovered from the Nabataean Period (OL E-South:4

and OL F:4). Eleven buildings were uncovered from the Roman Period (OL E-South:3 and OL F:3). Eight buildings are attributed to the Late Antique Period, which is divided into two phases in Area F (OL E-South, and OL F:2b and OL F:2a). The residential area was subsequently abandoned and became covered by debris and sand sometime after the 6 th century CE (OL E-South:1 and OL F:1) with some scarce attested evidence.138 Of the twenty-one buildings, thirteen had the necessary evidence to carry out a space syntax analysis (Table 4, in bold). A basic spatial setting, in which relevant evidence can be embedded, is obtained by analysing the above mentioned thirteen buildings. The buildings are organised within a specific space and the way that space is organised reflects the social structures. 139 Since three succeeding occupation levels can be analysed, a temporal reflection of the spatial decisions is also possible. This made possible for this research to contain a synchronic and a diachronic analysis of the uncovered buildings. For this, a first a basic understanding of the spatial configuration must be attained. 140 A space syntax analysis is in this context a tool to provide exactly this kind of insight. The architectural evidence from the residential area is thus indicated to provide an understanding of the spatial-temporal context on an everyday level.

And as are other types of evidence, such as objects or faunal and floral remains, embedded in a spatial dimension (i.e. the architectural evidence), are also everyday social choices of using space, such as specific ways of configuring space, embedded in a wider framework of historical dynamics that led to those choices.

Henceforth, OL E-South:5/OL F:5 will be abbreviated as OL 5, OL E-South:4/OL F:4 as OL 4, OL E-South:3/OL F:3 as OL 3, OL E-South:2/OL F:2b as OL 2b and OL E-South:2/OL F:2a as OL 2a because the attribution of the OL-number is strictly related to an excavation area, while the OPs refer to the entire site.

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK

A methodological framework will be outlined in the first three sections in order to define the methods applied in analysing the architectural evidence from the residential area (Figure 11): first, spatial analysis as an overall methodology; second, space syntax as a technique to analyse architectural evidence; third, geographical information systems (GIS) as a spatial toolbox capable of handling large amounts of data. The methodological framework is followed by a section with a definition of the concepts relevant to this research. To complete the chapter, the methodological framework will be reviewed considering the available evidence of the present case study in the last section. Space syntax is a key technique for the analysis in this thesis. Archaeological case studies often base their workflow, to carry out a space syntax analysis, on secondary literature, compromising the chance of performing a thorough analysis. Consequently, for this case study, the author decided to take a step back and review the primary literature available for this type of analysis. The drawback of this approach is that the technique, mainly developed for analysing complete urban layouts, must be reviewed to be applicable to archaeological architectural evidences that are per se fragmentary. The advantage is that commonly missed out steps of the technique might provide a more complete interpretation of the evidence.

Methodology: Spatial analysis

Technique: Space syntax Tool: GIS 1 METHODOLOGY: SPATIAL ANALYSIS Sociologists, urban planners, architects and designers, such as Lewis Mumford, Kevin Lynch, Aldo Rossi and Bruno Zevi, have theorised on the notion of space in the fields of modern urbanism and architecture, mainly in the 1950s and 1960s. 141 Nonetheless, it was not until the 1970s that spatial analysis was independently applied to the discipline of archaeology by the duo Hodder and Orton 142 and Clarke. 143 While Hodder and Orton were concerned with the need for a focused study on the relationship between elements and a theoretical framework in the field, Clarke concentrated his study on a broader definition of what spatial analysis means. 144 Since then, spatial analysis has come a long way and the methods in use have expanded considerably, 145 including the space syntax technique, presented in the next section of this chapter. There are various book collections available that focus on the methodological diversity of spatial analysis. 146 Defining spatial analysis is a complex matter, due to the extension of the field: Wheatley and Gillings give importance to the location of objects, 147 while Carver similarly emphasises the existence of different scales were life is conducted. 148 In both cases, the authors give importance to different types of spaces (more local in the former and more global in the latter) and how they relate.

Hodder and Orton clearly stated that there is too much subjectivity when it comes to the interpretation of a map, therefore a systematic study of spatial patterns is essential. 149 The objectivity that a mathematical approach gives, as is common in spatial analysis, enables the archaeologist to deal with large amounts of data and directly compare them to other cases. The development of the tools that can be used for this purpose, such as GIS, will be presented in the third section of this chapter, as it is important not only to deal with large data but also to make them readable. 141 Mumford 1989;[START_REF] Lynch | The Image of the City[END_REF][START_REF] Rossi | The Architecture of the City. Oppositions Books[END_REF]Zevi 1993. 142 Hodder and Orton 1976. 143 Clarke 1977. 144 Papaconstantinou 2006, 16-17;Seibert 2006, xv. 145 "Spatial analyses of archaeological materials have become quite varied as diverse methods and theoretical approaches have emerged, making the concept of space somewhat nebulous (Seibert 2006, xiii)." 146 Hietala 1984;[START_REF] Robertson | Space and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology[END_REF][START_REF] Paliou | Spatial Analysis and Social Spaces: Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Interpretation of Prehistoric and Historic Built Environments[END_REF]Parker and Asencio 2008, among others. 147 [START_REF] Wheatley | Spatial Technology and Archaeology: The Archaeological Applications of GIS[END_REF], 126. 148 Carver 2009, 265. 149 Hodder and Orton 1976, 4. Spatial analysis has various methods at its disposal to capture the location of the evidence and to analyse patterns. 150 The choice of methods to use depends on the type of evidence (such as a site, building or object group) and at what scale they are analysed (based on the question asked of the evidence). For the present study, which analyses architectural evidences, the spatial analysis focuses on two types of scale. These are: intra-and intersite spatial analysis and levels of resolution. Intra-and intersite spatial analysis oppose, respectively, the study within a site with a comparative study of a site with other sites. 151 The intrasite spatial analysis has, as its main subject of study, the settlement itself and with that the variation between evidence, which in this study are firstly single buildings (phenotypes) and secondly all buildings of each occupation level (genotypes152 ). This process identifies structural patterns of access and movement to define function. Although function cannot always be inferred from the patterns, it might be possible to differentiate different types of function. The intersite spatial analysis focuses on the comparative study between two or more settlements and the variations between the same types of evidence at each site, aiming at identifying wider dynamics that influences the evidence.

Levels of resolution, as first coined by Clarke, are the division of archaeological records into three levels: micro, semi-micro and macro (Figure 12). 153 The micro level stands for an analysis within structures based on proxemics and social models, where a structure stands for "[…] any small scale constructed or selected unit which contained human activities or their consequences". 154 The semi-macro level stands for an analysis within sites based on social and architectural models, where a site stands for "[…] geographical locus which contained an articulated set of human activities or their consequences and often an associated set of structures". 155 The macro level stands for an analysis between sites based on geographic and economic models, where a site system stands for a "[…] set of sites at which it is hypothesised that the interconnection between the sites was greater than the interconnection between any individual site and sites beyond the system". 156 The purpose of this multilevel view of a record is to create virtually manageable units of analysis. Clarke further states that these units are "terms-of-convenience" that can be subjected to changes according to the study157 , which is significant because it provides the means for an archaeologist to choose how narrow or broad the levels should be in accordance with the data in analysis.158

TECHNIQUE: SPACE SYNTAX

The term space syntax was first coined by Hillier and his team in 1976. 159 Although the theoretical framework was set by their article entitled Space syntax, there has been a considerable development of the theories involved and case studies have multiplied. 160 Hillier himself has kept the first approach evolving, as demonstrated by his contribution Spatial analysis and cultural information: the need for theory as well as method in space syntax analysis in Paliou et al. from 2014. The technique of space syntax has encountered both positive and negative feedback (presented in Section 2.2 of this chapter) over the years: a Macro level

• site system • based on proxemics and social models

Semi-macro level

• site

• based on social and architectural models

Micro level

• structure

• based on geographic and economic models critical approach from Osman and Suliman 161 , a summarising article from Bafna 162 , a forwardlooking summary from Griffith 163 and a manual written by Al-Sayed et al. 164 , among many others.

To define space syntax, it is best to use Hillier's own words: "Space syntax is a set of techniques for analysing spatial configuration, and a set of theories linking space and society". 165 Considering that this technique was originally used for analysing contemporary urban spaces, the archaeological aims are not very different. The idea behind this is that there is a social meaning entrenched in the built space 166 , where boundary plays a key role. 167 Boundaries give order to space, as they physically determine unlimited space 168 , which in an archaeological context is mainly manifested through walls. Yet, movement between bound spaces can only occur by means of permeability, which in an archaeological context is mainly manifested through doorways. Permeability can either be granted or denied 169 , consequently delimiting the same space in different ways. Space syntax is as such "[…] a graph-based theory used by architects to examine how the spatial layout of buildings and cities influences the economic, social, and environmental outcomes of human movement and social interaction.

Archaeologists have explored this concept by analysing how social structure is reflected in the spatial configuration of public and domestic architecture". 170 The aim of space syntax is to handle archaeological data in a mathematical way at different levels. This technical approach not only makes possible an analysis within a site to be systematic and simplified, but also the comparative analyses to be direct. 171 The results of a space syntax analysis are suitable for synchronic and diachronic studies, considering that spatial configuration can easily be compared. 172 This will be clear in the 161 Osman and Suliman 1994. 162 Bafna 2003. 163 Griffiths 2012. 164 Al-Sayed 2014. 165 Hillier 2014, 19. 166 Al-Sayed 2014, 7. 167 Bafna 2003, 17;Al-Sayed 2014, 7;Foster 1989, 41. 168 There are other types of boundaries, such as psychological or social, that can affect the determination of space. For a more detailed discussion see Sanders 1990, 51. 169 Foster 1989, 41. 170 Dawson 2002, 464. 171 In Hanson's words: "[…] in order to compare dwellings with one another and to interpret their sociological significance, we have to solve a prior problem, that of identifying the elements and relations which make up the space pattern (Hanson 1998, 22)".

172 "[…] one of the merits of Space Syntax techniques is their potential to contribute to diachronic and synchronic comparisons of spatial configuration (Paliou 2014, 9)."

analytical part of this study when joining the technique with the multilevel view described in the section above.

As stated, the methods used in space syntax are graph-based and the analysis is of mathematical nature. Depending on the questions asked of the data in analysis, space syntax is applicable to various levels, such as buildings, sites, landscapes and entire cities.173

Space syntax analysis 174

The concepts genotype and phenotype will be clarified before describing the space syntax analysis in detail. 175 A genotype is a transpatial concept that reflects the set of abstract rules that phenotypes comply with. A phenotype is therefore a spatial concept that displays the genotype in physical space in the form of buildings. Phenotypes can have transtemporal links, that is "ancestors and descendants" and transpatial links, that is "contemporaneous organisms of the same kind". The set of rules of genotypes can undergo either revolutionary changes or evolutionary changes: they either follow a completely new set of rules or they evolve from previously existing rules.

The following two parts will demonstrate how phenotypes and then genotypes are formally understood by means of a space syntax analysis.

Phenotypes

The basic idea of space syntax is to represent bound spaces and their permeability graphically. This is achieved by creating a justified grap176 , which captures the spatial configuration. 177 Each space (room, courtyard, kitchen etc.) is represented by a circular node 178 and each link (permeability) between two spaces (door, opening, threshold etc.) is represented by a lined vertex. 179 Two spaces with such a permeability are considered as being adjacent.

Hillier defined that a justified graph is based on a chosen node that is considered the root, on top of which all the other nodes align according to their topological distance from that root node (Figure 13). 180 The justified graph provides the means to visualise the depth of a space (topological distance of a node 181 ) and localises that space in the network by relating it to all the other spaces. The depth value is attributed as follows: an adjacent space has the value one, one space in between gives the space the value two, two spaces in between give the space the value three, etc. 182 In this case, the real distance between spaces is disregarded, 183 a fact that will be discussed below in more detail when discussing the methods of space syntax. 184 The justified graph serves to visualise both an axial map and a convex map. They serve to answer distinct types of questions about data on different scales. An axial map focuses on the street spaces, reducing them to the minimum and the longest straight lines possible (Figure 180 "[a] justified graph is where we pick a node and think of it as the root of the graph, and align the other nodes in layers above it according to the fewest other nodes we must pass through to get to that node from the root (Hillier 2014, 21)." 181 Teklenburg, Timmermans, andVan Wagenberg 1993, 349. 182 Al-Sayed 2014, 12;Hillier, Hanson, andGraham 1987, 364. 183 Bafna 2003, 23-24. 184 In Section 2.2 of this chapter. . 185 In this case, the question of the data is based on movement and is one-dimensional. 186 Analysing an axial map can therefore answer the question of how a street network is shaped and perceived. 187 185 Al-Sayed 2014, 11. 186 Hanson 1998, 39. 187 Hillier andHanson 2005, 17;Al-Sayed 2014, 11-12. 188 Any two points in a convex polygon can be connected without going outside of the perimeter of the polygon. See Hillier and Hanson 2005, 98, Fig. 39 for an example of a convex polygon. See also Al-Sayed 2014, 12. 189 Hillier 1996, 248-49. 190 Hanson 1998, 39. 191 Hillier and Hanson 2005, 17;Al-Sayed 2014, 12-13. There are two perspectives from which a convex map of a building can be analysed. If assuming that the inhabitants are a basic social unit, then strangers would, in Grahams words, oppose that unit. 192 While strangers have no access to a certain building, a subgroup named "visitors" receive limited permission to do so. To understand the difference between the relationship of inhabitants and the relationship between them and visitors, the justified graph is first analysed with the node representing the exterior of the buildingvisitor-inhabitant relationship -and then without itinhabitant-inhabitant relationship.

The steps described below focus on the analysis of convex maps, since the evidence to create an axial map is insufficient in the present study. 193 The analytical steps, applicable to both the visitor-inhabitant relationship and the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, are:

-total number of spaces (K)

-number of connections (NC) -total depth (TD)

-mean depth (MD)

-relative asymmetry (RA)

-real relative asymmetry (RRA)

-control value (CV)

-relative ringiness (RR)

-types of spaces Each space is represented by a node and each two nodes connected by a vertex when adjacent (Figure 16). Each node is represented by the variable "n" and the total number of nodes is represented by: K = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑛𝑜𝑑𝑒𝑠 As already mentioned above, the graphic representation can be done from any point of view, whether it is the space outside a building, in which case it is also seen as a unit, or a specific room within a building (Figure 13). The selected space is called a root space. 194 The result is an understanding of the depth of a particular space: when it is deep then many steps or turns are necessary to reach the space from the root, when it is shallow then not many steps or turns are necessary to reach the space from the root. 195 The number of connections (NC) counts the adjacent spaces a node ha 196 , which can then be represented by different colours, thicknesses, shades etc. either on the graph or on the convex spaces. 194 Sometimes "carrier space", as in Van Dyke 1999, 466. 195 Hillier andHanson 2005, 108;Al-Sayed 2014, 11. 196 Al-Sayed 2014, 15. The control value (CV) evaluates how much control each space has over the others. 197 It is calculated by counting the number of links that each space has (NC) and then giving to each neighbouring space the value 1 𝑁𝐶 (CVe). This procedure is done with all spaces and then the values given to each space are summed up. The result will have a value under one or above one. A value under one means weak control by that space over adjacent spaces and that it is rather controlled by those spaces. A value above one means strong control by that space over the adjacent spaces.

On the graph, justified or not, it can be visualised if it is composed of tree-like branches or rings (Figure 17). The relative ringiness (RR), a measure to quantify the degree of choice a spatial configuration offers198 , calculates the proportion between the real number of rings and the maximum possible number of rings in a graph:

𝑅𝑅 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 2𝐾-5
The RR will have a value between zero and one. A lower RR, closer to zero, means nondistributedness, with more tree-like branches. A higher RR, closer to one, means distributedness, with more rings. 199 Assessing if there are rings in a graph can be done by comparing the number of nodes (K) and vertices. One vertex less than K means that it is a tree graph and has therefore no rings. The number of vertices equal or higher than K means that there are rings.200 The four steps described next (TD, MD, RA and RRA) are calculated in sequence.

Total depth (TD) is calculated by totalling all depths of a node to all the other nodes. 201 The result obtained is between the value one, which is the minimum number of steps that must be taken to reach another space, and ∑ 𝑛 𝐾-1 𝑛=1 , which is when, hypothetically, every node is connected to all other nodes minus itself.

The mean depth (MD) is the average depth of each space to all other spaces, as calculated with the following formula:202

MD = 𝑇𝐷 𝐾-1
The result obtained is between the value one, which is the minimum average of steps to be taken to reach another node, and 𝐾 2 , which again is the average when, hypothetically, every node is connected to all the other nodes minus itself.

The analysis proceeds with the calculation of the relative asymmetry (RA). The RA "[compares] how deep the system is from a particular point with how deep or shallow it theoretically could be -the least depth existing when all spaces are directly connected to the original [root] space, and the most when all spaces are arranged in a unilinear sequence away from the original [root] space, i.e. every additional space in the system adds one more level of depth". 203 The calculation for the RA is:204

RA = 2 (𝑀𝐷-1) 𝐾-2
The RA will have a value between zero and one. A lower RA, closer to zero, means a closer location with a higher symmetry and a stronger integration in the whole system. A higher RA, closer to one, means a deeper location with a higher asymmetry and a stronger segregation. 205 The result is bound to the space numbers (K) of the justified graph in analysis, resulting in the need to recalculate the RA to a real relative asymmetry (RRA). The RRA standardises the RA value, enabling the result to be directly compared with the results from other graphs with a different number of spaces (K):206

𝑅𝑅𝐴 = 𝑅𝐴 𝐷 -𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

The RRA will have a value under one or above one. A value under one means a higher symmetry/integration and a value above one means a higher asymmetry/segregation. 207 The D-values, mean RA values of diamond-shaped graphs with the same number of nodes, were tabulated by Hillier and Hanson in The social logic of space208 , however only for five or more spaces. 209 Table 5 presents the D-values for K=1 to K=20 based on the following formula: Correlating them shows if there is a connection between the control a node has over its surroundings and the position it assumes in the building, meaning the local-global characteristics of a node. Further, analysing both relationships of a building means distinguishing how the interior of the building is perceived, with all its spaces, from the outside, as opposed to how it is perceived once accessed.

𝐷 𝑘 = 2 (𝑘(log 2 𝑘 + 2 3 -1) + 1) (𝑘 -1)(𝑘 -2)

Genotypes

As indicated previously, once the phenotypes (each building) are all understood, the analysis can proceed by defining the abstract rules they follow -genotypes.

A genotype has more common characteristics than differences. Although the RRA value is the basic comparative value, all other available information must be considered.

210 Hillier and Hanson 2005, 109; Tomé 2015, 11; Klarqvist 1993, 11-12. To verify the defined genotypes, the difference factor (H*) is calculated, which The closer the result is to the value one, the less variance and more similarities exist. This can be applied to any chosen set of RRA values, as in this case would be the mean RRA values of each building; but it can also compare RRA values of, for example, rooms with the same function, if the question requires so. Within a building a value of one would mean that there is no differentiation of spaces, while for a genotype or a combination of genotypes this would mean that they are similar in their underlying abstract rules.

Criticism towards space syntax

The methods used in space syntax have been the object of considerable criticism, mainly due to the lack of the "human factor" in this graph-based technique. A graph is abstract and therefore does not integrate all the available information, such as the dimension of the spaces (nodes) or the real distances between spaces (links) -instead measuring the topological distance. 212 Most case studies have in common that they have saturated the basic use of space syntax, indicating more a possibility rather than a determination of function of the object in study. 213 As stated above, in Section 1 of this chapter, this is a general trend in spatial analysis, where rather a differentiation of function than function itself can be determined upon applying this type of methodology. However, as Van Dyke stated, additional information must be fed to the values that result from a space syntax analysis:214 room functions, building functions, dimensions, distances etc. are applied directly onto the graph so that the results obtained by the space syntax analysis can be further discussed. This is an issue that will be taken into consideration when reviewing the methodological framework (see Section 5 of this chapter).

Another argument, especially stated by Leach215 and Ratti216 , is that the analysis does not consider the fact that space is three-dimensional. Interestingly, Hiller and colleagues answered this argument: "Human spatial organisation is not, contrary to general supposition, three dimensional in the same sense it is two dimensional, for very simple reasons: human beings cannot fly, and buildings cannot float in the air. The laying of cells on top of each other does not render human space fully three dimensional. It is always reduced to two dimensions so that human beings may traverse it, for example by stairs, ladders, lifts, etc. This has an important result for us: that multi-storey objects are accessible to the same kind of analysis as single storey complexes". 217 Important to keep in mind is that space syntax analysis is a basic technique in an archaeological study; it is not an answer to all questions asked of the data. As Hillier and

Hanson claimed: "The aim of the numerical side of syntactic analysis is to deepen descriptions by expressing in a concise way very complex relational properties of spaces and of the system as a whole. In particular, it is about considering individual spaces in terms of the whole system". 218 This is precisely what the correlation between local (CV) and global (RRA) values means, as already described above.219

TOOL: GIS

Geographical information systems (GIS), widely used by archaeologists220 , were first developed in 1964 by the Canadian government's Regional Planning Information Systems Division to manage resources. 221 The US government was developing similar programs for cartography in the 1970s. By the 1980s, it was commercialised and developed for new purposes, such as archaeology.

In archaeology, GIS started to be used around 1980. 222 It took ten years to be accepted as one of the possible tools used in archaeology, with the publication of Interpreting Space: GIS and Archaeology by Allen et al. 223 Wheatley and Gillings defined that GIS serves four main purposes: to store, manipulate, analyse and present information about geographic space 224 ; in short: a "spatial toolbox". 225 This definition already clarifies that the information handled is all spatially referenced in a coordinated system.

At first, GIS was used in archaeology for statistical purposes. 226 Now it is commonly used for intrasite and intersite spatial analyses. As Carver simply argues: "The ultimate instrument for comparing spatial relations of everything is GIS". 227

There is a wide range of available software and components. In this thesis, the open source Quantum GIS (QGIS) was used. 228 The workflow of GIS is as follows (Figure 19): the data collected on site (and completed off site) is entered into the database, there it is stored and can be retrieved at any time; next, it can be manipulated and analysed for the aimed purpose; the results can be visually represented in the form of graphs and maps. 229 Given the fact that a substantial quantity of information can be stored in a GIS, it is important to keep in mind when producing a map, that readability is very important. 230 The author encountered this issue when preparing the plans to represent the space syntax analysis of each building: two distinct values (CV and RA) had to be depicted on the same plan without compromising readability. 222 Seibert 2006, xix. 223 Allen, Green, and Zubrow 1990. 224 Wheatley and Gillings 2002, 8. 225 Wheatley and Gillings 2002, 8. 226 Wheatley 2014, 116. 227 Carver 2009, 247. 228 QGIS Version 3.8.1. The Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project has integrated GIS as a tool since excavations started in 2004. 229 Based on Wheatley and Gillings 2002, 8-9. 230 "However, the final map -despite the best efforts of the cartographer -must always represent an uneasy compromise between the conflicting goals of maximisation of information content and ease of visual extraction of that information (Marble 1990, 11)." regards their subject of study". 232 In agreement with this statement, the author defines the following concepts to avoid ambiguous interpretations:

-building

-house -household -space
The concept of building is bound to a very concrete, physical form of architectural remains. Hillier and Hanson, developers of the methods of space syntax, described a building "[…] as a certain ordering of categories, to which is added a certain system of controls, the two conjointly constructing an interface between the inhabitants of the social knowledge embedded

231 "In addition to the need for definition of terms within individual contextualised studies, there was general agreement in the discussion session that it should be made explicit by each author what their world-view was as regards their subject of study. The need to demonstrate critical self-awareness and transparency in writing about ancient households is to the fore, and this should include an articulation of what the expectations were in taking particular approaches to the archaeological record (Matthews 2012, 560)." 232 Matthews 2012, 560.

Data Entry Spatial Database

Manipulation and Analysis

Reporting and Visualisation

in the categories and the visitors whose relations with them are controlled by the building". 233 An interface can be understood here as a permeable (or not) boundary between inhabitants and visitors that can segregate space and control access. 234 It is particularly in the visitor-inhabitant relationship that this interface plays a key role, relating the outside of a building with the interior. This concept is therefore to be used when describing and categorising the architectural remains, which can be physically captured and analysed.

The concept of house is based on the meaning with which a building is charged. Bailey defines that a house has two aspects: first, the aspect of context, which includes the social meaning that a house is given and the material content that a house has within; second, the aspect of time, which can be seen as a "vertical construct" 235 , where repetition and variation take place. 236 Bintliff argued in a comparable way, when defining a house as a "[…] barometer for long-term transformations in social life as a whole". 237 With these two characterisations of the concept of house, it was clarified why it is an important source of information. This concept is to be used when interpreting and developing a discussion about the meaning with which the buildings in analysis are charged.

There is a more abstract facet to the house which can be defined by the concept of household. Novák defined it as being the sociological component of a house. 238 Foster and Parker define a household as the "basic socioeconomic unit". 239 A house does not necessarily contain only one household activity, there can be household activity that extends over various houses. 240 This concept would be used when discussing activities that took place in the buildings.

The concept of space has various definitions among researchers. First, it must be clarified that space can be perceived from different perspectives: psychological, geographical, personal, etc. In this study, space is in the first instance architectural space due to the available evidence.

Wheatley and Gillings argued that "[s]pace was viewed as a neutral, abstract dimension in which human action took place. It was universal, clearly measurable, and fundamentally external backdrop to cultural activity". 241 This is at first useful when speaking about 233 Hillier and Hanson 2005, 147. 234 Foster 1989, 41. 235 Bailey 1990, 23. 236 Bailey 1990, 23-24. 237 Bintliff 2014, 263. 238 Novák 1999, 7:299. 239 Foster and Parker 2012, 4. 240 Bernbeck 1997, 182. 241 Wheatley and Gillings 2002, 8-9. mathematical calculations that are part of the space syntax technique, aiming at capturing this physical aspect of space with a focus on its boundaries and permeability. However, once the discussion of the results unfolds, the concept of space can include other abstract meanings. This is also what Hillier and Hanson intended to transmit through their space syntax analysis. This dual meaning of the concept of space is well reflected in Seibert's argument that "[…] space, as an empirically neutral series of relationships between objects and the environment, and place, which is the meaningfully constituted and culturally constructed space that people dwell in". 242 A similar definition of "space" can be found in The concise Oxford dictionary of archaeology: "Physical space is of interest to archaeologists because human action is variously distributed in spatial terms and thus has to be explained. […] More relevant, however, is social space, the arrangement of the world created by its inhabitants and defined by them in terms of differential values, emotions, and attributed meanings. This is when the physical space, previously captured by a space syntax analysis, is viewed in its context by adding any information available that can contribute to a better understanding." 243 This concept is to be used when describing the built environment and to explore the intrinsic meaning.

METHODOLOGICAL REVIEW

In this section the methodological framework will be reviewed considering the available architectural evidence available for this case study.

The intrasite spatial analysis is based on the levels of resolution from Clarke. The levels are named nano, micro and macro level. The nano level of the analysis is aimed at the study of the smallest unit, the room itself. This is considered the minimum level of analysis in this study.

The micro level of the analysis is aimed at the study of the middle-sized unit, the building.

The macro level of the analysis is aimed at the study of the largest unit, the residential area as a whole.

The space syntax analysis can now be integrated into the basic scheme of levels of resolution and adapted to this case study, resulting in a proposed workflow for the analysis, as can be seen in Figure 20. The intrasite spatial analysis will be divided into three chapters: Chapter IV will focus on the space syntax analysis of each phenotype, Chapter V on the results of the analysis from the previous chapter and Chapter VI on the genotypes. The phenotypes will be described and analysed per OL in Chapter IV, starting with the earliest. The description of the architectural evidence from the residential area from each OL falls in the macro level of analysis. This is followed by a description of each building on a micro level and on a nano level; buildings are ordered alphabetically within each OL. The micro level focuses on the location, size and shape of the building, including the foundation levels of the newly built walls, and the height and width of the walls. The nano level focuses on the rooms, the permeabilities, and features and finds. The room description includes location and size. The permeabilities are described including the possible existence of such. The features and finds are a listing of installations and floors. Lastly, the additional data is included to complete any valuable information not mentioned before.

Then the space syntax analysis is applied on the micro level and nano level first on the visitor-inhabitant relationship, where the exterior of the building -the alley -is the root space. This is then repeated for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, where the first room accessed in the building -the entrance -is the root space.

A convex map is based on the reduction of spaces to the minimum and largest convex polygons, nevertheless this seems rather redundant given that no activity areas have been detected in this case study. Therefore, each space is simply represented by one polygon, independently from the shape the space has. As archaeological remains are fragmentary by default, a space syntax analysis is not always possible. In the cases where the fragmentary evidence is too scarce, a space syntax analysis was not carried out. If the evidence is enough or can be reconstructed, an analysis was carried out including all the possible variations.

For the space syntax analysis the following procedure was carried out: On the micro levels, a simple justified graph 244 along with the total number of nodes (K) is followed by the mean RA and RRA values, which later will be used for comparison, from a table presenting the minimal, mean and maximal of the control value (CV), the total depth (TD), the mean depth (MD), the relative asymmetry (RA) and the real relative asymmetry (RRA) values of each building. On the nano level, the rooms with highest/lowest control (CV) and most/least integrated (RA), which will make possible a comparison of local and global measures, are highlighted from a table presenting the space types (A, B, C, D), the number of connections (NC), the control value (CV), the total depth (TD), the mean depth (MD), the relative asymmetry (RA) and the real relative asymmetry (RRA) values for the space of each building.

The graphic output is shown through a codified justified graph and plan, 245 followed by an interpretation of the results obtained for each building phenotype. The codes are applied 244 Justified graphs were first drawn in AGRAPH 3.0 (Manum, Rusten, and Benze 2017) for automated calculation and then redrawn in yEd 3.17.2 (computer software, www.yworks.com) to colourize and outline the nodes. Space syntax analysis is carried out with AGRAPH 3.0 and then copied, optimized and completed in Microsoft Excel. 245 Plans were drawn in QGIS 3.8.1.

according to these rules: colours between green and red represent the RA values 246 between zero (symmetric) and one (asymmetric), line thicknesses from dashed to thick represents the CV below one (low control) and above one (high control), line types between nodes represent the type of permeability, and letters A to D represent the space types (Figure 21). For this chapter, since each building is analysed as a phenotype, the RA values can be used to define in which part of the resulting range each space falls. 246 RA values are used to colour the graphs instead of RRA values since the result is bound to a range of values. This is possible because the analysis focuses on single buildings and does not compare them yet.

Chapter V is divided into two sections: the first section is a synchronic analysis and the second section a diachronic analysis. For this chapter the comparison must be made based on the RRA values (standardised RA values), since the buildings have a different K value.

The synchronic analysis focuses on the results of each OL. The micro level and the nano level are summarised at first based on the descriptions and then ton he respective space syntax analysis presented in Chapter IV. This synchronic point of view aims at uncovering similarities and difference of phenotypes which might already occur within each OL. Correlating values in the descriptive part, such as usable area and the number of rooms, gives a deeper insight to how relationships might have worked between rooms. 247 The diachronic analysis considers the micro level and the nano level of the descriptions and the space syntax analysis in general, enabling an understanding of how the spatial configuration of phenotype (buildings) varies across OLs. Standard Deviation of building sizes, correlation coefficient of total area and usable area,248 average values and range of values.

The second section also includes the above-mentioned criticism towards the space syntax analysis and Hillier and Hanson's own suggestion that it is necessary to integrate additional information about the analysed space. Hiller and Hanson mention in The Social Logic of Space that spaces are labelled and that their relationship captured to define the genotype. In turn the "genotypical trend" would define the syntactic position -the spatial configuration -of those labelled spaces 249 This means that classification criteria need to be established to label spaces.

Although there are many propositions of classification criteria to label space, such as those by

Henrickson 250 or Pfälzner,251 it is difficult to establish beforehand which one is adequate.

Therefore, the criteria will be defined according to the information that is available for the analysed spaces after the space syntax analysis is complete. This serves the purpose of understanding if spatial behaviour of single space labels is related to their functional differentiation. For this the local (CV) and global (RA) values are correlated.

CHAPTER IV STARTING WITH THE PHENOTYPES: DESCRIPTIONS AND SPACE SYNTAX ANALYSIS

This chapter presents a description and a space syntax analysis for each building (phenotype) according to the workflow displayed in Section 5 of Chapter III by occupation level (OL), starting from the oldest and where buildings are ordered alphabetically: 252 -OL 4:

Building F-b3

-OL 3:

Building E-b15 Building F-b1 East Building F-b1 West Building F-b2
Building F-b4

Building F-b7

Building F-b12

-OL 2b:

Building E-b11

Building F-b5

Building F-b8 (Phase 1)

-OL 2a:

Building E-b7

Building F-b8 (Phase 2)

OL 4 PHENOTYPES-NABATAEAN PERIOD 1.Description -macro level

One building has been identified in Area E-South/F from OL 4 -Building F-b3 (Figure 22). A second building, Building E-b9, was identified in the area but does not have enough information to carry out a space syntax analysis. 253 Further evidence, such as walls and installations uncovered from OL 4, did not provide the necessary information to determine other buildings.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into five rooms. F-b3:R5 is located at the entrance on the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 9.70 m². F-b3:R3 is located on the east side and has an area of about 86.70 m². F-b3:R2 is located on the north side and has an area of about 28.30 m². F-b3:R1, an L-shaped room, is located on the west side and has an area of about 24.70 m². F-b3:R4 is located in the southwestern corner and has an area of about 8.00 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

The space before entering Building F-b3 is characterised by a roofed area (F-b3:R6), evidenced by beam holes in the wall facing the entrance (SU 3969) (Figure 25).

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified in the north-eastern corner, accessing the building from alley F-s3 first to a roofed area (F-b3:R6) and then to F-b3:R5. Doorways were identified between F-b3:R5 and F-b3:R3, F-b3:R1 and F-b3:R2, and between F-b3:R1 and F-b3:R4. Further permeability can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as no wall evidence between F-b3:R2 and F-b3:R3.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in two rooms. In F-b3:R1, the trodden floor SU 2388 254 at approx.

828.45 m a.s.l. In F-b3:R3, the mud and stone floor SU 2984 at 828.40 m a.s.l. An installation with grinding depressions was reused as a building element of a wall (SU 3649, Figure 26) located in the western corner of F-b3:R1. A sample of wooden remains from a beam in the east facade of the east pillar of the entrance (SU 3973) was dated to 371-202 calBC with 14 C-analysis. 255 Another sample of wooden remains from the wall facing the entrance (SU 3969) was dated to 544-401 calBC with 14 C-analysis. 256 The older date of the second sample is interpreted as being due to the reuse of wooden beams for the roofing of the entrance. 257 A third sample, fragments of dates, was taken from the mud and stone floor SU 2982 and dated to 92-245 calAD with 14 C-analysis. 258 Given that the date is more recent than of the other samples, the date is probably of the end of the use of Building F-b3.

Space syntax analysis

It is not clear whether Building F-b3 had further subdivisions of space, such as F-b3:R3.

The space syntax analysis therefore includes only the spaces that are certain.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b3 is composed of K=7 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 27). Table 6 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 1.963. Building F-b3 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.667 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b3 has a segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Before accessing the building, a more segregated roofed area is accessed (R6). Upon entering, a more integrated room (R5) is accessed, which initiates the sequence of rooms that follows. The next room is the largest room in the building and is more integrated (R3), followed by a more integrated room (R2), a more segregated room (R1) and a segregated back room (R4).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the roofed space before the entrance of the building (R6) and R1.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b3 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 30). Table 8 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 1.894.

Nano level

Table 9 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Two rooms are of

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 31 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b3, while the plan in Figure 32 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of Building F-b3 is in more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.667 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R5) loses control and becomes segregate as the back room (R4) (Table 10). The central rooms (R2, R3) gain control over adjacent rooms, equal to R1, while R1 and R2 increase its integration, R3 and R5 decrease it.

Figure 32: Building F-b3 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

OL 3 PHENOTYPES -ROMAN PERIOD

Description -macro level

Eleven buildings have been identified in Area E-South/F from OL 3 -Building E-b10;

Building E-b13; Building E-b15; Building F-b1 West; Building F-b1 East; Building F-b2;

Building F-b4; Building F-b7; Building F-b10; Building F-b12 (Figure 33). Of those, seven have enough information about the spatial layout to carry out a space syntax analysis. Further evidence uncovered from OL 3 did not provide the necessary information to determine other buildings.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into five rooms. E-b15:R4 is located in the centre and has an area of about 14.40 m². E-b15:R5 is located on the west side and has an area of about 26.80

m². E-b15:R4 and E-b15:R5 form probably an open space. E-b15:R2 is located in the eastern corner and has an area of about 16.30 m². E-b15:R3 is located on the south side, east of E-b15:R4, and has an area of about 7.50 m². E-b15:R1 is located in the south-eastern corner and has an area of about 2.20 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

The entrance was possibly located at the south side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to E-b15:R4, attested only by absence of evidence. Further permeabilities can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as interruptions of walls between E-b15:R3 and E-b15:R2 and between E-b15:R4 and E-b15:R3. It is not clear whether E-b15:R1 was accessed from Eb15:R2 or E-b15:R3. There is no visible division between E-b15:R4 and E-b15:R5, functioning possibly as an open space.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in three rooms. In E-b15:R5, the trodden mud floor SU 6677 at 830.21 m a.s.l. In E-b15:R4 and E-b15:R5, the clay floor SU 7340 at 829.90 m a.s.l. In E-b15:R3, the clay floor SU 7557 at 829.21 m a.s.l.

Space syntax analysis

Space syntax analysis -variation 1

Variation 1 of a space syntax analysis of Building E-b15 assumes a connection between E-b15:R1 and E-b15:R2.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b15 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 36). Table 11 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.567 and the mean RRA is 1.624.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 37 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building E-b15, while the plan in Figure 38 visualises the last two values.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b15 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 39). Table 13 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 1.894.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 40 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building E-b15, while the plan in Figure 41 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.667 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R4) loses some control (Table 15), sharing it now equally with R2. R3, leading to the east part and R5 to the west gain a bit of control. All spaces increase their segregation, except for R2.

Figure 41: Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Space syntax analysis -variation 2

Variation 2 of a space syntax analysis of Building E-b15 assumes a connection between E-b15:R1 and E-b15:R3.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b15 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 42). Table 16 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.467 and the mean RRA is 1.337.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 43 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building E-b15, while the plan in Figure 44 visualises the last two values. The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance of the building (R4) and the first room to the east part (R3).

This variation of Building E-b15 is generally more segregated and control is distributed over two rooms instead of one.

Figure 44: Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b15 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 45). Table 18 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.515. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.533 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R4) loses control, shifting now to R3 (Table 20). R5 in the west part increases control. All spaces tend to become more segregated, except for R3, which becomes the most integrated one.

This variation of Building E-b15 is generally more segregated and the control has shifted from R2 and R4 to R3.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into nine or ten rooms. F-b1:R11 is an inner room located in the central west side and has an area of about 26.30 m². F-b1:R14, in the southwestern corner, is an outer room with an area of about 2.30 m². F-b1:R15 is an outer room located on the south side and has an area of about 2.50 m², respectively. F-b1:R12, F-b1:R18 and F-b1:R13, from northeast to southwest, are outer rooms located on the east to southeast side and have an area of about 2.50 m², 3.20 m² and 3.30 m², respectively. F-b1:R9 is an outer room located in the northern corner and has an area of about 4.70 m². F-b1:R10 and F-b1:R17 are outer rooms located in the north-eastern corner and together have an area of about 6.40 m² and 9.20 m², respectively. A buttress (SU 3963) of 1.00 by 0.70 m on the northeast entrance wall SU 3973 created a division between both rooms. Possibly an outer room, F-b1:R19, is located on the south corner and has an area of about 1.90 m².

The space before entering Building F-b1 East is characterised by an unroofed area (F-b1:R16).

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified in the north-eastern corner (Figure 50), accessing the building from the blind alley F-s5 first to an unroofed area (F-b1:R16) and then to F-b1:R17.

This entrance is flanked by two vertical stones (SU 3973 and SU 3966, Figure 50), narrowing the opening to a width of 0.80 m and a threshold (SU 8686). A buttress defines the doorway between F-b1:R17 and F-b1:R10. Further permeabilities can only be assumed between F-b1:R11 and F-b1:R9, between F-b1:R11 and F-b1:R12, between F-b1:R11 and F-b1:R13, between F-b1:R11 and F-b1:R14, between F-b1:R11 and F-b1:R15 and maybe between F-b1:R15 and F-b1:R19 (if part of Building F-b1 East).

Features and finds

Floors were identified in seven rooms. In F-b1:R11, the 2-3 cm thick trodden floor SU 2392 at 828.60 m a.s.l. In F-b1:R14, the mud floor SU 5330 at max. 828.86 m a.s.l. In F-b1:R15, the mud and stone floor SU 5326 at 828.56 m a.s.l. The stones were reused from SU 5328 (OL 4). In F-b1:R18, the trodden floor SU 5788 at 828.77 m a.s.l. In F-b1:R13, the trodden, partially burnt floor SU 5786 at 828.67 m a.s.l. In F-b1:R9, the 10 cm thick mud floor SU 3964 at max. 828.80 m a.s.l. In F-b1:R10, the mud floor SU 3970 at max. 828.44 m a.s.l.

A sample of charred wood remains from mud and stone floor SU 5326 was dated to 376-186 calBC with 14 C-analysis. 259 The older date of the sample might be due to the stones used for the floor having been reused from OL 4 (SU 5328). Another sample, of vegetable material, from trodden floor SU 5786 was dated to 359-121 calBC with 14 C-analysis. 260 The older date might be an inclusion due to the deposits underneath, SU 5787, which was identified as being from OL 4 or the reuse of walls from Building F-b3 (OL 4).

Additional data

Building F-b1 East was remodelled during a second phase, as can be evidenced by the floor being raised in F-b1:R11: the 2-3 cm thick trodden floor SU 2385 at approx.

Space syntax analysis

Space syntax analysis -variation 1

Variation 1 of a space syntax analysis of Building F-b1 East does not assume F-b1:R19

as part of the building.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 East is composed of K=11 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 51). Table 21 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.339 and the mean RRA is 1.151.

Nano level

Table 22 shows the results obtained for each space. Seven rooms are of type A and four are of type B. F-b1:R9, F-b1:R12, F-b1:R13, F-b1:R14, F-b1:R15 and F-b1:R18 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R11 has the highest CV. F-b1:R11 has the lowest RA value, whereas alley F-s5 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 52 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 East, while the plan Figure 53 focuses on the last two. Building F-b1 East has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.339visitor-inhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b1 East has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Before accessing the building, an unroofed more integrated space is accessed (R16). Upon entering, a sequence of rooms with increasing integration (R17, R10) leads to the most integrated and largest space at the centre of the building (R11). From there the movement is distributed to six smaller -possibly storagerooms (R9, R12, R13, R14, R15, R18).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the central room (R11), connecting to the north, east and south parts, and then by the entrance room (R17) and R16.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 East is composed of K=9 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 54). Table 23 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.270 and the mean RRA is 0.852.

Nano level

Table 24 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Seven rooms are of type A and two are of type B. F-b1:R9, F-b1:R12, F-b1:R13, F-b1:R14, F-b1:R15 and F-b1:R18

have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R11 has the highest CV. F-b1:R11 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b1:R17 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 55 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 West, while the plan in Figure 56 focuses on the last two. 25). The entrance room (R17) loses control that is shifted toward the room leading to the centre of the building (R10), which becomes more segregated.

The small rooms (R9, R12, R14, R15, R18) and the central largest room (R11) become more integrated.

Figure 56: Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Space syntax analysis -variation 2

Variation 1 of a space syntax analysis of Building F-b1 East assumes F-b1:R19 as part of the building.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 East is composed of K=12 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 57). Table 26 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.333 and the mean RRA is 1.170.

Nano level

Table 27 shows the results obtained for each space. Seven rooms are of type A and five are of type B. F-b1:R9, F-b1:R12, F-b1:R13, F-b1:R14, F-b1:R15 and F-b1:R18 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R11 has the highest CV. F-b1:R11 has the lowest RA value, whereas alley F-s5 has the highest RA value. Building F-b1 East has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.333visitor-inhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b1 East has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Before accessing the building, an unroofed more integrated space is accessed (R16). Upon entering, a sequence of rooms with increasing integration (R17, R10) leads to the most integrated and largest space and at the centre of the building (R11). From there the movement is distributed to six smaller -possibly storage -rooms (R9, R12, R13, R14, R15, R18). R15 leads to equally more integrated R19.

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the central room (R11), connecting to the north, east and south parts, and then by the entrance room (R17) and R16.

This variation of Building F-b1 East has the same type of integration overall. The relation between rooms does not really change, besides R15 and R19 having more control than the other small rooms.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 East is composed of K=10 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 60). Table 28 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.278 and the mean RRA is 0.909.

Nano level

Table 29 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Seven rooms are of type A and two are of type B. F-b1:R9, F-b1:R12, F-b1:R13, F-b1:R14, F-b1:R15 and F-b1:R18

have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R11 has the highest CV. F-b1:R11 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b1:R17 and F-b1:R19 have the highest RA values. An individual moving inside of Building F-b1 East is in more integrated surroundings (mean RA = 0.278 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship).

Not much changes for an individual moving inside of the building (Table 30). The entrance room (R17) loses control that is shifted toward the room leading to the centre of the building (R10), which becomes more segregated. The small rooms (R9, R12, R14, R15, R18, R19) and the central largest room (R11) become more integrated.

This variation of Building F-b1 East has the same type of integration overall. The relation between rooms does not really change, besides R15 and R19 having more control than the other small rooms and R15 becoming integrated as the core of the building.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into six rooms. F-b1:R4261 is located in the southwestern corner and has an area of about 42.40 m². F-b1:R1 is located in the north-western corner and has an area of about 7.60 m². F-b1:R2 is located on the north side and has an area of about 15.10 m². F-b1:R3 is located in the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 9.40 m². F-b1:R5 is located on the east side and has an area of about 7.30 m². F-b1:R8 is located in the south-eastern corner and has an area of about 7.90 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

The entrance is evidenced by a threshold (SU 1982), accessing the building from alley F-s2 to F-b1:R4. A doorway was identified between F-b1:R2 and F-b1:R4. Thresholds were found between F-b1:R1 and F-b1:R2 (SU 1962, 828.55 m a.s.l.), F-b1:R4 and F-b1:R5 (SU 2029), F-b1:R5 and F-b1:R3 (SU 2379 262 ), and F-b1:R5 and F-b1:R8 (SU 2010, approx. 827.70 m a.s.l.).

Features and finds

A Table 31 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.476 and the mean RRA is 1.402.

Nano level

Table 32 shows the results obtained for each space. Four rooms are of type A and three are of type B. Alley F-s2, F-b1:R3 and F-b1:R8 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R5 has the highest CV. F-b1:R4 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b1:R1 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 67 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 West, while the plan in Figure 68 visualises the last two values. Building F-b1 West has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.476visitor-inhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b1 West has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the most integrated room (R4) is accessed, which is also the largest room in the building and gives access to the north and east parts. The north part is composed of two rooms in a sequence, the first is a more integrated (R2) and the second a more segregated back room (R1). The east part is composed of a more integrated room (R5) that leads to two more segregated back rooms (R3, R8), one of which has several installations for food processing (R3).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by eastern R5, connecting the west, north and south parts. Table 33 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.567 and the mean RRA is 1.624.

Nano level

Table 34 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 70 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 West, while the plan in Figure 71 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.567 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R4) loses control and part of its integrated position (Table 35). The north part of the building becomes increasingly segregated (R1, R2). The east part, where the food processing area is located (R3) stays more segregated.

R2 increases its control and R5 is now the room with the most control.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into six rooms. F-b2:R5 is located in the centre and has an area of about 36.90 m². F-b2:R6 is located on the southwest side and has an area of about 32.70 m².

This room was possibly divided into smaller spaces but there is no clear evidence for this, except for scattered indications for walls. F-b2:R4 is localised on the northern corner of F-b2:R1 and has an area of about 4.80 m². F-b2:R1 is localised in the northern corner and has an area of about 5.20 m². F-b2:R2 is localised on the north side and has an area of about 3.70 m².

F-b2:R3 is localised in the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 4.60 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

An entrance was identified in the east side, accessing the building from alley F-s7 to F-b2:R1. This entrance is evidenced by a threshold (SU 1920, 828.20 m a.s.l., Figure 74), a reused stone with grinding depressions. Further permeabilities can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as interruptions of walls between F-b2:R5 and F-b2:R3, between F-b2:R5

and F-b2:R4, between F-b2:R5 and F-b2:R6, between F-b2:R4 and F-b2:R1 and between F-b2:R1 and F-b2:R2.

Features and finds

Four standing stones with small stones at the bottom (SU 1994) Table 36 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.476 and the mean RRA is 1.402.

Nano level

Table 37 shows the results obtained for each space. Four rooms are of type A and three are of type B. Alley F-s7, F-b2:R3 and F-b2:R6 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b2:R5 has the highest CV. F-b2:R5 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b2:R2 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 76 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b2, while the plan in Figure 77 visualises the last two values. Building F-b2 has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.476 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b2 has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the most integrated room (R5) is accessed, which is also the largest room in the building and gives access to the north, east and south parts. The north part is composed of a sequence of three rooms of decreasing integration (R4, R1, R2): the first has several installations for food processing and the last is a segregated back room. The east part is a more segregated room (R3). The south part is equally a more segregated room (R6).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the rooms at the entrance of the building (R5), connecting the north, east and south parts.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b2 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 78). Table 38 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.567 and the mean RRA is 1.624. An individual moving inside of the building is in more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.567 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R5) decreases its integration and a bit of control (Table 40); which is distributed to its adjacent rooms. The north, east and south parts of the building increase their segregation (R1, R2, R4, R3, R6).

Micro level

Building F-b4 (Figure 81, Figure 82) was excavated at its northeast and southwest limits.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into at least five spaces. F-b4:R1 is located on the south side and has an area of at least 1.80 m 2 . F-b4:R2 is located on the north side and has an estimated area of about 11.50 m 2 . F-b4:R3 is located on the east side and has an area of about 17.20 m 2 .

The staircase and the possible other floor are considered two more spaces. All three rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

The permeabilities of Building F-b4 are unclear. An entrance could be identified in the north side, accessing the building from an alley to F-b4:R2 through a 1.50 m wide threshold (SU 5034, 828.65 m a.s.l.). A doorway with a small staircase (SU 5052, Figure 83) could be identified east of F-b4:R2 but it is unclear where it leads to. Further permeability can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as between F-b4:R2 and F-b4:R3. The connection between F-b4:R2 and F-b4:R1 has not been excavated.266

Space syntax analysis

The space syntax analysis of Building F-b4 can only be carried out preliminarily due to large parts not being excavated yet.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b4 is composed of at least K=7 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 84). Table 41 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.438 and the mean RRA is 1.290.

Nano level

Table 42 shows the results obtained for each space. Four rooms are of type A and three are of type B. The alley and F-b4:R3 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b4:R2 has the highest CV.

F-b4:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas the F-b4:R1 and the other floor have the highest RA values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 85 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b4, while the plan in Figure 86 visualises the last two values. Building F-b4 has not been completely excavated and can therefore not be analysed thoroughly by a space syntax analysis. Nevertheless, a preliminary interpretation can be made based on the three existent rooms and the staircase.

Building F-b4 has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.438 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b4 has a more integrated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the most integrated room (R2) is accessed. This rooms gives access to the east and south part and the staircase to another possible floor.

R3, to the east, is more integrated but with very low control. The room in the south part (R1), after the part not excavated, is more segregated and has a low control. The staircase has a more integrated position and control that leads to a more segregated floor.

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance of the building (R2).

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b4 is composed of at least K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 87). Table 43 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.528.

Nano level

Table 44 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. F-b4:R3 has the lowest CV, whereas F-b4:R2 has the highest CV. F-b4:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b4:R1 and the other floor have the highest RA values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 88 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b4, while the plan in Figure 89 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.533 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R2) loses some control (Table 45). The east and south parts (R1, R3) and the staircase of the building obtain more control. Overall all spaces increase their segregation.

Building F-b7

Description

Micro level

Building F-b7 (Figure 90

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into eight rooms. F-b7:R1 is an outer room located in the central west side and has an area of about 14.50 m². F-b7:R2 is an outer room located to the south of F-b7:R1 and has an area of about 2.50 m². F-b7:R3 is an outer room located in the north-western corner and has an area of about 3.50 m². F-b7:R4 is an inner room located in the central north side and has an area of about 0.50 m². F-b7:R5 is an outer room located on the north side and has an area of about 1.00 m². F-b7:R7 is an outer room located on the northeast side and has an area of about 0.80 m². F-b7:R6 is an outer room located in the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 0.80 m². Possibly an outer room, F-b7:R8, is located on the south side of R2 and has an estimated area of about 4.60 m², since it has not been completely excavated. The rooms F-b7:R3, F-b7:R4, R5, F-b7:R7 and F-b7:R6 are "pit-like spaces267 " (Figure 92), possibly part and accessed from F-b7:R1.

Permeabilities

Evidence of permeability is scarce. An entrance was identified on the west side, accessing the building from alley F-s4 to F-b7:R1, which was later blocked. A doorway was identified between F-b7:R2 and F-b7:R8, later blocked (Figure 93). Access to the smaller rooms in the northeast of the building (F-b7:R3 to F-b7:R7) was probably made from above through F-b7:R1. A further passage can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as an interruption of the wall between F-b7:R1 and F-b7:R2.

It is not clear if the entrance has shifted in another phase to another position.

Features and finds

A buttress or platform (SU 5793) of 1.20 by 0.90 m is located on the north side of F-b7:R3. A channel (SU 5294, Figure 94) at 829.30 m a.s.l. and an attached wall (SU 5293) are located on the east side of F-b7:R1. The channel has a preserved height of 0.30 m, a width of 0.30 m and slopes toward southwest. The wall is 0.50 m wide. A possible casual hearth (SU 5290 -ashes, charcoal and probably uncarbonized plant remains) of 0.05 m thickness was identified at 829.52 m a.s.l., partially covered by one of the walls from F-b1 (SU 5794).

Floors were identified in one room. In F-b7:R1, the stone paved floor SU 5291 at 829.28 m a.s.l., localised under the channel. Also, in R1, the trodden mud floor SU 5296 on the south and west sides.

A sample of charred hordeum and barley from stone paved floor SU 5291 was dated to 245-385 calAD with 14 C-analysis.268 Table 46 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.270 and the mean RRA is 0.852.

Nano level

Table 47 shows the results obtained for each space. Seven rooms are of type A and two are of type B. Alley F-s4, F-b7:R3, F-b7:R4, F-b7:R5, F-b7:R6 and F-b7:R7 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b7:R1 has the highest CV. F-b7:R1 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b7:R8 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 96 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b7, while the plan in Figure 97 visualises the last two values. Building F-b7 has an integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.270 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b7 is in an already more integrated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the most integrated room (R1) is accessed, which is also the largest room in the building and gives access to the north and south parts. The room has a channel-like structure on its east side. The north part is composed of six smaller more integrated rooms (R3, R4, R5, R6, R7). The south part is composed of a sequence of two long rooms, the first integrated (R2) and the second less integrated (R8).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance of the building (R1), connecting the north and south parts, and then the room that gives passage to the south part (R2). Table 48 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.310 and the mean RRA is 0.943.

Nano level

Table 49 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Six rooms are of type A and two are of type B. F-b7:R3, F-b7:R4, F-b7:R5, F-b7:R6 and F-b7:R7 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b7:R1 has the highest CV. F-b7:R1 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b7:R8 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 99 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b7, while the plan in Figure 100 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in more integrated surroundings (mean RA = 0.310 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R1) loses some control and decreases its integration (Table 50). The north part (R3, R4, R5, R6, R7) increases a bit of its control and becomes increasingly integrated. R2 to the south has a bit more control and less integration, while the back room in the south part (R8) becomes more segregated.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into seven rooms. F-b12:R4 is attached to the building on the east side and has an area of about 2.70 m². F-b12:R3 is localised on the south side and has an area of about 27.10 m². F-12:R1 is localised on the north side and has an area of about 17.00 m². From F-b12:R1 is a kind of cavity going down covered by large slabs (SU 7338), probably leading to a part on a lower storey (Figure 103). F-b12:R2 is localised in the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 14.60 m². All rooms are outer rooms. F-b12:R5 is a passage between F-b12:R1 and F-b12:R3 of about 2.50 m 2 .

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified through the east side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to F-b12:R4. A threshold was found between F-b12:R5 and F-b12:R1 (SU 7776, 828.14 m a.s.l.) and between F-b12:R3 and F-b12:R2 (SU 6295). Doorways were identified between F-b12:R4 and F-b12:R3 and F-b12:R3 and F-b12:R5.

Table 51 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.571 and the mean RRA is 1.740.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 106 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b12, while the plan in Figure 107 visualises the last two values. Building F-b12 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.571 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b12 has a segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, a more segregated small room (R4) is accessed. This leads to one of the two most integrated rooms in the building. It is the largest room (R3), which gives access to the north and northeast parts. The north part is composed of an integrated passage, the other most integrated room, (R5), which leads to a more integrated room (R1) and then a more segregated staircase to a possibly segregated other floor.

The northeast part is composed of a more segregated room (R2).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the largest room of the building (R3).

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b12 is composed of K=7 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 108). Table 53 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.590 and the mean RRA is 1.738.

Nano level

Table 54 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and four are of type B. F-b12:R2 and F-b12:R4 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b12:R3

has the highest CV. The passage F-b1:R5 has the lowest RA value, whereas the possible other floor has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 109 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b12, while the plan in Figure 110 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.590 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R4) loses control and its integrated position becoming more segregated, just as the other storey ( Table 55). The largest room (R3) on the other hand gains even more control and is the most integrated. R1 and the staircase increase integration, while R2 increases its segregation.

OL 2B PHENOTYPES -LATE ANTIQUE PERIOD

Description -macro level

Five buildings have been identified in Area E-South/F from OL 2b -Building E-b8;

Building E-b11; Building F-b5; Building F-b6; Building F-b8 (phase 1) (Figure 111). Of those, three buildings have enough information about the spatial layout to carry out a space syntax analysis. Further evidence uncovered from OL 2b did not provide the necessary information to determine other buildings.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into at least three rooms. E-b11:R1 is located at the entrance on the west side and has an area of about 30.50 m². A staircase is located on the north side of the room leading to a possible upper floor. E-b11:R3 is located on the northeast side and has an area of about 12.60 m². E-b11:R2 is located on the southeast and has an area of about 9.20 m². All rooms are outer rooms. It is not clear if the building continues further to the west.

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified in the southwest side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to E-b11:R1. A doorway with a threshold (SU 7569, 830.11 m a.s.l.) was identified between E-b11:R1 and E-b11:R2. A staircase (SU 2647, Figure 114) is located on the north side of E-b11:R1, evidencing a possible second storey. Further permeabilities can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as interruptions in walls between E-b11:R2 and E-b11:R3

and between alley F-s8 and E-b11:R1.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in two rooms. In E-b11:R1, the antique surface SU 7340 at 829.97 m a.s.l. In E-b11:R2, the clay floor SU 7557 at 829.95 m a.s.l.

Additional data

Building E-b11 was remodelled, changing the size of the building and the quantity and location of rooms, it is therefore considered as a new building (Building E-b7, described and analysed below).

Space syntax analysis

It is not clear whether Building E-b11 continues to the west. It is displayed in the justified graphs, although not integrated in the space syntax analysis.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b11 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 115). Table 56 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level, where the mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.528.

Nano level

Table 57 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. Alley F-s8 has the lowest CV, whereas E-b11:R1 has the highest CV. E-b11:R1

has the lowest RA value, whereas the E-b11:R3 and the upper floor have the highest RA values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 116 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building E-b11, while the plan in Figure 117 visualises the last two values. Building E-b11 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.533 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building E-b11 has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the most integrated room (R1) is accessed. This room leads to the east part and to a staircase. The east part is composed of two rooms in a sequence, the first more integrated (R2) and the second segregated (R3). The staircase is a more integrated space, leading to a segregated possible upper floor.

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance of the building (R1), leading to the east part and upstairs.

Figure 117: Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant)

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Macro level

Building E-b11 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 118). Table 58 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 1.894.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 119 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building E-b11, while the plan in Figure 120 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.667 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room (R1) loses control and its most integrated position, distributed now between E-b11:R2 and the staircase (Table 61). All spaces increase segregation.

Figure 120: Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Building F-b5

Description

Micro level

Building F-b5 (Figure 121

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into five rooms. F-b5:R4 is located on the north-eastern corner and has an area of at least 11.60 m² (excavated), estimated at about 26.70 m 2 . F-b5:R1 is located on the north side and has an area of about 2.80 m². F-b5:R2 is located on the south side and has an area of at least 13.90 m² (excavated), estimated at about 28.20 m 2 . F-b5:R3 is located on the west side and has an area of about 15.30 m². Further on the west side is F-b5:R5 with an area of about 10.80 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

An entrance was identified in the north side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to F-b5:R4. This entrance is evidence by a threshold (SU 4736, 831.00 m a. s. l, Figure 123). A doorway was identified between F-b5:R3 and F-b5:R5. Further permeabilities can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as interruptions of walls between F-b5:R2 and F-b5:R3. It is not clear whether F-b5:R1 was accessed via F-b5:R4 or F-b5:R2.

Features and finds

A fire installation was identified in F-b5:R1 composed of two standing ashlars (SU 6529)

and filled with SU 6530 (Figure 124).

A clay floor (SU 6531) was identified in F-b5:R1 and F-b5:R2 at about 830.40 m a.s.l.

A date stone sample from the fire installations filling (SU 6530) was dated to 389-535 calAD with 14 C-analysis.270

Space syntax analysis

Space syntax analysis -variation 1

Variation 1 of a space syntax analysis of Building F-b5 assumes a connection between rooms F-b5:R2 and F-b5:R1.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b5 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 125). Table 61 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.528.

Nano level

Table 62 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. F-b5:R1 has the lowest CV, whereas F-b5:R2 has the highest CV. F-b5:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas alley F-s8 and F-b5:R5 have the highest RA values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 126 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b5, while the plan in Figure 127 visualises the last two values. Building F-b5 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.533 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b5 has a segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, a more integrated room is accessed (R4), which leads to the most integrated room (R2). That room distributes to a more segregated room with an installation to the north part (R1) and a sequence of two rooms to the west part.

The first room is a more integrated (R3) and the second a segregated back (R5).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room that leads to the room with the installation and the west part (R2).

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b5 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 128). Table 63 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.515.

Nano level

Table 64 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and two are of type B. F-b5:R1 and F-b5:R4 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b5:R2 has the highest CV. F-b5:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b5:R5 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 129 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b5, while the plan in Figure 130 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.533 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). R2 gains more control and R4, previously an entrance room, loses control (Table 65). R2 and R3, at the centre of the building become increase their integration, while the rooms on the outer ends (R1, R4, R5) decrease their integration.

Space syntax analysis -variation 2

Variation 2 of a space syntax analysis of Building F-b5 assumes a connection between rooms F-b5:R4 and F-b5:R1.

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b5 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 131). Table 66 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.567 and the mean RRA is 1.624.

Nano level

Table 67 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. Alley F-s8 and F-b5:R1 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b5:R4 has the highest CV. F-b5:R2 and F-b5:R4 have the lowest RA values, whereas F-b5:R5 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 132 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b2, while the plan in Figure 133 visualises the last two values. Building F-b5 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.567 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b5 has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the first of the two most integrated rooms is accessed (R4). This leads to the more segregated room with an installation (R1) and to the other more integrated room (R2). From there to the west part, first a more segregated room is accessed (R3) and then a segregated back room (R5).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance (R4).

This variation of Building F-b5 is a bit more segregated and the control is centred on R4 instead of R2.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b5 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 134). Table 68 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 1.894.

Nano level

Table 69 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Two rooms are of

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 135 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b2, while the plan in Figure 136 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.667 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship).

The entrance room, R4, loses control and its integrated position (Table 73). The most control is now shared by R3 and R4 equally. R1, with the installation, increases its control and becomes segregated. All spaces increase their segregation except for R3.

Building F-b8 (Phase 1)

Description

Micro level

Building F-b8 (Figure 137

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into four rooms. F-b8:R4 is a passage on the east side of the building and has an area of about 2.20 m². F-b8:R3 is localised on the south side and has an area of about 32.60 m². F-b8:R1 is localised in the north-western corner and has an area of about 14.20 m². F-b8:R2 is localised on the northeast side and has an area of about 15.40 m².

All rooms are outer rooms.

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b8 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 140). Table 71 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.553 and the mean RRA is 1.515.

Nano level

Table 72 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and two are of type B. Alley F-s8 and F-b8:R2 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b8:R4 has the highest CV. F-b8:R4 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-s8:R1 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 141 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b8, while the plan in Figure 142 visualises the last two values. Building F-b8 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.533 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b8 has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, a small integrated passage (R4) is accessed, which leads on one hand to the northeast part and on the other hand to the south and then north parts of the building. To the north part is a more segregated room (R2).

To the south is the largest, more integrated room (R3) that then leads to a segregated room to the north part (R1).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the passage at the entrance (R4), leading to the other parts of the building.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b8 is composed of K=4 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 143). Table 73 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.667 and the mean RRA is 2.000.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 144 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b8, while the plan in Figure 145 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.667 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship).

The passage at the entrance (R4) decreases its control, which is now evenly distributed between F-b8:R3 and the passage (Table 79). R2 also increases its control and is now equal to R1. The passage R4, R1 and R2 increase their segregation.

OL 2A PHENOTYPES -LATE ANTIQUE PERIOD

Description -macro level

Three buildings have been identified in Area E-South/F from OL 2a -Building E-b7;

Building F-b8 (phase 2); Building F-b11 (Figure 146). Of those, two buildings have enough information about the spatial layout to carry out a space syntax analysis. Further evidence uncovered from OL 2a did not provide the necessary information to determine other buildings.

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into five rooms. E-b7:R1 is located in the centre and has an area of about 35.30 m². E-b7:R4 is located on the west side and has an area of about 8.50 m².

E-b7:R2 is located to the east side of E-b7:R1 and has an area of about 18.60 m². E-b7:R is located in the north-eastern corner and has an area of about 1.50 m². E-b7:R3 is located in the south-eastern corner and has an area of about 6.00 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Table 76 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.467 and the mean RRA is 1.337. Building E-b7 has a more integrated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.467 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building E-b7 has a more segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, the largest room is accessed (R1), which leads to a possible more segregated room (R4) to the west and to the east part. R1

shares equally the most integration with the first room to the east (R2). R2 leads to two more segregated rooms (R3, R5).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the room at the entrance (R1)

together with the first room to the east (R2).

Figure 151: Building E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant)

Table 78 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.533 and the mean RRA is 1.515.

Nano level

Table 79 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and two rooms are of type B. E-b7:R3 and E-b7:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b7:R2 has the highest CV. E-b7:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas E-b7:R4 has the highest RA value. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.533 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship). The entrance room, R1, and the room to the west, R4, lose control (Table 80). Instead, the most control is now exercised by R2, the first room to the east part. Except for R2, which becomes increasingly integrated, all spaces increase their segregation.

Figure 154: Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Description

Micro level

The location of the entrance and the passage R4 were changed in Building F-b8 (Figure 155

Nano level

Rooms

The usable area is divided into four rooms. F-b8:R4 is a passage localised at the entrance on the east side of the building and has an area of about 2.20 m². F-b8:R3 is localised on the south side and has an area of about 32.60 m². F-b8:R1 is localised in the north-western corner and has an area of about 14.20 m². F-b8:R2 is localised on the northeast side and has an area of about 15.70 m². All rooms are outer rooms.

Permeabilities

The entrance was shifted to the east side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to F-b8:R4. The view to the interior of the building is blocked by an L-shaped wall (SU 6298) built to access F-b8:R3 to the south and impeding the way to F-b8:R2 in the northwest part.

Doorways were identified between F-b8:R4 and F-b8:R3, and between F-b8:R3 and F-b8:R1.

It is not clear how the access from F-b8:R3 to F-b8:R2 was.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in three rooms. In F-b8:R3, the trodden mud and stone floor SU 6294 at 829.30 m a.s.l. (east) to 829.76 m a.s.l. (northwest). In F-b8:R1, the trodden mud floor SU 6676 at 830.30 m a.s.l. In F-b8:R2, the trodden mud floor SU 6293 at 830.25 m a.s.l.

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b8 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 157). Table 81 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.553 and the mean RRA is 1.515.

Nano level

Table 82 shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and two are of type B. F-b8:R1 and F-b8:R2 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b8:R3 has the highest CV.

F-b8:R3 has the lowest RA value, whereas alley F-s8 has the highest RA value.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 158 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b8, while the plan in Figure 159 visualises the last two values. Building F-b8 has a more segregated overall configuration (mean RA = 0.533 -visitorinhabitant relationship), when the alley is included.

An individual approaching Building F-b8 has a segregated position (the alley) in relation to the interior before entering the building. Upon entering, a small more integrated passage (R4) is accessed, which leads to the largest, most integrated room (R3) in the building. R3 leads to two more segregated rooms in the north part (R1, R2).

The highest control over adjacent rooms is exercised by the largest room (R3), leading to the north part of the building.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b8 is composed of K=4 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 160). Table 83 shows the results obtained for the building on a micro level. The mean RA is 0.500 and the mean RRA is 1.500.

Nano level

Table 84 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and one is of type B. F-b8:R, F-b8:R2 and F-b8:R4 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b8:R3 has the highest CV. F-b8:R3 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b8:R1, F-b8:R2 and F-b8:R4 have the highest RA values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 161 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b8, while the plan in Figure 162 visualises the last two values. An individual moving inside of the building is in generally more segregated surroundings (mean RA = 0.500 -inhabitant-inhabitant relationship).

The largest room, R3, increases the control and becomes as integrated as possible. R4, on the other hand, decreases control and becomes more segregated.

CHAPTER V UNCOVERING SPATIAL CONFIGURATION: RESULTS OF THE SPACE SYNTAX ANALYSIS

This chapter presents the results obtained from the space syntax analysis described in detail for each of the buildings in Chapter IV.

The first section comprises a synchronic analysis, where the descriptions and space syntax analyses are summarised for each occupation level (OL).

The second section is a diachronic analysis of all three OLs that first compares the descriptions and space syntax analyses and then analyses the general spatial behaviour in an attempt to relate these with a functional differentiation. For the latter, due to the absence of information about the room functions, labels were attributed to most of the spaces: exterior; entrance room; largest room; smallest room; room(s) with the highest NC; room with a food processing area. This makes it possible to compare and associate differently labelled spaces with different spatial behaviours.

Some notes of caution are due here, because enough information is not always available or the results can be ambiguous. OL E-South:4/OL F:4 and OL E-South:2/OL F:2a are based on a small sample size. This is particularly valid for OL E-South:4/OL F:4, which is just a single building and cannot be considered representative of an entire OL. Ambiguous results can be caused by variations (var.) of buildings, 272 which occurs in two cases from OL E-South:3/OL F:3 273 and one from OL E-South:2/OL F:2b 274 , or by the presence of similar results produced by the space syntax analysis. 272 Variations of buildings occurred because of the lack of evidence to place the location of permeability between spaces. See Chapter IV: Space syntax analyses of Building E-b15 var.1 and var. 2 (Section 2.2), Building F-b1 East var. 1 and var. 2 (Section 2.3) and Building F-b5 var. 1 and var. 2 (Section 3.3).

273 Building E-b15 and F-b1 East. 274 Building F-b5.

SYNCHRONIC ANALYSIS

This first section focuses on a synchronic analysis of each OL (OL 4, OL 3, OL 2b and OL 2a). The analysis is based on the descriptions and space syntax analysis, as presented in Chapter IV, per OL.

1.1 OL 4

Description

Micro level

Only one building (Building F-b3) of OL 4 had the necessary information to carry out a space syntax analysis (Figure 22). This does not make it possible to filter out accurately the spatial configuration for this OL. Nevertheless, the results will be presented here and used, when possible, to compare with the other occupation levels.

This building was built on collapsed walls and debris of an older OL (OL 5). The rectangular shaped total area occupied by the building is about 270.70 m 2 (Figure 163). The usable area, 157.40 m 2 , is 58% of the total area. The foundation levels of the newly built walls are between 827.68 m a.s.l. and 828.72 m a.s.l., averaging 828.27 m a.s.l. (Figure 164). The highest level, 828.72 m a. s. l., is a result of the wall SU 3966 having been built on bedrock, which is not as deep as under the rest of Building F-b3.

Figure 164: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4)

The width of the external walls is between 0.75 m and 1.00 m, while the internal walls is between 0.30 m and 1.00 m.

Nano level

There are five rooms, of which the smallest measures about 8.00 m 2 and the largest about 86.70 m 2 (Figure 165). As Figure 165 illustrates, there is not enough information to state if there is a relationship between the number of rooms and the available usable area of Building F-b3 because at least two more cases would be needed to establish a reliable trendline.

Space syntax analysis

Micro level

The mean RRA value for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b3 is 1.963 (Figure 166). In the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship the RRA value decreases to 1.894, therefore indicating a lower segregation of the building as a closed unit.

Nano level 275

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

When approaching the Building F-b3 of OL 4, an individual is in a segregated position.

Upon entering, a path of rooms is accessed, of which the first is a small entrance room. The largest room is the most integrated room, while the back room is the most segregated.

The highest control is exercised by the three rooms at the centre of the path, which are also the rooms with the highest number of connections. This can be confirmed by the correlation coefficient of 0.84 when comparing control value (CV) and number of connections (NC) directly.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

An individual already moving inside of Building F-b3 of OL 4 is equally in a more segregated surrounding.

The highest control is shared by the largest room and the room leading to the back room because they control the access to both ends of the path that the rooms form, and all three rooms have the highest number of connections. This can be confirmed by the correlation coefficient of 0.91 when comparing control value (CV) and number of connections (NC) directly. This means that the former entrance room loses its function of controlling access to the building and becomes completely segregated as the back room.

OL 3 1.2.1 Description

Micro level

Two buildings (Building F-b1 East, Building F-b1 West) reused walls from the same OL 4 building (Building F-b3), three buildings (Building E-b15, Building F-b2, Building F-b4)

reused OL 4 walls that could not be attributed to a building and two buildings (Building F-b7, Building F-b12) were built on top of OL 4 debris; for all buildings new walls were built (Figure 33). For two buildings, Building E-b15 and Building F-b1 East, two variations were proposed because of unclear evidence of permeability. The average total area occupied by a building is either 125.70 m 2 (considering Building F-b1 East var. 1) or 126.40 m 2 (considering Building F-b1 East var. 2), ranging between 60.50 m 2 and 170.80 m 2 (Figure 167). The shape of the buildings vary between rectangular, L-shaped and one of them square. The usable area is on average 52% (ranging between 44% and 57%) of the total area: between 28.20 m 2 and 89.70 m 2 ; in all cases, although the total area occupied by the building changes, the percentage of usable area is always the same.

Figure 167: Total and usable area per building -Roman Period (OL 3)

The foundation levels of the newly built walls are between 827.70 m a.s.l. and 829.90 m a.s.l., averaging 828.52 m a.s.l. (Figure 168 276 ). The graphs shows the slope under the residential area very well: on the left side of the graph the buildings (E-b…) located north have walls founded at a higher level than the buildings (F-b…) on the right side of the graph, located on the south side of the area.

276 Foundation levels of newly built walls are not available for Building E-b13 and Building F-b7. There is no space syntax analysis of Building E-b10 and Building E-b13. The width of the external walls is between 0.45 m and 1.20 m, generally wider than the internal walls, which is between 0.25 m and 1.00 m.

Nano level

The number of rooms in each building varies between five and ten, of which the smallest measures about 0.50 m 2 and the largest about 42.40 m 2 . The correlation coefficient between usable area and the number of rooms is about -0.50 (Figure 169), indicating that there might be a relationship.

Space syntax analysis

Micro level

Figure 170 shows the mean RRA values for all buildings and variations for the buildings from OL 3. There are four different possible average RRA values for a visitor-inhabitant relationship of the buildings from OL 3, depending on which variation of Building E-b15 and Building F-b1 East is used for the calculation in combination with the buildings with no variations (Table 86). The average RRA value is therefore between 1.311 and 1.354. The same procedure can be followed for an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Table 87):

here the average RRA value lies between 1.403 and 1.466. In all four cases the average increases, therefore indicating a higher segregation when analysing the buildings as closed units.

Nano level 277

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

When approaching a building of OL 3, an individual is in four cases in a more segregated position (Building E-b15, Building F-b1 East, Building F-b1 West, Building F-b2), more integrated in two cases (Building F-b4, Building F-b7) and in one case segregated (Building F-b12). Upon entering, the most or one of the most integrated rooms is accessed immediately

(Building E-b15, Building F-b1 West, Building F-b2, Building F-b4, Building F-7) or, alternatively, an integrated room leading to the most integrated room (Building F-b1 East) or a more segregated room leading to the most integrated room (Building F-b12).

The highest control over adjacent spaces is exercised by the room with the most connections, which has a distributary character; it is either it located at the entrance (Building E-b15, Building F-b2, Building F-b4, Building F-b7) or at the centre of the building (Building F-b1 East, Building F-b1 West, Building F-b12). This can be confirmed by the correlation coefficient of 0.98 or 0.99 when comparing control value (CV) and number of connections (NC) directly.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

An individual moving inside a building of OL 3 is usually in more segregated surroundings (Building E-b15, Building F-b1 West, Building F-b2, Building F-b4, Building F-b12), though more integrated in two cases (Building F-b1 East, Building F-b7).

The highest control over adjacent spaces is in all buildings maintained by the room(s)

with the most connections, as proven by the correlation coefficient of 0.98 or 0.99 between control (CV) and number of connections (NC).

OL 2b

Description

Micro level

Two buildings (Building E-b11, Phase 1 of Building F-b8) were built reusing part of the walls from OL 3 buildings (Building E-b15, Building F-b12, respectively), while one building (Building F-b5) was built on OL 3 debris; for all buildings new walls were built (Figure 111).

For one building, Building F-b5, two variations were proposed because of unclear evidence of permeability. The average total area occupied by a building is 121.20 m 2 , ranging between 107.90 m 2 and 136.30 m 2 (Figure 171). The shape of the buildings varies between rectangular and L-shaped. The usable area is on average 55% (ranging between 48% and 61%) of the total area: between 64.40 m 2 and 83.80 m 2 ; in all cases, although the total area occupied by the building changes, the percentage of usable area is always the same. The foundation levels of the newly built walls are between 827.70 m a.s.l. and 830.95 m a.s.l., averaging 830.15 m a.s.l. (Figure 172 278 ). Although not as pronounced as for the buildings from OL 3, still the graphs shows signs of the slope under the residential area: on the left side of the graph the building (E-b…) located north has walls founded at higher levels than the buildings (F-b…) on the right side of the graph, located on the south side of the area. The width of the external walls is between 0.45 m and 1.20 m, generally wider than the internal walls, which is between 0.35 m and 0.70 m.

Nano level

The number of rooms in each building varies between four and five, of which the smallest measures about 2.20 m 2 and the largest about 32.60 m 2 . The correlation coefficient between usable area and the number of rooms is -0.13 (Figure 173), meaning that there is almost no relationship between them.

278 Foundation levels of newly built walls is not available for Building E-b11. There is no space syntax analysis of Building E-b8 and Building F-b6.

Space syntax analysis

Micro level

Figure 174 shows the mean RRA values for all buildings and variations for the buildings from OL 2b. There are two different possible average RRA values for a visitor-inhabitant relationship of the buildings from OL 2b, depending on which variation of Building F-b5 is used for the calculation in combination with the buildings with no variations (Table 88). The average RRA value is therefore between 1.524 and 1.558. The same procedure can be followed for an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Table 89):

here the average RRA value lies between 1.789 and 1.924. In both cases the average increases, therefore indicating a higher segregation when analysing the buildings as closed units.

Nano level 279

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

When approaching a building of OL 2b, an individual is either in a more segregated position (Building E-b11, Building F-b5 var. 2) or segregated position (Building F-b5 var. 1, Phase 1 of Building F-b8). Upon entering, the most integrated room is accessed (Building E-b11, Building F-b5 var. 2, Phase 1 of Building F-b8) or, alternatively, a more integrated room leading to the most integrated room (Building F-b5 var. 1). The divergent case is the first variation of Building F-b5, indicating that the second variation is probably the correct one, as it has the same characteristics as the other buildings of the same occupation level.

The highest control over adjacent spaces is exercised by the room with the most connections, which has a distributary character; it is either located at the entrance (Building E-b11, Building F-b5 var. 2, Phase 1 of Building F-b8) or at the centre of the building (Building F-b5 var. 1). This can be confirmed by the correlation coefficient of 0.97 or 0.99 when comparing control (CV) and the number of connections (NC) directly.

The divergent case is the first variation of Building F-b5, indicating that the second variation is probably the correct one, as it has the same characteristics as the other buildings of the same occupation level.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

An individual moving inside a building of OL 2b is, in all cases, in a more segregated surrounding.

The highest control over adjacent spaces is in all the buildings maintained by the room(s)

with the most connections, as proven by the correlation coefficient of 0.94 or 0.98 between control (CV) and the number of connections (NC).

OL 2a

Description

Micro level

Both of the buildings from OL 2a (Building E-b7, Phase 2 of Building F-b8) were built by reusing walls of the buildings from OL 2b (Building E-b11, Phase 1 of Building F-b8, respectively) and by building new walls (Figure 146). The average total area occupied by a building is 122.90 m 2 , ranging between 119.40 m 2 and 126.30 m 2 (Figure 171). The shape of the buildings varies between rectangular and L-shaped. The usable area is on average 55% (ranging between 54% and 55%) of the total area: between 64.70 m 2 and 69.90 m 2 ; in all cases, although the total area occupied by the building changes, the percentage of usable area is always the same. The width of the external walls is between 0.45 m and 1.20 m, generally wider than the internal walls, which is between 0.35 m and 0.70 m.

Nano level

The number of rooms in each building varies between four and five, of which the smallest measures about 1.50 m 2 and the largest about 35.20 m 2 . Calculating the correlation coefficient between usable area and number of rooms (Figure 177) is unprofitable because the result would always be -1.00 or 1.00 for two samples. At least one more case would be needed to start to have a reliable result.

Figure 177: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a)

Space syntax analysis

Micro level

Figure 178 shows the mean RRA values for both buildings of OL 2a. The average RRA value for the visitor-inhabitant relationship is 1.418. In the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship the RRA value increases to 1.508, therefore indicating a higher segregation when analysing the buildings as closed units.

Nano level 281

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

When approaching a building of OL 2a, an individual is in a more segregated (Building E-b7) or segregated position (Phase 2 of Building F-b8). Upon entering, the two most integrated room(s) is accessed (Building E-b7) or an integrated room leading to the most integrated room (Phase 2 of Building F-b8).

The highest control over adjacent spaces is exercised by the room(s) with the most connections. This can be confirmed with the correlation coefficient of 1.00 when comparing control (CV) and number of connections (NC) directly.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

An individual moving inside a building of OL 2a is in more segregated surroundings.

The highest control over adjacent spaces is in all buildings maintained by the room with the most connections, as proven by the correlation coefficient of 0.99 between control (CV) and number of connections (NC). 281 See "Graphic output and interpretation" in Chapter IV, Section 4. 0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 E-b7 F-b8 (phase 2) mean RRA vis-inh mean RRA inh-inh

DIACHRONIC ANALYSIS

This second section focuses on a diachronic analysis of all OLs in analysis (OL 4, OL 3, OL 2b and OL 2a). The analysis is based on the synchronic analysis in Section 1 of this chapter.

Description

Micro level -general

The only analysed building from OL 4 has been built on debris of an older OL (OL 5).

Further uncovered walls, which were not enough to define a building from the same level, have also been reused from an older OL (OL 5). Buildings of OL 3, OL 2b and OL 2a mostly reused walls of older OLs or rebuilt them in the same position as before, but also built on debris of older OLs. Additionally, some new walls were built regardless to were walls stood in an older OL.

From OL 4 to OL 3 mainly the external walls are maintained, while the building's interior is laid out differently (Building F-b3 to Building F-b1 East and Building F-b1 West). The layout of the building's interior changes from OL 3 to OL 2b (such as Building E-b15 to Building E-b11), although in some cases the thicker interior walls are rebuilt in the same position (such as Building F-b12 to Building F-b8). The transition between OL 2b and OL 2a is mainly characterised by small variations of the layout of the building's interior (such as Building E-b11 to Building E-b7; Phase 1 of Building F-b8 to Phase 2 of Building F-b8).

The buildings of all four OLs are predominantly rectangular or L-shaped, although there is one case of a square shaped building in OL 3 (Building F-b1 West).

There is a wide range of total and usable area that the buildings occupy: between 60.50 m 2 and 270.70 m 2 (Figure 179). The usable area of all the buildings analysed is between 44% and 61%. The correlation coefficient between total area and the usable area for all analysed buildings is together 0.98 (Figure 181). Interestingly, this indicates that the surface of usable area has always been optimised in the same proportion, independent of the total size of the building and the OL they belong to. This is very well represented by the two buildings at both ends of the trendline in The average foundation levels of the newly built walls are lower for OL 4 and increase towards OL 2a (Figure 182). The overlapping foundation levels of newly built walls across OLs can be explained by the existence of a slope in the residential area, as mentioned in Chapter II, Section 3.1. Buildings on the north side of the residential area (E-b…) have a general trend of having higher founded new walls, while the buildings on the south side (F-b…) have lower founded new walls. This is especially pronounced in OL 3 but can also be seen in OL 2b.

Figure 182: Foundation levels of all buildings, black line indicates the OLs mean foundation level -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods

Nano level -general

The number of rooms in each building varies between four and nine (or possibly then, considering F-b1 East var. 2), of which the smallest measures about 0.50 m 2 and the largest about 86.70 m 2 . OL 3 has the greatest variation in the amount of rooms -four to nine or ten, while the other OLs have a lesser amount -four or five. OL 4 has the greatest variation of rooms sizes, namely in Building F-b3. The other OLs have a more even distribution of room sizes, although there are cases of very small or very large rooms. A correlation coefficient between usable area and the number of rooms could only be established for OL 3 and OL 2b. OL 3 has a correlation coefficient of -0.50, which might indicate a relationship, but this is not certain. For OL 2b the correlation coefficient is -0.13, indicating, with a very high probability, that there is no relationship between usable area and the number of rooms. Not enough buildings from OL 4 and OL 2a have been analysed to make such a calculation, because at least three would be needed and only one or two, respectively.

Space syntax analysis -micro and nano level

Turning now to the results of the space syntax analysis, first the micro level of analysis will be discussed followed by the nano level of analysis.

The micro level is analysed by comparing the mean RRA values of buildings of each OL and its variations. As can be seen in Figure 183, average RRA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship are all above 1.00, meaning that the buildings are generally segregated. These average RRA values increase even more in an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, meaning that their segregation also increases.

Figure 183: Average RRA values per OL and variations -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods How the topological distance changes can immediately be identified through the justified graphs of the visitor-inhabitant relationship: if upon entering a building only one choice of connection is possible from the room accessed, then the topological distance in the inhabitantinhabitant relationship is going to reduce; if upon entering a building the room accessed has two choices, one with one topological distance and one with more, then the topological distance is maintained in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship; if upon entering a building the room accessed has at least two choices with more than one topological distance, then the topological distance is going to increase. This means that the behaviour of the topological distance between the visitor-inhabitant relationship and the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship already gives an indication of movement characteristic such as a path-like entrance, a furcation with one single space path or a furcation with at least two paths with multiple spaces.

As for the visitor-inhabitant relationship, OL 4 is characterised by a path of spaces, including the exterior of the building. The longest topological distance from the perspective of a visitor is five. OL 3 has none such path-like aligned spaces, instead all the buildings contain bi-or multifurcations, which can already occur upon entering the building or further inside.

The topological distance from the perspective of a visitor is between three and six. All OL 2b buildings contain one bifurcation but no multifurcations. The longest topological distance from the perspective of a visitor is between three and four. Buildings from OL 2a contain only bifurcation. The longest topological distance from the perspective of a visitor is three.

As for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, where buildings are analysed as a closed unit, OL 4 is still characterised by a path of spaces and the longest topological distance reduces.

OL 3 buildings contain one bifurcation or multifurcations and the topological distance reduces in two cases, maintains in three cases and increases in two cases. Spaces of buildings from OL 2b are now either aligned on a path or contain one bifurcation and the longest topological distance reduces in the first variation of Building F-b5, is maintained in two cases, if considering the second variation of Building F-b5, and reduces in one case. OL 2a has only one bifurcation and the longest topological distance reduces in one case and is maintained in another.

Spatial behaviour -functional differentiation?

As mentioned in Chapter III, Section 5, Hillier and Hanson had in mind that additional information is necessary to complete the results obtained from a space syntax analysis. This information is primarily drawn from the room function, but since evidence to define these is scarcely available for this case study282 , labels were given to the spaces mainly based on location and size rather than their function. It is expected by this approach, where location and size precede, that functional differentiation can be inferred. 283 The six space labels established for the buildings at Tayma are the following:

-the exterior, namely the alley;

-the entrance room;

-the largest room;

-the smallest room;

-the room(s) with the most connections (highest NC);

-the staircase;

-the upper floor;

-the room where a food processing area was evident.

The analysis of spatial behaviour is based on the correlation of the values for control (CV) and integration/segregation (RA) are correlated and the space types (A-, B-, C-or Dtype) are defined in a visitor-inhabitant relationship and in an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. The first value is a local value and the second is a global value, enabling to understand the placement of each space within both the local and the global surrounding. Figure 185 -representing the visitor-inhabitant relationship -and Figure 186 -representing the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship -illustrate that a higher control is always connected to integration and a lower control with segregation. A-type spaces generally tend towards a segregated area with low control, while B-type spaces are less segregated and have more control. This confirms A-type spaces as dead-end spaces and B-type spaces as part of tree branches, as they have been defined in Chapter III, Section 2.1.1. The same correlation between CV and RA is analysed according to the above-mentioned labels in the following paragraphs.

The spaces labelled as exterior (alley) are always A-type spaces -dead-ends -that are segregated and have no control over the building's interior (Figure 187). These spaces are on the outer side of the boundary defined by the walls of the building. Nevertheless, alleys are not always the most segregated space, indicating that there was not a high control to access the building. The spaces labelled as largest room in the building are from a visitor-inhabitant perspective usually in a more integrated position and have distributed values of control (Figure 189, left). Most of these rooms are B-type spaces connected to a higher number of rooms, while in exceptional cases they are A-type spaces. There is not completely clear why the latter occurs, since two of them are a variation of the same building 284 and in the third case the building has not been completely excavated 285 ; but observing their justified graphs, the largest room is, in all these exceptions, a dead-end space, while all the other cases have their largest room at the entrance or centre of the building and with multiple connections. Most of these rooms are therefore located in a more central location of the buildings, giving access to at least two other spaces. The inhabitant-inhabitant perspective does not change the range of control values but increases the segregation of a space (Figure 189, right). The division between A-type and Btype spaces remains the same. 284 Building E-b15 (OL 3), R5. 285 Building F-b4 (OL 3), R3. The spaces labelled as smallest room in every building display A-type and B-type distinction that are inverted in comparison with the largest room. The smallest room is in a visitor-inhabitant perspective usually in a more segregated position and with a low control value (Figure 190, left). Most of them are A-type spaces, while in exceptional cases they are B-type spaces. In one case the smallest room is a small entrance room, 286 in another case the smallest room is a corridor-like entrance room, 287 which explains why they have a high control over adjacent spaces although they are the smallest room in the building, and in the third case the permeability is not clear. 288 Most of these rooms are therefore located at the end of the buildings and with no choice except returning the same way as the room was accessed. The control values decrease for an inhabitant-inhabitant perspective (Figure 190, right). The division between A-type and B-type space remains the same. 286 Building F-b12 (OL 3), R4. The two rooms containing a food processing area have in neither case a position of control and are located in an area of more segregation from a visitor-inhabitant perspective (Figure 194, left). There is no evidence to make a typological identification for the rooms with food processing areas, because one A-type and one B-type space is known. From an inhabitantinhabitant perspective these rooms increase segregation but do not change their space type (Figure 194, right). By analysing the spatial behaviour of the differently labelled spaces, it could be shown that spaces with the same label follow similar spatial configuration and behaviour changes from the visitor-inhabitant relationship to the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. From that it can be assumed that the rooms with the same labels could also have had the same or very similar functions. The alley, for example, is usually more segregated from the buildings' interior, while the largest room with its mostly distributary character is most of the time in a position of control within the building.

In some cases, spaces can also have multiple functions. The entrance room, for example, has a function as interface between a visitor and an inhabitant, dividing the outside public space from the inside private space. This function is not maintained when considering the building as a closed unit, leading to the assumption that the room probably had another function once the door to the outside was closed.

Since this diachronic analysis showed that there is some degree of similarity between spaces with the same labels across OLs, it might show that the arrangement of space did not change radically from occupation to occupation level. The layout of buildings are changed and rooms are added or joined, but there is a verticality 290 in the built environment that keeps the tradition of room arrangement and probably their function also.

CHAPTER VI MAKING GENOTYPES VISIBLE

This chapter discusses the results presented in Chapter V based on the question as to whether the spatial configuration of the analysed buildings is a cross-period phenomenon -one genotype for all four occupation levels (OLs) in analysis -or if each OL can be represented by one genotype. 291 Arguments supporting and contradicting the various possibilities will be presented, followed by a description and comparison of the identified genotype(s).

ONE GENOTYPE TO RULE THEM ALL?

To assess if there is a cross-period genotype, the average RRA value for all analysed buildings -OL 4, OL 3, OL 2b and OL 2a -is calculated together. Figure 195 shows this value for all four OLs together and includes the variations caused by the variations of single buildings. 292 The average RRA value for the visitor-inhabitant relationship is 1.415 and for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship it is 1.514. The value itself does not indicate whether there is only one genotype for all OLs, but it shows that the buildings from the residential area are, on average, overall asymmetric (RRA above 1.000) in both types of relationship. The range between the lowest and highest RRA values (Figure 195) shows that the existence of one genotype seems unlikely: for the visitor-inhabitant relationship this is on average 1.111 and for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship this is on average 1.120. This means that there is a great difference between the spatial configuration of the buildings in analysis, indicating that there must be more than one genotype. 291 As presented as research question in Chapter I, Section 2. 292 OL 3: E-b15 var. 1 and var. 2, F-b1 East var. 1 and var. 2; OL 2b: F-b5 var. 1 and var. 2. By calculating the difference factor H*, it is possible to quantify the variance of the RRA values (Figure 196) within the above-mentioned range. In both the visitor-inhabitant relationship and the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship this is on average 0.87, meaning that that there is a similarity between all buildings. Nevertheless, this value has to be placed in relation to the results from the next section where it is tested through the same argumentative line that each OL might have one genotype.

Figure 196: H* for all analysed buildings of all OLs together, including the breakdown into variations -(variations for the Roman Period (OL 3) and first phase of the Late Antique Period (2b)); y-axis starts at 0.

ONE GENOTYPE PER OCCUPATION LEVEL?

The second possibility presented by the research question is that the buildings of each OL are represented by one genotype, respectively. Figure 197 293 shows the average RRA values for each OL, including the variations of single buildings (see footnote 292). The average RRA for OL 4 is 1.963 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and 1.894 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship; for OL 3 it is between 1.290 and 1.322 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and between 1.353 and 1.394 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship; for OL 2b it is 1.524 or 1.558 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and 1.789 or 1.924 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship; for OL 2a it is 1.418 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and 1.508 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. The RRA values show, as in Section 1 of this chapter, that the buildings of all OLs are overall asymmetric (RRA above 1.000) in both types of relationship. But in this case there are visible variations within their asymmetry: OL 4 and OL 2b (only inhabitant-inhabitant relationship) have a higher asymmetry, while OL 3, OL 2b

(inhabitant-inhabitant relationship) and OL 2a have a lower asymmetry. The last two indicate a similarity in the RRA values. Although the division into four genotypes is far more likely than one genotype for all OLs, the range of RRA values within each OL needs to be examined.

Since there is only one building in OL 4, the range is 0.000 for both the visitor-inhabitant relationship and the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship and has therefore no additional evidence as to whether the genotype is likely to be obtained or not. Yet, when looking at OL 4, which has a different average RRA value than OL 3, it must be a different genotype. OL 3 has a range of RRA values that is 0.888 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and between 0.825 and 1.042 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. The range is lower than the one presented in Section 1 of this chapter, increasing the likelihood of a single genotype for this OL, but still it is very high in comparison to the other OLs. The range of RRA values in OL 2b is, in the visitorinhabitant relationship, between 0.013 and 0.109 and in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship between 0.106 and 0.485, hence very low. Likewise, in OL 2a the range is also very low: 0.178 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and only 0.015 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship.

The examination of the range of RRA values within each OL shows that OL 4, OL 2b and OL 2a can be represented by one genotype each, while OL 3 most likely does not. The high probability of a genotype in OL 4, OL 2b and OL 2a, respectively, and the low probability of only one genotype in OL3 can be well visualised by overlapping all the justified graphs (visitor-inhabitant relationship: Figure 199; inhabitant-inhabitant relationship: Figure 200). 294 The darker the green lines are, the more occurrences of that path the buildings have within one OL, while on the other end of the scale orange shows only one occurrence of that path. OL 3 has a high quantity of paths that occur only once and therefore there must be at least one other genotype for that OL. OL 2b and OL 2a show they have a very similar path. Figure 200: Overlapping of all justified graphs per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods) , including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (inhabitant-inhabitant relationship)

NEW PROPOSITION FOR GENOTYPES

At this point of the line of argumentation presented in Section 1 and Section 2 of this chapter, it could be identified that the building from OL 4 can be represented with one genotype, distinct from OL 3. The genotype for OL 4 is henceforth named genotype A and is represented by phenotype Building F-b3.

Buildings from OL 3 follow the spatial configuration of at least two genotypes, which

have not yet been defined in more detail. OL 2b and OL 2a are distinct from OL 3 but show evidence of similarities amongst themselves. The possibility of defining more than one genotype for OL 3 will now be analysed first and then a possible joint genotype for OL 2b and 2a.

Firstly, the buildings of OL 3 have a high variance of average RRA values: between 0.852 and 1.740 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and between 0.852 and 1.894 in the inhabitantinhabitant relationship. Building F-b1 East and Building F-b7 have a much lower average RRA value than the other buildings (Figure 201) and their justified graphs show they have a high multifurcation (up to six spaces connected to a single space) that the other buildings do not have. 295 Joining the buildings with a higher average RRA value, their common spatial configuration is henceforth named genotype B.I and is represented by the phenotype Building E-b15, Building F-b1 West, Building F-b2, Building F-b4 and Building F-b12. The two buildings with a lower average RRA value, Building F-b1 East and Building F-b7, follow the spatial configuration of the henceforth named genotype B.II.

295 See justified graphs in Chapter IV: Section 2.3.2 for Building F-b1 East and Section 2.7.2 for Building F-b7. Secondly, buildings from OL 2b and OL 2a display similarities in their average RRA values (Figure 174), which is between 1.337 and 1.624 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and between 1.500 and 2.000 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. Hence, the values are very similar, positioned well above the value 1.000 as minimum indicator of asymmetry. The same applies to their justified graphs, which display a simpler furcation in all cases, 296 opposed to the multifurcation of up to seven nodes in OL 3. Buildings from both OL 2b and OL 2a are jointly to henceforth be named genotype C, represented by the phenotypes Building E-b11, Building F-b5, Building F-b8 (Phase 1), Building E-b7 and Building F-b8 (Phase 2). Overlapping all justified graphs (visitor-inhabitant relationship: Figure 205; inhabitantinhabitant relationship: Figure 206) now shows a different colour scheme than in Section 2 of this chapter, Figure 199 and Figure 200, where there was a high quantity of paths that occur only once in all phenotypes per OL (in orange). Now the paths are mainly on the dark green side of the scale, indicating a higher occurrence of the same path. The lighter colours on the graphs show in this case a variation of a genotype.

"Transpatial" links

Transpatial links have been defined in Chapter III, Section 2.1 as a concept that indicates similarities among contemporary phenotypes. The author has criticised this by stating that the same genotype can also be cross-period phenomenon and therefore a search for contemporary transpatial links might not be possible to apply in such cases, as in this study, which would be genotype C. 297 These transpatial links are termed links for the purpose of describing each genotype in this case study.

The results presented in the synchronic analysis in Chapter V, Section 1 focused on the characteristics of buildings -phenotypes -pertaining to the same OL and hence contemporary. 298 This part will review these characteristics and summarise them anew considering the phenotypes based on the same spatial configuration -genotype -and hence not necessarily contemporary (Table 90). 297 For the discussion about transpatial links see Chapter III, Section 5. 298 As a side note: in this case the concept of transpatial links can be applied because only contemporary phenotypes were compared. Genotype A defines the spatial configuration of Building F-b3 from OL 4, which dates to the Nabataean Period (Figure 207). This genotype is a labile case study because only one building has been uncovered from this period, yet it shows some very distinct characteristics making it different from the other analysed buildings. The walls of the building were built new on debris from older occupations. The building is distinctively large, about 271 m 2 , in comparison with all other buildings from the other three genotypes (the next largest is Building F-b1 West from genotype B.I with a total area of about 171 m 2 ). Building F-b3 has five rooms with a considerable range of sizes: the smallest measures merely 8.00 m 2 , while the largest is 86.70 m 2 . The building of genotype A is very asymmetric in both the visitor-inhabitant relationship and the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. This is because all the rooms are aligned on a path, letting the individual move in the building but with absolutely no choice of movement. Nevertheless, the largest room in the building has, anyway, the highest control over adjacent spaces, followed by the most connected rooms and the entrance (the latter only in the visitor-inhabitant relationship). This leaves the smallest room in a position of less control and is segregated from the rest of the rooms.

To sum it up, since there is only one building of genotype A, there is no way possible to compare it with other buildings that might have a link to Building F-b3. Building F-b12) are more than the others. This is caused by the two buildings having, after a bifurcation, a deeper path of aligned rooms in topological terms (the last room is up to six topological steps from the entrance). The most connected room holds the highest control, resulting from the fact that they are in the position from which the individual, moving in the building, can have up to four ways to choose, caused by a complex furcation. The movement in the buildings is therefore not restricted or pre-determined. In the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship the asymmetry within the buildings increases, caused by the occurrence of longer paths of aligned rooms, which puts their furthest room very distant from the opposite end of the building.

Finally, although some variations between the five buildings of genotype B.I exist, their link is still very strong.

Genotype B.II defines the spatial configuration of Building F-b1 East and Building F-b7 from OL 3, which dates to the Roman Period (Figure 208). Building F-b1 East has two variations analysed because it is not clear if there is an additional room or not, yet both variations show similar characteristics. 302 The spatial configuration is so distinct from other buildings that the genotype itself is clear, although only two buildings were attributed to it.

Most of the walls have been newly built, especially in the southeaster part of the residential area where no walls from OL 4 have been identified, other walls were rebuilt on the same location as in an older OL (OL 5), especially the outer walls in the southern part where Building F-b3 from OL 4 stood. Although with the same spatial configuration, the size of the buildings is different with one (Building F-b1 East) having the double the size of the other (Building F-b7). Still, the number of rooms is very similar, the smaller building having eight and the largest nine or ten. Since there are only two buildings of genotype B.II, a correlation coefficient cannot be calculated. 303 Buildings of genotype B.II are generally very symmetric, caused by a multifurcation type of path centred around a possible courtyard. Besides the alley in front of Building F-b1 East, all rooms are symmetric, meaning that the rooms are integrated in the movement within the building and never too far from each other. The control is held by the courtyard that determines the distribution of connections to most of the rooms within the building. The only difference of movement between both buildings is that in entering Building F-b1 East a path of rooms is first accessed before reaching the courtyard, while in Building F-b7 the courtyard is accessed immediately from the alley.

To sum it up, the link between the two buildings of genotype B.II is very strong, resulting from the fact that there are only two phenotypes. Genotype C defines the spatial configuration of Building E-b11, Building F-b5, Building F-b8 (Phase 1), Building E-b7 and Building F-b8 (Phase 2) from OL 2b and OL 2a, both of which are two phases dated to the Late Antique Period (Figure 209). Building F-b5 has two variations analysed because it is not clear from where a room has been accessed, yet both variations show similar characteristics. 304 Most of the walls from buildings of genotype C from OL 2b have been reused or rebuilt on the same location as in OL 3. The same happened in OL 2a, where most of the changes are new walls in the interior of the buildings. Only in the northern part were walls from OL 2b and OL 2a found. Buildings of genotype C have not got a large variation of building sizes, having a difference of about 28 m 2 between the smallest (Building E-b11) and largest (Building F-b5). The number of rooms is very similar for genotype C buildings, either four or five. A correlation coefficient of 0.20 shows here that there is a slight relation between the usable area of each building and their number of rooms. The buildings of genotype C are asymmetric. Building E-b7 is in the visitor-inhabitant relationship mathematically symmetric, this could however be reconsidered because the value is just under the limit defininf symmetric and asymmetric. Since all the other buildings are asymmetric, it would be likely that Building E-b7 would be too. The buildings all have a simple furcation, leaving an individual, circulating in the building, with a choice. The most connected rooms hold the highest control, regulating choice of movement for the individual.

To sum it up, a strong link could be assessed for the buildings of genotype C, although they are from two different phases of occupation. Genotype B.I and genotype C have a difference factor of 0.98 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and 0.99 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, which indicates that there are similarities between them. While the former has a more complex furcation of up to four spaces linked to a central space, the latter is characterised by more simple furcation of up to three spaces linked to one. The spatial configuration is different, but a certain evolution between both can be identified, hence there is a minor transtemporal link with evolutionary changes.

Lastly, between genotype B.II and genotype C there are not many similarities: the difference factor in the visitor-inhabitant relationship is 0.92 or 0.93, while in the inhabitantinhabitant relationship it is between 0.88 and 0.90. Here too the kind of furcation seems decisive because the former has a multifurcated path while the latter is composed of a simple furcation. The transtemporal link, can be considered here, as being a mix between evolutionary and revolutionary change, but a revolutionary change seems more likely. Building F-b8 (phase 1) from OL 2b was built on top of Building F-b12 from OL 3, reusing mainly the outer walls and the central thick internal wall running northeast-southwest.

The location of the entrance is the same for both buildings. The interior layout has been simplified by reducing the quantity of rooms from five rooms and a staircase to an upper floor to four rooms. The spatial configuration of Building F-b8 follows the set of rules of genotype C, while the earlier building follows the rules of genotype B.I. Still, in both cases, there is only one bifurcation that gives the moving individual a choice. The new building is more integrated when accessed from the exterior (visitor-inhabitant relationship) but becomes completely asymmetric once moving inside the building. This results from the rooms of Building F-b8 in OL 2b all being aligned on a path. The spatial configuration does not change in Building F-b8

(phase 2) from OL 2a, although the access to one room (R2) is shifted. The visitor-inhabitant relationship stays the same, but the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship changes to less asymmetric, on the border to symmetric.

The external walls of Building E-b11 from OL 2b were mostly maintained from the earlier Building E-b15 from OL 3, except for the east part of the building, reducing the size of the building. Although some interior walls were rebuilt on the same location, the spatial configuration still changes from following the rules of genotype B.I to genotype C. The main change is the addition of a staircase to another floor for which there has been no evidence in the earlier building. The access to one room of Building E-b15 (R1) is not clear and depending on which variation being used to compare, the comparison to Building F-b8 (both phases) has a different outcome. Building E-b7 from OL 2a has reused most of the walls from Building E-b11, but expanding the building again to the west, adding two rooms and probably not having a second floor. 306 Movement within the building became more complex, changing from one bifurcation, when accessing the building, to two, nevertheless the spatial configuration, as a whole, is maintained. The interior circulation changes from a simple path aligning all the rooms to the existence of a bifurcation. Interestingly, variation 1 of Building E-b15 is more similar to Building E-b11, while variation 2 is the same as Building E-b7, opening the question of has the genotype B.I been correctly attributed to Building E-b15. Unfortunately, no evidence has been found to clarify this question for now. 306 There is no evidence of a second floor.

CHAPTER VII ZOOMING OUT: IMPACT OF THE POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DYNAMICS ON THE USE OF SPACE

This chapter takes a closer look at the results and discussions of this research, by zooming out of the detailed study of the residential area as was done up until this point. The focus is on the overall significance they have in the context of the oasis of Tayma and NW Arabia during the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods. 307 The first section presents the results, obtained through the space syntax analysis, embedding them in the context of the political and spatial development of the oasis of Tayma.

The second section is a presentation and comparison of residential areas in the same chronological frame (Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods) from other sites in NW Arabia, namely Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal. Since a space syntax analysis is not possible for these sites, it bases the comparison on the "additional information" 308 available.

The third section consists of the concluding remarks, resulting from the complete research carried out in this study, by focussing on the political, social and economic dynamics that had an impact on the development of the residential area.

INTRASITE SPATIAL ANALYSIS

The oasis of Tayma underwent significant changes at the beginning of the period under analysis here. In the 4 th /3 rd century BCE the outer city wall ceased to be used, reducing the size of the oasis significantly to only encompass Compound E. The Kingdom of Lihyan, based in Dedan, the dominant power in the region and therefore over Tayma, is in a state of decline. 309 The Nabataean Kingdom from the north is in the meantime extending its borders to the south reaching Hegra in the 1 st century BCE. 310 The residential area at Tayma (Area E-South/F), evidenced in this context, has continuous occupation between the 4 th century BCE and the 6 th century CE (OL 4, OL 3, OL 2a and OL 307 The context has been presented and referenced in Chapter II.

308 "Additional information" as mentioned in Chapter III, Section 5. 309 Hoyland 2001, 68. 310 Macdonald et al. 2015, 20. 2b). For the Nabataean Period (OL 4: 4 th /3 rd century BCE -1 st /2 nd century CE) only two buildings could be identified: one in the south of the excavated area and a multi-storey building in the north. For the Roman Period (OL 3: 1 st /2 nd -4 th century CE) a total number of eleven buildings were uncovered, extending over the whole 1600 m 2 of the excavated area. The eight buildings from the two phases of the Late Antique Period (OL 2b and OL 2a: 4 th -6 th century CE) seem to have condensed to the north side of the area, leaving the south side, except for scattered evidence, empty. The second phase (OL 2a) is further characterised by the construction of an 18000 m 2 large complex (Building E-b6) northwest of the residential area and a later enclosure wall that extends to the residential area and then continues on its southeast side. The residential area is abandoned, at the latest, during the 6 th century CE.

Thus, the long and continuous usage of the residential area, spanning four levels of occupation, is evidenced by a total number of twenty-one buildings. The present research focussed on thirteen buildings of those occupation levels, given that not all the architectural remains attributed to a building had the necessary minimum information to carry out a space syntax analysis (boundaries and permeabilities). 14 C dates, preliminary pottery analysis311 and the foundation levels of the walls provided evidence to date the single buildings, giving this research a solid chronological base to work from.

The reuse of primarily external but also internal walls in different occupation levels showed at first sight a more or less stable continuous occupation, which considering major supra-regional changes -the expansion of the Nabataean Kingdom until further south in the 1 st century BCE, the later annexation by the Romans to integrate the Provincia Arabia in 106 CE and the leaving of the Romans after the 3 rd century CE -would seem rather unusual if considering large buildings programs could have been carried out to establish political dominance, i.e. the Romans. Previously published studies on buildings about the residential area indicated a certain continuity in the technique of local production of pottery between the Nabataean and Roman Period. 312 However, most of the pottery shapes in the Nabataean Period find their parallels towards Hegra instead of Petra, hence regional, while in the Roman Period parallels can mostly be found in the direction of the Levant: more standardised but still produced locally. This is interesting, because just as the buildings of the Roman occupation reuse the pre-existent situation, i.e. the reuse of walls, the pottery production place also did not change. However, the spatial configuration of these buildings, as the pottery shapes, have changed. It shows an adaptability to the given circumstances.

Although single studies of selected buildings provided some insight into the residential area,313 the architectural evidence had not yet been systematically studied. And hence, the space syntax analysis carried out in this study uncovered the underlying differences and also similarities between buildings of the same period and with other periods by mathematising the conception and perception of space.

The space syntax analysis resulted in the determination of four different genotypes that set the rules for the spatial configuration of the buildings -phenotypes -attributed to them. In the Nabataean Period this is genotype A, characterised by a newly built large building with rooms aligned on a linear path and hence resulting in a high asymmetry. During the Roman Period two genotypes were determined with part of the walls reused from the Nabataean Period: genotype B.I, characterised by buildings that are composed of a complex furcation but still rather asymmetric; genotype B.II, characterised by multifurcating symmetric buildings with most of the rooms surrounding a large courtyard. In the Late Antique Period, although composed of two building phases, only one genotype was determined: genotype C is characterised by a simple furcation that is also asymmetric and probably evolving from genotype B.I from the Roman Period, while genotype B.II ceases to be built.

The function of single buildings could not be determined, based on this type of analysis, however different types of spaces could be determined based on labels attributed to them, in considering other information other than the archaeological material found in them: the exterior, the entrance room, the largest room, the smallest room, the room(s) with the most connections, the staircase, the upper floor, the rooms with food processing areas. The analysis of each of the group of spaces showed that they have similar spatial configurations within their group.

The similarity of this spatial behaviour, within groups, resulted in the proposition that there would be a functional differentiation between each labelled group. What exactly this function would be cannot be determined. Still, some statements can be made for the labelled space groups: the alley is segregated from the building's interior; the entrance has a high control over its surroundings but partially loses it when the door to the exterior is closed; the most connected room, especially the courtyards of genotype B.II in the Roman Period, have a very high control over the adjacent rooms; the staircases are segregated from the lower floor, but not as segregated as the upper floor. The food processing areas, since only two were determined, displayed, unfortunately, unclear results.

Interestingly, these patterns of spatial configuration, and with this their assumed functional differentiation, are fairly maintained across all three periods. This means that there is no genotypical trend of functional differentiation of spaces, as would be expected based on the fact that four genotypes with different spatial configurations were determined.

To sum up, a change in the use of space could be determined on a micro level of analysis (buildings) between the Nabataean Period and Roman Period, while between the Roman Period and Late Antique Period this change could only be shown, unequivocally determined, for one of the (geno-)types of buildings. On the nano level of analysis (spaces) there is a certain continuity as to the functional differentiation of the rooms. These two different patterns of behaviours are very interesting and shall be discussed further when the impact of political, social and economic dynamics is discussed.

INTERSITE SPATIAL ANALYSIS

The following section will investigate comparative evidence of architectural remains from residential areas within the same spatio-temporal frame as this research. Unfortunately, most of the sites have not enough data to make a comparative space syntax analysis, which means that the architectural remains lack the minimum necessary information needed, boundaries and permeability. Furthermore, many times research has been restricted to soundings and therefore buildings have not been excavated in their integrity. These parameters make it difficult to achieve a substantial comparative analysis. As has been mentioned

repeatedly throughout this research, a space syntax analysis often falls short regarding the quantity and quality of the available data, a confrontation that also the present study encountered. This is where additional information plays a key role. So, the focus in this chapter will be on the information that is in fact available and can provide insight on how space has been perceived and conceived in residential areas in the region during the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods. Mada'in Saleh (ancient Hegra) and Dumat al-Jandal (ancient Duma), both in the same NW Arabian context as Tayma, provided the comparative data needed (Figure 211). Phase 6 (Figure 217) is dated to the 6 th to 7 th c. CE. 344 This phase is particularly well represented in comparison with all the previous phases, because it has been excavated in area rather than in soundings. 345 It is characterised by a system of "contiguous housing". 346 Although some walls are reused from the previous phase, almost all are newly built. 347 The southern quarter from the perspective of the street is characterised by larger rooms that become smaller the further south. 348 In total 14 rooms (Room 10110, Room 10111, Room 10112, Room

Area 2

Area 2 (Figure 218) was excavated between 2008 and 2011. 354 All four identified phases, in the excavated area, Phase 1 to Phase 4, have comparable evidence, dating between the late 1 st c. BCE and the 3 rd /early 4 th c. CE (Table 92). 355 Though not completely excavated, the description of the location of features is described according to trench limits and not building limits. 219) is dated to the late 1 st c. BCE -early 1 st c. CE. 356 The first building activities take place in this period and are considered being a Nabataean building program based on the Nabataean pottery, coins and funerary architecture. 357 A street divides the area into a northern and a southern sector. 358 The walls are all made of mudbrick. 359 In the northern sector at least three rooms were identified on the east side, a possible room at the centre and a courtyard on the northwest side. 360 A doorway was identified between the courtyard and the street, and between the middle east room and the southern east room; further permeability could not be recognised. The southern sector is composed of at least three rooms. 361 The room on the east side might have had a staircase ( 20028) to an upper floor. 362 No permeability was identified.

Phase 2 (Figure 220) is dated to the 1 st c. CE. 363 This phase is characterised by a reorganisation of the northern sector and by wall reinforcements and the construction of stone walls with possible mudbrick superstructures in the southern sector. 364 The Phase 2 walls in the northwest part of the northern sector are razed to build stone walls that form a larger enclosed area, probably a courtyard, than the previous. 365 The east part of that sector is now composed of at least seven rooms: three at the centre from the north to the street and four on the east part, also from the north to the street. 366 The courtyard is possibly connected to the west side of the area and connected to the room on its east side, followed by possibly another passage to the room further east. The connection between the central east room and the east room by the street might have still been in use. 367 Rooms are generally smaller, while the courtyard has been enlarged. A channel was uncovered, leading from the central northern room to the street. 368 It is not clear, in this phase, if the street is divided into two segments by a large wall running from the south of the southern sector against the southern wall of the northern sector. 369 The southern sector almost does not change, besides the reinforcement of the walls on the northeast part. 370 It is possible that at the end of this phase there had been some kind of flooding episode, destroying parts of the area. 371 Phase 3 (Figure 221) is dated to the 2 nd /early 3 rd c. CE. 372 In this phase minor changes took place in the northern sector, while the southern is largely disused. 373 There are now at least seven rooms and one courtyard. 374 The courtyard from Phase 2 in the northwest is divided into two rooms. The central room in the north is paved with stones and the channel is only used at the beginning of Phase 3. 375 On the northeast side a courtyard is created with a smaller room to its south side. An L-shaped room is now besides the street on the east side. The passage in the northwest part, from the former courtyard, is now without a context to the east. A passage was found from the western room of the former courtyard to the west and another passage was found from the eastern room of the former courtyard to the north. Passages have also been unearthed from the paved room to the east courtyard and to the room on its south side. The courtyard has further passages to the east and to the roofed room to the south. The two rooms along the street on the east side of the area are also connected by a passage. The street is in Phase 3 not divided as had been assumed in Phase 2, this is evidenced by the construction of a wall parallel to the street (20003). 376 The southern sector is mostly levelled but some single evidence, such as a monolithic basin and an oven, has been found. 377 At the end of this phase evidence of destruction and disuse have been found, possibly associated to another flooding of the area. 378 Phase 4 (Figure 222) is dated to the 3 rd /early 4 th c. CE. 379 This phase is characterised by some reoccupation of the northern sector after the accumulation of a layer of disuse of about 15 to 20 cm and a complete abandonment of the southern sector. 380 The formerly two rooms on the west side of the northern sector, divided in Phase 3 from the Phase 2 courtyard, are now again joined and the three central rooms seem not to have any walls dividing them. The east side does not change layout. Passages are maintained as in Phase 3, except for the northern passage of the now joined rooms on the west side of the area. At the end of this phase a 25 cm thick layer of disuse was identified and only some hearths and junk pits of the Late Byzantine/Early Islamic Periods have been found (Phase 5). 381

Trench A and trench B

In trench A and trench B (Figure 224), Phase 3 to Phase 10 are dated between the 2 nd /1 st c. BCE and the 4 th c. CE (Table 93).

In trench A and trench B, Phase 3 to Phase 5 are dated to the 2 nd /1 st c. BCE. 386 These phases are characterised by dumping operation onto older Phase 2 (4 th /3 rd c. BCE) mudbrick walls with probable postholes to hold a wooden structure. 387 Phase 6 is dated between the late 1 st c. BCE to the first half of the 1 st c. CE. 388 Trench A is not used during this phase, while in trench B some occupation occurred. 389 Phase 7 is dated to the 1 st c. CE. 390 The first "well-defined" occupation occurs in this phase, characterised by a "lower complex".391 Western trench A is composed of a rectangular space with a doorway on the northern wall and a drainage system; it is interpreted as probably being domestic. 392 In eastern trench B two stone walls were uncovered that shape a corner of a large building with a monumental doorway; The "lower complex" is interpreted as probably being cultic on the east side and domestic on the west side. 393 Phase 8 is dated to the end of the 1 st c. CE/beginning of the 2 nd c. CE.394 Flooding destroyed the "lower complex" during this phase. 395 Phase 9 and Phase 10 are dated up until the 4 th c. CE. 396 During this phase an "upper complex" is built. 397 A room was identified that maintained the northern walls of the "lower complex", while the eastern and southern walls were newly built. 398 The doorway of the "lower complex" in the northern walls has been blocked during this phase.399

Trench C and trench D

In trench C and trench D (Figure 225), Phase 1 to Phase 4 are dated between the 2 nd /1 st c. BCE and the 4 th c. CE (Table 94).

Phase 1 (phase C1 and phase D1) is dated to the 2 nd /1 st c. BCE. This phase is characterised by mudbrick walls and an oven or kiln. 400 Phase 2 (phase C2 -with two subphases -and phase D2; Figure 225) is dated to the 1 st /early 2 nd c. CE. Three mudbrick walls, some with stone foundations, were uncovered in this phase; two of them joined parallel at the centre by the third. Between the two subphases of C2 a short disuse was identified. 401 A destructive event seems to have taken place at the end of this phase. 402 Phase 3 (phase D3 -with two subphases; Figure 225) is dated to the (2 nd -/) 3 rd c. CE. A wall (stone and mudbrick foundation with a mudbrick superstructure) probably forming a room to the east of trench D was identified in one subphase (D3a) and a long platform in the other subphase (D3b). 403 Phase 4 (phase C3 -with four subphases -and phase D4; Figure 225) is dated to the (3 rd -/) 4 th c. CE. A rectangular enclosure made of mudbrick and stone walls was uncovered for this phase. 404 The enclosure was divided into two parts by a mudbrick wall. 405 Permeability was identified at three points: an open doorway through the northern wall and two doorways through the southern door (at least one is an open doorway as well). 406 In the northern part a staircase was uncovered. 407 The enclosure was probably composed as an open-air forecourt, leading to an important room or building. 408 Reused Nabataean architectural elements can be connected to Phase 9 of trench B. 409 The enclosure has been interpreted as probably domestic,

although it has a monumental character. 410 To the south of the rectangular enclosure lies, presumably, a street. Building A (Figure 227, Figure 228, Figure 229) is a Late Nabataean building from the 1 st c. CE, reused various times in the Roman/Byzantine Period between the 2 nd and 6 th c. CE 412 [START_REF] Loreto | Saudi-Italian-French Archaeological Mission in Saudi Arabia, Dūmat al-Jandal 2010. The Excavation of Sector A[END_REF], 2015, 2016, 2017b. 414 Loreto 2016, 173, 2017a, 179. until its destruction in the Early Islamic Period (6 th -8 th c. CE) (). 415 The building is protected by a ten-metre-long retaining or terrace wall on its southwestern side. 416 A street is located to the southern side of the building. 417 Only partially excavated, it measures at least 13 by 17 m

and has an open-air courtyard with a portico to the west side. 418 A low wall of two courses between the courtyard and the portico presumably had wooden pillars to support the covering for this portico. 419 The portico of 0.90 by 5.5 m was partially floored. 420 To the south of the courtyard is a large rectangular room with a double entrance to the courtyard. 421 The walls of the building are all 0.50 m thick (except for one 0.40 -0.45 m thick wall). 422 Traces of white plaster were found covering the retaining or terrace wall, the external wall and the floor of the southern room and on the portico, leading to the assumption that the building could have been covered in that white plaster. 423 Evidence found in the foundation (level 10) and floor (level 9) date to the 3 rd c. BCE -1 st CE, explained as reused ancient materials used for the construction of the building. The ground floor and the reoccupation level (level 8) evidenced Roman, Byzantine and early Islamic material, an indicator of the use and various reuses of the building until its destruction. 424 The building is interpreted as being a private or public (civic or religious) dwelling of a local elite, this based on the building technique of walls and floors. 425 Northwest of Building A is a second Nabataean building, Building B (Figure 227, Figure 228). It is composed of two concentric aligned rooms. 426 As on Building A, Building B was covered in white plaster. 427 An entrance was identified in the southern room, but none in the northern room, 428 leading to the assumption that Building B was used for storage, both liquid and/or solid. 429 Unfortunately, the building has not yet been completely excavated. 430

Comparative study

The information collected from the residential areas of Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal were joined with those of Tayma in a table by equating the dating of single occupations of all three sites (Table 96). The result is a comparative chronostratigraphy that can be used to compare the architectural evidence from the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods. The aim is to understand whether the residential areas of the comparative sites might have had the same impact of the political, social and economic dynamics as in Tayma.

The Nabataean Period in Tayma (OL 4) is characterised by the new construction of walls on collapses and debris of the previous occupation of the area. Area 1 in Mada'in Saleh, on the contrary, has part of previous walls destroyed, some reused and some newly built (Phase 2).

This phase is interpreted as possibly coinciding with the Nabataean arrival to Mada'in Saleh it can either be natural or artificial as a means of destruction, since there is a wadi located to the E of the residential area (Figure 212). If the latter would be true, then it could be a sign of violence originated by the Roman Annexation. In Dumat a-Jandal the two uncovered buildings are from the Late Nabataean Period, evidencing a long-term use throughout the Roman/Byzantine Period.

To sum it up, it seems that the Nabataean Period is largely characterised by the first construction of houses in the residential areas of all three sites. For Mada'in Saleh this has been interpreted perhaps as a sign that permanent housing has replaced the mobile lifestyle.

However, this must be interpreted with caution, permanent houses are not evidence of the first occupation of the sites. As has been presented before 431 , Tayma has evidence of an oasis culture from the late 5 th /4 th millennium BCE, which is compatible with a mobile lifestyle, and continuous occupation from the 3 rd /2 nd millennium onwards.

The Roman Period in Tayma is characterised by a mix of reuse or rebuilding of walls from the Nabataean Period and the construction of new walls on debris. Two (geno-)types of buildings could be differentiated. Area 1 in Mada'in Saleh is characterised by reuse of some walls from the previous occupation and the addition of new walls. The first Roman phase (Phase 4) is especially characterised by the construction of a street, hinting to a better planned layout of the residential area, while the second phase (Phase 5) is defined by a change of circulation. The latter phase is dated to a transition between the Roman and Late Antique Period. In Area 2 in Mada'in Saleh major changes took place (Phase 3), mainly by discontinuing the southern sector and reorganisation of the northern sector. After a phase of disuse, the northern sector is again reused in a second Roman phase (Phase 4). It is not clear of the reason for the disuse phase between both of the Roman dated phases. Area 9 in Mada'in Saleh is characterised by a rebuilding of the Nabataean complex after flooding at the end of the Roman Period (Phase 9-10). Trench C evidenced a disuse in a first Roman phase (Phase 3).

Major changes took place in trench C and trench D in the second Roman phase (Phase 4), with the construction of a complex with probably an open-air forecourt. There is no such evidence in the other sites, opening the question as to why this monumental architecture was built in this area. All areas in Mada'in Saleh have been reused, also destroyed at the end of the Nabataean Period, and partially monumentalized. While Area 1 and Area 2 maintain a similar layout as before, Area 9 is completely restructured. After the Roman Period, the residential areas are largely abandoned except for Area 1. The buildings from Dumat al-Jandal were still being used as they were constructed in the Late Nabataean Period with some minor changes.

To sum up, while in Area 1 and 2 in Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal a continuity of the use of space could be seen, Area 9 in Mada'in Saleh is characterised by a larger investment in monumentalization. In Tayma an investment is also visible, although not as monumental as in Mada'in Saleh. In the Late Antique Period, the residential area in Tayma is primarily characterised by the reuse of Roman buildings in the northern part, changing gradually, probably as repair was due, and the abandonment of the southern part. Besides this, a large complex was built northwest of the residential area, evidencing a rerouting of investment of resources to another area, leaving the residential area, in analysis, to be abandoned after the Late Antique Period.

In Mada'in Saleh only in Area 1 have resources been largely used to build continuous housing in the same area, while Area 2 and Area 9 do not evidence an occupation.

To sum up, the Late Antique Period and later seems to be characterised by the general abandonment, little by little, focusing the construction of housing in only a few areas.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

An overall aim of this research was to uncover the political, social and economic dynamics that made an impact on the residential area of the oasis of Tayma during the Nabataean, Roman and Late Antique Periods. The space syntax analysis, on first sight a very mathematical and seemingly static technique of analysis, in connection with additional information from the oasis itself and two other sites, Mada'in Saleh (ancient Hegra) and Dumat al-Jandal (ancient Duma) provided a much more complex and intertwined outcome than would have been expected. Not only the different levels of resolution -macro, micro and nanoshowed that variation and continuity can occur within the same evidence, depending from which point of view it is analysed, but also that different dynamics -political, social and economic -had a different impact on the development of a residential area.

On a political scale, a distinct change took place when the Nabataean Kingdom expanded, evidenced by permanent housing being built. This seems to have been the case of all three residential areas, Tayma, Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal since no compelling evidence prior to this first occupation of the areas was found. The impact of the Roman annexation proved to be connected to major changes taking place in the residential area of Tayma and Area 9 in Mada'in Saleh, while the other areas in Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal have been restructured, in the case of the former, or simply reused, in the case of the latter. The Late Antique Period is characterised by a change of the location of the residential areas. In Tayma the area is still partially reused and restructured but generally a decline can be seen in the previously established residential area. Investment goes into building a complex towards the northwest of the area. In Area 1 in Mada'in Saleh a similar development occurs, but instead of shifting the area, continuous well-built houses are constructed on top of the Roman residential area. This concept of decline during the Late Antique Period has been discussed when the framework of this research was presented. 432 It seems that it would be more appropriate to look at the changes occurring during this period in NW Arabia as transformations rather than a decline as such, otherwise there would not be such building activities in both Tayma and Mada'in Saleh. The aridification of the climate, depopulation, demonetarization of the economy etc. all lead to the disintegration of an urban system, leading to a stronger regionalisation and localised development of the NW Arabian oases.

In Tayma the political changes could very well be analysed with the space syntax analysis, showing a change of spatial configuration between the Nabataean and Roman Period and then the continuation of usage of one of the (geno-)types of buildings in the Late Antique Period.

It is more challenging to interpret the results on a social scale, especially because the comparative sites did not offer enough evidence for this aspect since a space syntax analysis was not possible. Nevertheless, some observations can be made. While on a political scale interplaying variation and continuity could be detected on a macro and micro level (the residential area as a whole and the spatial configuration of the buildings), on a nano level (the single rooms) a different observation was made. The functional differentiation of rooms is strikingly continuous. Disassociated from the overall development of the residential area, the conception of space on a small scale still seems not to have changed. This might be because the social perception of these spaces did not change, even with strong political changes occurring. This questions if the political dynamics were indeed as impacting as they seem, on a larger scale, and if they might have simply been formal and not as influencing on daily life in an oasis located not quite on the periphery of the Nabatean Kingdom and later Roman Arabia.

On an economic scale, investment of resources could be observed with the Nabataean arrival, since buildings were constructed on scarcely occupied or empty areas. An investment could also be observed for the Roman Period, although many of the walls were reused, evidenced in Tayma, Mada'in Saleh and especially in Dumat al-Jandal. This opens the question 432 Chapter II, Section 1. Especially based on Schiettecatte 2013, who discusses this subject in length.

as to why resources were economised, since the spatial configuration of the buildings does change in the Roman Period. Perhaps there was no economic capacity to do so or, and this seems more likely, there was no socio-political need for it. Keeping the occupation of NW Arabia more administrative, spatial changes were not regarded as necessary to demonstrate control.

genotypes typical of other occupation levels (evolutionary changes) or if a new set of rules was established (revolutionary changes). This would then provide the means for a discussion about the meaning of the determined genotypes.

The results of the above-outlined analysis was then embedded within the historical context of the site, in order to provide a better understanding of the transition from the Nabataean Period to the Roman Period and then to the Late Antique Period. This was then compared with evidence from contemporary residential areas at other sites in the NW Arabian region. 435 This research was made so as to gain an understanding of the impact of political, social and economic dynamics on the residential area of an oasis located in a relatively hostile climatic region, within but not far from the southern periphery of the Nabataean Kingdom and the later more extensive Provincia Arabia and including the transformations occurring in Late Antique NW Arabia.

Summary of research findings

Based on the hypothesis that an urban environment -here the residential area -is charged with meaning 436 , the political, social and economic dynamics, that had an impact on the residential area, could be determined.

The analysis of individual buildings (phenotypes) 437 provided a detailed understanding the interaction between public and domestic space, the movement within buildings and the spatial differentiation between individual spaces. The entrances of buildings are a protective interface between public and private domain, keeping the visitor in a segregated position from the building, in almost all cases. The movement through buildings followed different patterns:

either along a single path or by bi-or multifurcations, the latter which signals choice for a circulating individual. Rooms with different spatial behaviour -variations of 435 See Chapter II, Section 1 and Section 2. 436 Discussion held in the Introduction and Chapter 1 in "The Social Logic of Space" (Hillier and Hanson 2005). 437 See Chapter IV for the complete space syntax analysis.

integration/segregation and control over adjacent spaces -could be discerned within the same building, suggesting that they might have had different functions. 438 The analysis of the set of abstract rules defining the spatial configuration (genotypes) resulted in the determination of four distinct genotypes by period of occupation of the residential area (A, B.I, B.II and C). 439 In the Nabataean Period (genotype A) only one building was preserved well enough, to enable an analysis of its path-shaped spatial configuration. A path is here defined as a spatial configuration that dictates the movement of people within it.

In the Roman Period, two completely disconnected new sets of rules, for spatial configuration, The determination of the genotype in the context of Tayma and two other sites from the region, Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal, 440 resulted in a thesis as to how political, social and economic dynamics had an impact on the development of the residential area. 441 While the political dynamics during the expansion of the Nabatean Kingdom, the Roman Annexation and the Late Antique disintegration of the region had a more substantial impact on the configuration of the residential area and its buildings, especially during the former two, the impact of social and economic factors do not appear to have been the same. On a smaller scale -i.e. single rooms -this impact has not been observed to the same degree. Instead, the results of the analysis suggest a steady continuation of spatial differentiation, which could be interpreted as a lack of the need for change on a social scale. Economically, the reuse of walls in the Roman Period and especially in the Late Antique Period occurred extensively in the residential area.

The lack of investment in new resources could perhaps have been related to the economic inability or, more likely, it may not have been necessary, since a mere administrative control over the oasis could have been enough. An oasis can be defined as a place of paramount importance in the NW Arabian context, providing water, food and rest in a quite hostile, hyperarid region; the availability of these resources was of a higher importance than the demonstration of control through a complete change in the configuration, and thus in the perception and conception of space.

EVALUATION

Limitations of the research

To evaluate the limitations encountered in this research, the methodological approach and the archaeological evidence has to be considered. 442 A space syntax analysis is conditioned whether evidence of boundaries and permeability is present: boundaries determine space, otherwise unlimited, and permeability makes movement through those enclosed spaces possible. These two criteria form the basis for carrying out this type of analysis, since it studies the spatial configuration different spaces have in connection with each other, both on a local and a global scale.

An archaeological excavation, as such, always provides incomplete evidence. This limits the capacity of a space syntax analysis as some of the parameters needed for the analysis may not be available: scarcity and/or absence of evidence of boundaries, such as walls; unclear and/or absence of evidence of permeability, such as doorways. This limitation is evident for the following cases: (a) when there is not enough evidence to delimit buildings and (b) when there is not enough evidence to determine the exact location of permeability. There are instances in all three occupation levels when there was evidence of walls, but these were not included in this analysis; their presence did enclose space in such a way that individual buildings could be determined, but still they had to be left out of the space syntax analysis. This limitation especially affected the space syntax analysis of the architectural evidence from the Nabataean Period, since only one building could be determined. Making generalising statements based on the results of the analysis of a single building for an entire occupation level where there is clearly undetermined evidence of further walls, must always be discussed with caution. As for the necessary evidence of permeability, the exact location of such connections between spaces is not always clear. This was the case, when a variation of the analysis was carried out to include all possible connections. However, if it is clear which spaces have a 442 See Chapter III, Section 2.2 for a criticism of space syntax analysis.

connection, but it is not known exactly where they are, along a wall interfacing both spaces, then it can still be included in the analysis. This is because in a space syntax analysis the available information is reduced to a mere presence or absence of permeability; the exact location along a boundary is not required.

A space syntax analysis is, as has already been discussed in this thesis 443 , a graph-based technique that reduces reality to nodes and links. The results must, therefore, be considered in their context, possibly including additional information when it becomes available.

Significance of the results

Despite the limitations stated above, this thesis has provided new insight into the spatial configuration of and the impact of political, social and economic dynamics on the residential area at the oasis of Tayma.

The systematic study of the buildings themselves and placing them in the context of the occupation levels they are attributed to, adds to the understanding of revolutionary or evolutionary changes that the residential area underwent in the transition from the Nabataean Period to the Roman Period and then to the two phases of the Late Antique Period. Such a study has not been carried out for the residential area in Tayma before and therefore provides important groundwork for further research.

The buildings themselves were analysed from two perspectives: the outside, from a visitor's viewpoint, and the inside, from an inhabitant's viewpoint. In this way, the space syntax analysis of individual buildings contributed to our understanding of the movement into and within and the spatial differentiation for each building.

Nonetheless, despite a limited sample size from the Nabatean Period, a different spatial configuration was detected in contrast with the other periods: the path-shaped building clearly binds the movement of an individual to entering and exiting the same way. In the Roman Period, two types of buildings could be determined: one based on path-like buildings with bifurcations that indicates a choice of movement, the other with small-sized spaces grouped around the largest room suggesting a courtyard house that also enables a choice of movement.

Both phases of the Late Antique Period were characterised by one type of building that evolved, 443 See Chapter III.

based on their spatial configuration, from the path-like buildings pertaining to the Roman Period.

The space syntax analysis proved itself to be an effective technique that provides a basic understanding of the perception and conception of space; however, the results must always be considered in their context.

To sum up, the nature of the development of the use of space could be determined in the residential area, despite the fragmentary archaeological evidence and the fact that not all findings, such as objects and samples, were considered.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

In evaluating the limitations and significance of the results from this study, I suggest using the groundwork laid out in this study to integrate more of the available additional information of the residential area. This includes (a) analysing evidence, such as pottery, Furthermore, this research has demonstrated that a space syntax analysis can also be carried out on a single building and therefore can be applied to other cases at a site, even if it is not in the context of a residential area. However, it must be kept in mind that a minimum amount of evidence for boundaries and permeability is necessary and that the analysis might have to adapt to each study. Nevertheless, it is possible to carry out space syntax analysis to obtain a basic understanding of the use of space, putting it together with any other available evidence to complete the picture.

GLOSSARY

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: The Nabataean Kingdom -Tayma circled (based on Fiema et al. 2015, fig. 7.1. (Map drawn by Aron Styba)) ...........................................................................................................................................................

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Provincia Arabia -Tayma circled (based on Fiema et al. 2015, fig. 7.2. (Map drawn by Aron Styba)) Figure 3: The Arabian Peninsula -Tayma circled (based on Magee 2014, fig. 9.1.) ...........................................

Figure 4 :

 4 Figure 4: The oasis of Tayma with the sebkha to the N of the site (©Google Earth. Imagery date: 8 May 2013 and 16 September 2016. Accessed 7 May 2018). ........................................................................................

Figure 5 :

 5 Figure 5: The oasis of Tayma, Qrayyah located at the centre (Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, fig. 7 (graphics: S. Lora, DAI, Orient-Abteilung)) ....................................................................................................................

Figure 6 :

 6 Figure 6: Qrayyah with compounds and excavation areas (Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, fig. 8 (DAI, Orient-Abteilung, S. Lora)) ....................................................................................................................................

Figure 7 :

 7 Figure 7: Arabian trade network (Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, Karte 2.) ...................................................

Figure 8 :

 8 Figure 8: Large complex Building E-b6 (in green) NW of the residential area ....................................................

Figure 9 :

 9 Figure 9: Residential area (Area E-South and Area F), S of Building E-b1, in Qrayyah. ....................................

Figure 10 :

 10 Figure 10: Birdseye view over the residential area (Area E-South and Area F), S of Building E-b1; view from S (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ..........................................................................................

Figure 11 :

 11 Figure 11: Scheme of the methodological framework ..........................................................................................

Figure 12 :

 12 Figure 12: Scheme of levels of resolution (based on Clarke 1977) ......................................................................

Figure 13 :

 13 Figure 13: Example of justified graphs of a building from two perspectives: node 5 and node 10 -highlighted in grey (based on Hillier 2014, 21) .................................................................................................................

Figure 14 :

 14 Figure 14: Example of an axial map of street spaces around buildings (grey); axial lines representing street spaces (black) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.2 b.) ..................................................................................

Figure 15 :

 15 Figure 15: Example of a building (left) with convex map (right) showing connections (black) between spaces (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.3 a. and b.) .....................................................................................

Figure 16 :

 16 Figure 16: Example of an unjustified graph (black) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.3 c.) ..........................................................................................................................................................

Figure 17 :

 17 Figure 17: Example of rings (red) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, figs 2.3 and 2.4) ...

Figure 18 :

 18 Figure 18: Example of space types (A-type -turquoise; B-type -purple; C-type -yellow; D-type -green) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.4) ..................................................................

Figure 19 :

 19 Figure 19: Workflow of GIS (based on Wheatley and Gillings 2002, fig. 1.2) ....................................................

Figure 20 :

 20 Figure 20: Workflow of the intrasite spatial analysis in this thesis (repeated task in italic) .................................

Figure 21 :

 21 Figure 21: Codes for justified graphs and plans (RA values, CV and permeability -from top to bottom) ..........

Figure 22 :

 22 Figure22: Architectural evidence from the Nabataean Period (OL 4) in the residential area (Area E-South/F) ..

Figure 23 :

 23 Figure 23: Building F-b3 ......................................................................................................................................

Figure 87 :

 87 Figure 87: Justified graph Building F-b4(inhabitant-inhabitant) ........................................................................

Figure 88 :

 88 Figure 88: Coded justified graph of Building F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ........................................................

Figure 89 :

 89 Figure 89: Building F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...............................................................................................

Figure 90 :

 90 Figure 90: Buildings F-b7 ...................................................................................................................................

Figure 91 :

 91 Figure 91: Building F-b7; view from N (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ...................................

Figure 92 :

 92 Figure 92: F-b7:R4, F-b7:R5, F-b7:R6, F-b7:R7; view from NNE (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M. Cusin) ..................................................................................................................................................................

Figure 93 :

 93 Figure 93: Doorway in wall SU 5297 between F-b7:R2 and F-b7:R8; view from NNE (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M. Cusin) ......................................................................................................................

Figure 94 :

 94 Figure 94: Channel SU 5294; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M. Cusin) .................................

Figure 95 :

 95 Figure 95: Justified graph Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) .............................................................................

Figure 96 :

 96 Figure 96: Coded justified graph of Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ..............................................................

Figure 97 :

 97 Figure 97: Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) .....................................................................................................

Figure 98 :

 98 Figure 98: Justified graph Building F-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................................................................

Figure 99 :

 99 Figure 99: Coded justified graph of Building F-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ........................................................

Figure 100 :

 100 Figure 100: Building F-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .............................................................................................

Figure 101 :

 101 Figure 101: Building F-b12 ................................................................................................................................

Figure 102 :

 102 Figure 102: Final excavation photo Building F-b12, Building F-b8 (first phase and second phase); view from SE (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ........................................................................................

Figure 103 :

 103 Figure 103: Large slabs SU 7338 covering a cavity; view from N (© DAI Orient Department 2012 F. Weigel) ..................................................................................................................................................................

Figure 104 :

 104 Figure 104: Wall SU 6285 with beam holes (on top); view from E (© DAI Orient Department 2012 F. Jürcke) ..................................................................................................................................................................

Figure 105 :

 105 Figure 105: Justified graph Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant) .........................................................................

Figure 106 :

 106 Figure 106: Coded justified graph of Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................................

Figure 107 :

 107 Figure 107: Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant) .................................................................................................

Figure 108 :

 108 Figure 108: Justified graph Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...................................................................

Figure 109 :

 109 Figure 109: Coded justified graph of Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ....................................................

Figure 110 :

 110 Figure 110: Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................................................

Figure 111 :

 111 Figure 111: Architectural evidence from the first phase of the Late Antique Period (OL 2b) in the residential area (Area E-South/F) .......................................................................................................................................

Figure 112 :

 112 Figure 112: Building E-b11 ................................................................................................................................

Figure 113 :

 113 Figure 113: Final excavation photo of Building E-b15, Building E-b11 and Building E-b7; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ......................................................................................................

Figure 115 :

 115 Figure 115: Justified graph Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant) .........................................................................

Figure 116 :

 116 Figure 116: Coded justified graph of Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................................

Figure 117 :

 117 Figure 117: Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant) .................................................................................................

Figure 118 :

 118 Figure 118: Justified graph of Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...............................................................

Figure 119 :

 119 Figure 119: Coded justified graph of Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ....................................................

Figure 120 :

 120 Figure 120: Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...........................................................................................

Figure 121 :

 121 Figure 121: Building F-b5 ..................................................................................................................................

Figure 122 :

 122 Figure 122: Building F-b5, view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ................................

Figure 123 :

 123 Figure 123: Threshold SU 4736 (on the bottom); view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2016 F. Weigel) ..

Figure 124 :

 124 Figure 124: Fire installation SU 6529; view from E (© DAI Orient Department 2011 F. Weigel) ....................

Figure 125 :

 125 Figure 125: Justified graph Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ......................................................

Figure 126 :

 126 Figure 126: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 .......................................

Figure 127 :

 127 Figure 127: Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ..............................................................................

Figure 128 :

 128 Figure 128: Justified graph Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 ................................................

Figure 129 :

 129 Figure 129: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 .................................

Figure 130 :

 130 Figure 130: Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 ........................................................................

Figure 131 :

 131 Figure 131: Justified graph Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ......................................................

Figure 132 :

 132 Figure 132: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 .......................................

Figure 133 :

 133 Figure 133: Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ..............................................................................

Figure 134 :

 134 Figure 134: Justified graph Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 ................................................

Figure 135 :

 135 Figure 135: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 .................................

Figure 136 :

 136 Figure 136: Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 ........................................................................

Figure 137 :

 137 Figure 137: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) .................................................................................................................

Figure 138 :

 138 Figure 138: Final excavation photo Building F-b12, Building F-b8 (first phase and second phase); view from SE (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ........................................................................................

Figure 139 :

 139 Figure 139: Threshold SU 6297 with grinding depressions; view from E (© DAI Orient Department 2011 J. Kramer) .....................................................................................................................................................

Figure 140 :

 140 Figure 140: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................................

Figure 141 :

 141 Figure 141: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................

Figure 142 :

 142 Figure 142: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant) ..................................................................................

Figure 143 :

 143 Figure 143: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant) ....................................................

Figure 144 :

 144 Figure 144: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant) .....................................

Figure 145 :

 145 Figure 145: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................................

Figure 146 :

 146 Figure 146: Architectural evidence from the second phase of the Late Antique Period (OL 2a) in the residential

Figure 147 :

 147 Figure 147: Building E-b7 ..................................................................................................................................

Figure 148 :

 148 Figure 148: Final excavation photo of Building E-b15, Building E-b11 and Building E-b7; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ......................................................................................................

Figure 149 :

 149 Figure 149: Justified graph Building E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ...........................................................................

Figure 150 :

 150 Figure 150: Coded justified graph of Building E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ...........................................................

Figure 151 :

 151 Figure 151: Building E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ...................................................................................................

Figure 152 :

 152 Figure 152: Justified graph of Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ................................................................

Figure 153 :

 153 Figure 153: Coded justified graph of Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ......................................................

Figure 154 :

 154 Figure 154: Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .............................................................................................

Figure 155 :

 155 Figure 155: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) .................................................................................................................

Figure 156 :

 156 Figure 156: Final excavation photo Building F-b12, Building F-b8 (first phase and second phase); view from SE (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow) ........................................................................................

Figure 157 :

 157 Figure 157: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................................

Figure 158 :

 158 Figure 158: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant) ..........................................

Figure 159 :

 159 Figure 159: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant) ..................................................................................

Figure 160 :

 160 Figure 160: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant) ....................................................

Figure 161 :

 161 Figure 161: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant) .....................................

Figure 162 :

 162 Figure 162: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................................

Figure 163 :

 163 Figure 163: Total and usable area per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4) .......................................................

Figure 164 :

 164 Figure 164: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4) ...........................

Figure 165 :

 165 Figure 165: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -Nabataean Period (OL 4) .......................

Figure 166 :

 166 Figure 166: Mean RRA value per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4) .............................................................

Figure 167 :

 167 Figure 167: Total and usable area per building -Roman Period (OL 3) ............................................................

Figure 168 :

 168 Figure 168: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -Roman Period (OL 3) .................................

Figure 169 :

 169 Figure 169: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -Roman Period (OL 3) ............................

Figure 170 :

 170 Figure 170: Mean RRA values per building -Roman Period (OL 3) .................................................................

Figure 171 :

 171 Figure 171: Total and usable area per building -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b) ................................

Figure 172 :

 172 Figure 172: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b) ....

Figure 173 :

 173 Figure 173: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b) Figure 174: Mean RRA values per building -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b) ....................................

Figure 175 :

 175 Figure 175: Total and usable area per building -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a) ...........................

Figure 176 :

 176 Figure 176: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a) Figure 177: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a) ..................................................................................................................................................................

Figure 179 :

 179 Figure 179: Total and usable area of all buildings -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods ........................................................................................................

Figure 180 :

 180 Figure 180: Average total area of buildings and Standard Deviation for each OL -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods .......................................................

Figure 181 :

 181 Figure 181: Correlation of total and usable area for all OL -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods ...............................................................................................

Figure 182 :

 182 Figure 182: Foundation levels of all buildings, black line indicates the OLs mean foundation level -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods ..............................

Figure 183 :

 183 Figure 183: Average RRA values per OL and variations -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods ...............................................................................................

Figure 184 :

 184 Figure 184: RRA values per OL and building with variations -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods ..................................................................................

Figure 185 :

 185 Figure 185: Correlation of CV and RA values per space type (visitor-inhabitant) .............................................

Figure 186 :

 186 Figure 186: Correlation of CV and RA values per space type (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................................

Figure 187 :

 187 Figure 187: Correlation of CV and RA values for the alleys (visitor-inhabitant) ...............................................

Figure 188 :

 188 Figure 188: Correlation of CV and RA values for the entrance rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left) and for the former entrance rooms (inhabitant-inhabitant, right) ............................................................................................

Figure 189 :

 189 Figure 189: Correlation of CV and RA values for the largest rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitantinhabitant, right) ........................................................................................................................................

Figure 190 :

 190 Figure 190: Correlation of CV and RA values for the smallest rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitantinhabitant, right) ........................................................................................................................................

Figure 191 :

 191 Figure 191: Correlation of CV and RA values for the most connected rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitantinhabitant, right) ........................................................................................................................................

Figure 192 :

 192 Figure 192: Correlation of CV and RA values for the staircases (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitant-inhabitant, right) ..........................................................................................................................................................

Figure 193 :

 193 Figure 193: Correlation of CV and RA values for the upper floors (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitant-inhabitant, right) ..........................................................................................................................................................

Figure 194 :

 194 Figure 194: Correlation of CV and RA values for the rooms with food processing areas (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitant-inhabitant, right).......................................................................................................................

Figure 195 :

 195 Figure 195: Average RRA and range for all analysed buildings of all OLs together, including the breakdown into variations -(variations for the Roman Period (OL 3) and first phase of the Late Antique Period (2b)) ...

Figure 196 :

 196 Figure 196: H* for all analysed buildings of all OLs together, including the breakdown into variations -(variations for the Roman Period (OL 3) and first phase of the Late Antique Period (2b)); y-axis starts at 0.80 ...........................................................................................................................................................

Figure 197 :

 197 Figure 197: Average RRA and range per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods), including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b ................................................

Figure 201 :

 201 Figure 201: Mean RRA values per building -Roman Period (OL 3). Average RRA values under 1.000 circled .................................................................................................................................................................. 280 Figure 202: Mean RRA values per building -Late Antique Period (first phase: OL 2b + second phase: 2a) .... 280 Figure 203: Average RRA and range per genotype (A, B.I, B.II and C), including variations for genotypes B.I, B.II and C .................................................................................................................................................. 281 Figure 204: H* per genotype, including variations for genotypes B.I, B.II and C; y-axis starts at 0.80 ............ 282 Figure 205: Overlapping of all justified graphs per genotype (A, B.I, B.II, C), including variations for genotype B.I, B.II and C -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (visitorinhabitant) ................................................................................................................................................. 283 Figure 206: Overlapping of all justified graphs per genotype (A, B.I, B.II, C), including variations for genotype B.I, B.II and C -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (inhabitantinhabitant) ................................................................................................................................................. 284 Figure 207: Plan of genotype A buildings -Nabatean Period (OL 4) ................................................................ 287 Figure 208: Plan of genotype B.I and genotype B.II buildings -Roman Period (OL 3) .................................... 290 Figure 209: Plan of genotype C buildings -Late Antique Period (first phase: OL 2b on the top, second phase (OL 2a) on the bottom) ............................................................................................................................. 292 Figure 210: H* for the transition between two genotypes (Nabataean (A), Roman (B.I, B.II) and Late Antique (C) Periods) ............................................................................................................................................... 294 Figure 211: Tayma and comparative sites Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal circled (based on Macdonald 2004, fig. 16.1) .......................................................................................................................................... 301 Figure 212: Mada'in Saleh. Location of the Areas excavated between 2008 and 2017, wadi on the E side (Nehmé 2018b, 6, fig. 1) ........................................................................................................................... 302 Figure 213: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 2 (Nehmé 2011a, 42, fig. 13) ........................................................... 307 Figure 214: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 3 (Nehmé 2011a, 43, fig. 14) ........................................................... 308 Figure 215: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 4 (Nehmé 2011a, 44, fig. 15) ........................................................... 309 Figure 216: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 5 (Nehmé 2011a, 45, fig. 16) ........................................................... 310 Figure 217: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 6 (Nehmé 2011a, 35, fig. 3) ............................................................. 311 Figure 218: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2 (Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 9)................................................................ 312 Figure 219: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 1 (Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 10) ............................................... 316

Figure 221 :

 221 Figure 221: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 3 (Nehmé 2011a, 73, fig. 31) ...........................................................

Figure 222 :

 222 Figure 222: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 4 (Nehmé 2011a, 75, fig. 34) ...........................................................

Figure 223 :

 223 Figure 223: Mada'in Saleh. Area 9 (Nehmé 2018b, 161, fig. 1).........................................................................

Figure 224 :

 224 Figure 224: Mada'in Saleh. Area 9, trench A and trench B (Nehmé 2011a, 214, Pl. 1 on the top; Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 5 on the bottom) .............................................................................................................

Figure 225 :

 225 Figure 225: Mada'in Saleh. Area 9, trench C and trench D (Nehmé 2018b, 178, fig. 22)..................................

Figure 226 :

 226 Figure 226: Dumat al-Jandal. Plan of the archaeological area (based on Charloux and Loreto 2016, 101, fig. 1). ..................................................................................................................................................................

Figure 227 :

 227 Figure 227: Dumat al-Jandal. Building A (Edificio A) and Building B (Edificio B), Sector A (Loreto 2017a, fig. 108 on the right) ........................................................................................................................................

Figure 228 :

 228 Figure 228: Dumat al-Jandal. Building A and Building B (Loreto 2017b, fig. 4) ..............................................

Figure 229 :

 229 Figure 229: Dumat al-Jandal. Building A, Sector A, courtyard with portico (Charloux and Loreto 2016, 114, fig. 16) .............................................................................................................................................................

  ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 Table 4: Buildings of the residential area (Area E-South and Area F) -in bold the buildings where a space syntax analysis is possible ........................................................................................................................... 29 Table 5: D-values calculated for K=1 to K=20 ..................................................................................................... 43Table 6: Micro level analysis of Building F-b3 (visitor-inhabitant) ..................................................................... 63 Table 7: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b3, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (visitor-inhabitant) ............................... 63 Table 8: Micro level analysis of Building F-b3 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ................................................................ 67 Table 9: Nano level of analysis of BuildingF-b2, k = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................... 67 Table 10: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b3 ................. 69 Table 11: Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ............................................ 75 Table 12: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ...... 75 Table 13: Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 ...................................... 79 Table 14: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 79 Table 15: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b15, variation 1 .................................................................................................................................................................... 81 Table 16: Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ............................................ 83 Table 17: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ...... 83 Table 18: Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 ...................................... 87 Table 19: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 87 Table 20: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b15, variation 2 .................................................................................................................................................................... 89 Table 21: Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1....................................... 95 Table 22: Nano level analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 11 and D = 0.295 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ... 95 Table 23: Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 ................................. 99 Table 24: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 9 and D = 0.317 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 .................................................................................................................................................................. 99 Table 25: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 East, variation 1 ................................................................................................................................................. 101

  F-b1 East, K = 10 and D = 0.306 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 ................................................................................................................................................................ Table 30: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 East, variation 2 ................................................................................................................................................. Table 31: Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 West (visitor-inhabitant) ......................................................... Table 32: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 West, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (visitor-inhabitant) ...................

  F-b2, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...................... Table 40: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b2 ............... Table 41: Micro level analysis of Building F-b4 (visitor-inhabitant) ................................................................. Table 42: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b4, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (visitor-inhabitant) ........................... Table 43: Micro level analysis of Building F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................ Table 44: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b4, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...................... Table 45: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b4 ............... Table 46: Micro level analysis of Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ................................................................. Table 47: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b7, K = 9 and D = 0.317 (visitor-inhabitant) ........................... Table 48: Micro level analysis of Building F-b7(inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................. Table 49: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b7, K = 8 and D = 0.328 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...................... Table 50: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b7 ............... Table 51: Micro level analysis of Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant) ............................................................... Table 52: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b12, K = 8 and D = 0.328 (visitor-inhabitant) ......................... Table 53: Micro level analysis of Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................................................... Table 54: Nano level of analysis of Building F-b12, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .................... Table 55: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b12 ............. Table 56: Micro level analysis of Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant) ............................................................... Table 57: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b11, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) .........................

  F-b5, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1 . Table 65: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b5, variation 1 ..................................................................................................................................................................

  F-b8 (phase 1), K = 5 and D = 0.352 (visitor-inhabitant) .......... Table 73: Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................................... Table 74: Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1), K = 4 and D = 0.333 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .... Table 75: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) .................................................................................................................................................................. Table 76: Micro level analysis of Building E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant) ................................................................. Table 77: Nano level of analysis of Building E-b7, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) ........................... Table 78: Micro level analysis of Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ........................................................... Table 79: Nano level analysis of Building E-b7, K =5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ........................... Table 80: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b7 .............. Table 81: Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant) ................................................ Table 82: Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2), K = 5 and D = 0.352 (visitor-inhabitant) .......... Table 83: Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant) .......................................... Table 84: Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2), K = 4 and D = 0.333 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .... Table 85: Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) .................................................................................................................................................................. Table 86: Average RRA values depending on variations of Building E-b15 and Building F-b1 East (visitorinhabitant) -Roman Period (OL 3) ........................................................................................................... Table 87: Average RRA values depending on variations of Building E-b15 and F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -Roman Period (OL 3) .............................................................................................................................

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: The Nabataean Kingdom -Tayma circled (based on Fiema et al. 2015, fig. 7.1. (Map drawn by Aron Styba))

Figure 2 :

 2 Figure 2: Provincia Arabia -Tayma circled (based on Fiema et al. 2015, fig. 7.2. (Map drawn by Aron Styba))

Figure 3 :

 3 Figure 3: The Arabian Peninsula -Tayma circled (based on Magee 2014, fig. 9.1.)

Figure 5 :Figure 6 :

 56 Figure 5: The oasis of Tayma, Qrayyah located at the centre (Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, fig. 7 (graphics: S. Lora, DAI, Orient-Abteilung))

Figure 8 :

 8 Figure 8: Large complex Building E-b6 (in green) NW of the residential area

Figure 10 :

 10 Figure 10: Birdseye view over the residential area (Area E-South and Area F), S of Building E-b1; view from S (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow)

Figure 11 :

 11 Figure 11: Scheme of the methodological framework

Figure 12 :

 12 Figure 12: Scheme of levels of resolution (based on Clarke 1977)

Figure 13 :

 13 Figure 13: Example of justified graphs of a building from two perspectives: node 5 and node 10highlighted in grey (based on Hillier 2014, 21)

Figure 14 :

 14 Figure 14: Example of an axial map of street spaces around buildings (grey); axial lines representing street spaces (black) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.2 b.)

Figure 15 :

 15 Figure 15: Example of a building (left) with convex map (right) showing connections (black) between spaces (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.3 a. and b.)

Figure 16 :

 16 Figure 16: Example of an unjustified graph (black) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.3 c.)

Figure 17 :

 17 Figure 17: Example of rings (red) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, figs 2.3 and 2.4)

  be classified into four types: A-, B-, C-and D-type (Figure18). A-type spaces have only one link; they are a dead-end space; the elimination of the link cuts the space from the rest of the graph. B-type spaces have more than one link; they are part of a tree branch; they are located on the way to an A-type space; the elimination of a link cuts one or more spaces from the rest of the graph. C-type spaces have more than one link; they are part of a ring with no A-type or B-type spaces; the elimination of a link creates a tree-branch. D-type spaces have more than two links; they are part of at least one ring: they are part of a complex of at least two rings, with no A-type or B-type spaces.

Figure 18 :

 18 Figure 18: Example of space types (A-type -turquoise; B-type -purple; C-type -yellow; D-typegreen) on top of a convex map (grey) (based on Al-Sayed 2014, fig. 2.4)

  = max RRA, b = mean RRA, c = min RRA

Figure 19 :

 19 Figure 19: Workflow of GIS (based on Wheatley and Gillings 2002, fig. 1.2)

Figure 20 :

 20 Figure 20: Workflow of the intrasite spatial analysis in this thesis (repeated task in italic)

Figure 21 :

 21 Figure 21: Codes for justified graphs and plans (RA values, CV and permeability -from top to bottom)

Figure 22 :

 22 Figure 22: Architectural evidence from the Nabataean Period (OL 4) in the residential area (Area E-South/F)

Figure 23 :

 23 Figure 23: Building F-b3

Figure 25 :

 25 Figure 25: Wall SU 3969 with beam holes facing the entrance of Building F-b3 in the N; view from S (© DAI Orient Department 2011 F. Weigel)

Figure 26 :

 26 Figure 26: Stone with grinding depressions in wall SU 3649 (on the right side); view from S (© DAI Orient Department 2009 C. Purschwitz)

Figure 27 :

 27 Figure 27: Justified graph Building F-b3 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 29 :

 29 Figure 29: Building F-b3 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 30 :

 30 Figure 30: Justified graph Building F-b3 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  type A and three are of type B. F-b3:R4 and F-b3:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b3:R1, F-b3:R2 and F-b3:R3 have the highest CV. F-b3:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b3:R4 and F-b3:R5 have the highest RA values.

Figure 31 :

 31 Figure 31: Coded justified graph of Building F-b3 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 33 :

 33 Figure 33: Architectural evidence from the Roman Period (OL 3) in the residential area (Area E-South/F)

Figure 34 :

 34 Figure 34: Buildings E-b15

Figure 36 :

 36 Figure 36: Justified graph Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 37 :

 37 Figure 37: Coded justified graph of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 38 :

 38 Figure 38: Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 39 :

 39 Figure 39: Justified graph Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 40 :

 40 Figure 40: Coded justified graph of Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 42 :

 42 Figure 42: Justified graph Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 43 :

 43 Figure 43: Coded justified graph of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 45 :

 45 Figure 45: Justified graph Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 47 :

 47 Figure 47: Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

  b1 East (Figure 48, Figure 49) was built on top of the eastern part of Building F-b3 (OL 4), reusing part of the razed external walls as foundation for the newly built walls and also reusing OL 4 walls. The building has an estimated area between about 114.40 m 2 and 119.30 m² with an L-shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area between 60.40 m 2 and 62.30 m². The foundation levels of the walls from Building F-b1 East vary strongly, depending on the refill of an older OL (OL 4) and whether the walls are reused from Building F-b3 (OL 4) or not. For example, in the section crossing F-b1:R9, F-b1:R10 and F-b1:R17 (from west to E) the foundation of wall SU 2009 is at 828.70 m a.s.l. and the foundation of wall SU 3953 is at 827.70 m a.s.l. . The width of the external walls, reused from OL 4, is between 0.70 m and 0.90 m. The width of the internal walls is between 0.45 m and 0.50 m.

Figure 48 :

 48 Figure 48: Building F-b1 East

Figure 50 :

 50 Figure 50: Entrance of Building F-b1 East flanked by two vertical stones (SU 3973 and SU 3966) and the threshold (SU 8686), view from R17 in the interior to the exterior. Wall SU 3969 can be seen in the background (Building F-b3 roofing, see Figure 25); view from S (© DAI Orient Department 2016 F. Weigel)

Figure 51 :

 51 Figure 51: Justified graph Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 52 :

 52 Figure 52: Coded justified graph of Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 53 :

 53 Figure 53: Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 54 :

 54 Figure 54: Justified graph Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 55 :

 55 Figure 55: Coded justified graph of Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 57 :

 57 Figure 57: Justified graph Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 59 :

 59 Figure 59: Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 60 :

 60 Figure 60: Justified graph Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 62 :

 62 Figure 62: Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

  b1 West (Figure 63, Figure 64) was built on top of the western part of Building F-b3 (OL 4), reusing part of the razed external walls as foundation for the newly built walls and also reusing OL 4 walls. The building has an estimated area of 170.80 m² with a square shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area of about 89.70 m². The foundations levels of the walls are set at an average of about 828.60 m a.s.l. Set at a lower level are the walls reused from Building F-b3 (OL 4). The preserved height of the walls is up to about 1.00 m. The width of the external walls is about 0.70 m. The width of the internal walls is about 0.60 m.

Figure 63 :

 63 Figure 63: Buildings F-b1 West

  millstone (SU 2012) is located in the southern corner of F-b1:R4 in floor 2013. Three installations were found in F-b1:R3 (Figure 65): a platform (SU 2030) of 1.25 by 0.95 m in the northern corner at 828.77 m a.s.l., a grinding installation supported by a stone base (SU 2053) measuring 0.60 by 0.45 m and 0.20 m high in the centre at 828.60 m a.s.l., and a storage jar (SU 2981, not in Figure 65) in a primary position on the south side. A buttress (SU 3639) of 1.25 by 1.15 m on the southwest wall created a division of space in F-b1:R4. Floors were identified in three rooms. In F-b1:R4, the stone floor SU 2011 at 828.51 m a.s.l., formerly a wall from OL 4 partially razed for this purpose. In F-b1:R2, the trodden mud floor SU 2024. In F-b1:R3, trodden floor SU 2065. A sample of charred millet from floor SU 2063 (see section below) was dated to 215-381 calAD with 14 C-analysis.

Figure 65 :

 65 Figure 65: F-b1:R3 with food preparation area; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2009 C. Purschwitz)

Figure 67 :

 67 Figure 67: Coded justified graph of Building F-b1 West (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 68 :

 68 Figure 68: Building F-b1 West (visitor-inhabitant)

  type A and three are of type B. F-b1:R3 and F-b1:R8 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b1:R5 has the highest CV. F-b1:R4 and F-b1:R5 have the lowest RA values, whereas F-b1:R1 has the highest RA value.

Figure 70 :

 70 Figure 70: Coded justified graph of Building F-b1 West (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 71 :

 71 Figure 71: Building F-b1 West (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  b2 (Figure 72, Figure 73) was built on top of evidence of wall from an unidentified OL 4 building, reusing part of the existent walls from both levels. The building has an estimated area of 156.90 m² with a rectangular shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area of 87.90 m². The foundation levels of the walls built in OL 3 are set between 827.70 m a.s.l. and 828.29 m a.s.l. Set at a lower level are SU 1973 and SU 1992, reused from Building F-b10 (OL 4). The preserved height of the walls is up to about 1.80 m. The width of the external walls is between 0.70 m and 0.95 m. The width of the internal walls is between 0.25 m and 0.65 m.

Figure 72 :

 72 Figure 72: Building F-b2

  of 0.65 by 0.50 by 0.45 m are located to the south of the main entrance in F-b2:R1 at less than 829.70 m a.s.l. and 830.10 m a.s.l. Three installations were found in F-b2:R4: a basin (SU 1959) of 0.65 by 0.55 m on top of a stone wall is located in the L-curve of the room at 827.70 m a.s.l., a stone with grinding depressions (SU 1964) of 0.90 by 0.60 m and 0.50 m high on floor SU 1985 at 827.70 m a.s.l., and a work platform (SU 1958 + SU 1963 + SU 1999) of 1.20 by 0.95 m and at least 0.50 m high on the south side of the room.

Figure 74 :

 74 Figure 74: Threshold SU 1920 with grinding depressions (on the left); view from SW (© DAI Orient Department 2005 C. Purschwitz)

Figure 76 :

 76 Figure 76: Coded justified graph of Building F-b2 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 77 :

 77 Figure 77: Building F-b2 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 78 :

 78 Figure 78: Justified graph Building F-b2 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 80 :

 80 Figure 80: Building F-b2 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  Part of the walls were reused from an unidentified OL 4 building. The building has an estimated area of 115.40 m 2 (including area not excavated) with an L-shaped ground plan. The usable area is at least 30.50 m 2 and is estimated at 61.20 m 2 . The estimation does not encompass the possible other storey. The reused walls were originally built on bedrock. The foundation levels of the walls built in OL 3 are set between 828.05 m a.s.l. and 828.65 m a.s.l. The preserved height of the walls is up to about 1.90 m. The width of the external walls is about 0.60 m.

Figure 81 :

 81 Figure 81: Building F-b4

Figure 83 :

 83 Figure 83: Staircase SU 5052; view from E (© DAI Orient Department 2016 F. Weigel)

Figure 84 :

 84 Figure 84: Justified graph Building F-b4 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 85 :

 85 Figure 85: Coded justified graph of Building F-b4 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 86 :

 86 Figure 86: Building F-b4 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 87 :

 87 Figure 87: Justified graph Building F-b4(inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 88 :

 88 Figure 88: Coded justified graph of Building F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 89 :

 89 Figure 89: Building F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  , Figure 91) was probably built on debris from OL 4. The building has an estimated area of 60.50 m² with a rectangular shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area of about 28.20 m². The foundation levels of the walls are built in OL 3 at about 829.20 m a.s.l. The width of the external walls is between 0.50 m and 0.70 m. The width of the internal walls is between 0.25 m and 0.70 m.

Figure 90 :

 90 Figure 90: Buildings F-b7

Figure 92 :

 92 Figure 92: F-b7:R4, F-b7:R5, F-b7:R6, F-b7:R7; view from NNE (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M.Cusin)

Figure 93 :

 93 Figure 93: Doorway in wall SU 5297 between F-b7:R2 and F-b7:R8; view from NNE (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M. Cusin)

Figure 94 :

 94 Figure 94: Channel SU 5294; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2009 M. Cusin)

Figure 96 :

 96 Figure 96: Coded justified graph of Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 97 :

 97 Figure 97: Building F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 99 :

 99 Figure 99: Coded justified graph of Building F-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 100 :

 100 Figure 100: Building F-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  b12 269 (Figure 101, Figure 102) was probably built on debris of an older OL (earlier than OL 3). The building has an estimated area of 143.70 m² with a roughly L-shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area of about 63.90 m². The estimation does not encompass the possible other storey of the building. The foundation levels of the walls are set between 829.25 m a.s.l. and 830.26 m a.s.l. The preserved height of the walls is up to 0.65 m. The width of the external walls is between 0.55 m and 1.20 m. The width of the internal walls is between 0.35 m and 1.00 m.

Figure 101 :

 101 Figure 101: Building F-b12

Figure 102 :

 102 Figure 102: Final excavation photo Building F-b12, Building F-b8 (first phase and second phase); view from SE (© DAI Orient Department 2015 J. Krumnow)

Figure 103 :

 103 Figure 103: Large slabs SU 7338 covering a cavity; view from N (© DAI Orient Department 2012 F.Weigel)

Figure 106 :

 106 Figure 106: Coded justified graph of Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 107 :

 107 Figure 107: Building F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 108 :

 108 Figure 108: Justified graph Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 109 :

 109 Figure 109: Coded justified graph of Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 110 :

 110 Figure 110: Building F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 111 :

 111 Figure 111: Architectural evidence from the first phase of the Late Antique Period (OL 2b) in the residential area (Area E-South/F)

Figure 112 :

 112 Figure 112: Building E-b11

Figure 114 :

 114 Figure 114: Staircase SU 2647; view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2012 F. Jürcke)

Figure 115 :

 115 Figure 115: Justified graph Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 116 :

 116 Figure 116: Coded justified graph of Building E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 118 :

 118 Figure 118: Justified graph of Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 119 :

 119 Figure 119: Coded justified graph of Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

  , Figure 122) was built on top of debris from OL 3. The building has an estimated area of 136.30 m² with an L-shaped ground plan. It has about 54.40 m² of usable area excavated and is estimated at 83.80 m 2 . The foundation levels of the walls are set between 830.08 m a.s.l. and 830.60 m a.s.l. The width of the external walls is between 0.55 m and 0.60 m. The width of the internal walls is about 0.55 m.

Figure 121 :

 121 Figure 121: Building F-b5

Figure 123 :

 123 Figure 123: Threshold SU 4736 (on the bottom); view from W (© DAI Orient Department 2016 F.Weigel)

Figure 124 :

 124 Figure 124: Fire installation SU 6529; view from E (© DAI Orient Department 2011 F. Weigel)

Figure 125 :

 125 Figure 125: Justified graph Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 126 :

 126 Figure 126: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 127 :

 127 Figure 127: Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 128 :

 128 Figure 128: Justified graph Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 129 :

 129 Figure 129: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 130 :

 130 Figure 130: Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

Figure 131 :

 131 Figure 131: Justified graph Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 132 :

 132 Figure 132: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 133 :

 133 Figure 133: Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 134 :

 134 Figure 134: Justified graph Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

  type A and three are of type B. F-b5:R1 and F-b5:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b5:R3 and F-b5:R4 have the highest CV. F-b5:R2 has the lowest RA value, whereas F-b5:R1 and F-b5:R5 have the highest RA values.

Figure 135 :

 135 Figure 135: Coded justified graph of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

Figure 136 :

 136 Figure 136: Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

  , Figure 138) was built on top of Building F-b12 (OL 3), reusing part of the existing walls. The building has an estimated area of 119.40 m² with a roughly L-shaped ground plan. It has an estimated usable area of about 64.40 m². The foundation levels of the walls are set between 829.45 m a.s.l. and 830.26 m a.s.l. Set at a lower level are the walls reused from Building F-b12 (OL 3). The width of the external walls is between 0.55 m and 1.20 m. The width of the internal walls is between 0.35 m and 0.70 m.

Figure 137 :

 137 Figure 137: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1)

Figure 140 :

 140 Figure 140: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 141 :

 141 Figure 141: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 142 :

 142 Figure 142: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 143 :

 143 Figure 143: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 144 :

 144 Figure 144: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 145 :

 145 Figure 145: Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 146 :

 146 Figure 146: Architectural evidence from the second phase of the Late Antique Period (OL 2a) in the residential area (Area E-South/F)

Figure 147 :

 147 Figure 147: Building E-b7

  , Figure156) during OL 2b. It keeps reusing part of the walls from Building F-b12 (OL 3), which had been already reused during the OL 2a phase of Building F-b8. The building area stays estimated at 119.40 m² with a roughly L-shaped ground plan. It also stays at an estimated usable area of about 64.70 m². The foundation levels of the walls are set between 829.45 m a.s.l. and 830.26 m a.s.l, as in the older phase of the building. Also, set at a lower level are the walls reused from Building F-b12 (OL 3). The width of the external walls is between 0.55 m and 1.20 m and the width of the internal walls is between 0.35 m and 0.70 m, as they don't change for this phase of the building.

Figure 155 :

 155 Figure 155: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2)

Figure 157 :

 157 Figure 157: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 158 :

 158 Figure 158: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 159 :

 159 Figure 159: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 160 :

 160 Figure 160: Justified graph Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 161 :

 161 Figure 161: Coded justified graph of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 162 :

 162 Figure 162: Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Figure 163 :

 163 Figure 163: Total and usable area per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4)

Figure 165 :

 165 Figure 165: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -Nabataean Period (OL 4)

Figure 166 :

 166 Figure 166: Mean RRA value per building -Nabataean Period (OL 4)

Figure 168 :

 168 Figure168: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -Roman Period(OL 3)

Figure 169 :

 169 Figure 169: Correlation between usable area and number of rooms -Roman Period (OL 3)

Figure 170 :

 170 Figure 170: Mean RRA values per building -Roman Period (OL 3)

Figure 171 :

 171 Figure171: Total and usable area per building -first phase Late Antique Period(OL 2b)

Figure 172 :

 172 Figure 172: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b)

Figure 174 :

 174 Figure 174: Mean RRA values per building -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b)

Figure 175 :

 175 Figure 175: Total and usable area per building -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a)

Figure 176 :

 176 Figure 176: Foundation levels of newly built walls per building -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a)

Figure 178 :

 178 Figure 178: Mean RRA values per building -second phase Late Antique Period (OL 2a)

Figure 179 :Figure 180 :

 179180 Figure179: Total and usable area of all buildings -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods

Figure 181 :

 181 Figure 181: Building F-b7 from OL 3 on the lower left end of the trendline and Building F-b3 from OL 4 on the upper right end of the trendline have a completely different amount of total and usable area, yet the proportion between both areas is roughly the same.

Figure 181 :

 181 Figure 181: Correlation of total and usable area for all OL -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods

Figure 185 :Figure 186 :

 185186 Figure 185: Correlation of CV and RA values per space type (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 187 :

 187 Figure 187: Correlation of CV and RA values for the alleys (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 189 :

 189 Figure 189: Correlation of CV and RA values for the largest rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitantinhabitant, right)

Figure 190 :

 190 Figure 190: Correlation of CV and RA values for the smallest rooms (visitor-inhabitant, left; inhabitant-inhabitant, right)

Figure 194 :

 194 Figure 194: Correlation of CV and RA values for the rooms with food processing areas (visitorinhabitant, left; inhabitant-inhabitant, right)

Figure 195 :

 195 Figure 195: Average RRA and range for all analysed buildings of all OLs together, including the breakdown into variations -(variations for the Roman Period (OL 3) and first phase of the Late Antique Period (2b))

Figure 197 :

 197 Figure 197: Average RRA and range per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods), including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b

Figure 199 :

 199 Figure 199: Overlapping of all justified graphs per OL (Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods), including variations for OL 3 and OL 2b -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (visitor-inhabitant relationship)

Figure 201 :

 201 Figure 201: Mean RRA values per building -Roman Period (OL 3). Average RRA values under 1.000 circled

Figure 204 :

 204 Figure 204: H* per genotype, including variations for genotypes B.I, B.II and C; y-axis starts at 0.80

Figure 207 :

 207 Figure 207: Plan of genotype A buildings -Nabatean Period (OL 4)

Figure 208 :

 208 Figure 208: Plan of genotype B.I and genotype B.II buildings -Roman Period (OL 3)

Figure 209 :

 209 Figure 209: Plan of genotype C buildings -Late Antique Period (first phase: OL 2b on the top, second phase (OL 2a) on the bottom)

Figure 210 :

 210 Figure 210: H* for the transition between two genotypes (Nabataean (A), Roman (B.I, B.II) and Late Antique (C) Periods)

Figure 211 :

 211 Figure 211: Tayma and comparative sites Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal circled (based on Macdonald 2004, fig. 16.1)

Figure 218 :

 218 Figure 218: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2(Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 9)

Figure 219 :

 219 Figure 219: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 1 (Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 10)

Figure 224 :

 224 Figure 224: Mada'in Saleh. Area 9, trench A and trench B (Nehmé 2011a, 214, Pl. 1 on the top; Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 5 on the bottom)

Figure 225 :

 225 Figure 225: Mada'in Saleh. Area 9, trench C and trench D(Nehmé 2018b, 178, fig. 22)

Figure 226 :

 226 Figure 226: Dumat al-Jandal. Plan of the archaeological area (based on Charloux and Loreto 2016, 101, fig. 1).

Figure 227 :

 227 Figure 227: Dumat al-Jandal. Building A (Edificio A) and Building B (Edificio B), Sector A (Loreto 2017a, fig. 108 on the right)

  and the transition from mobile to permanent housing. A second phase of the Nabataean Period (Phase 3) evidenced by newly built walls as a consequence of destruction or robbery in the area. The probable Nabataean building program is evidenced more intensely in Area 2 in Mada'in Saleh. While the first occupation (Phase 1) has defined the general layout of the area, until the end of the occupation, the next phase (Phase 2) evidences itself as a monumentalization of the residential area. The first phases of trench A and trench B Area 9 in Mada'in Saleh are characterised by a minor occupation and only in Phase 7 is there a construction of a complex, possibly of cultic and domestic character. Trench C and trench D display little occupation until a later phase (Phase 2) that combines Nabataean and Roman elements. All areas, except for trench C and trench D of Area 9, evidenced a destruction horizon, perhaps because of flooding. Since there is no evidence for the cause of the flooding,

  was determined (genotype B.I and genotype B.II). Genotype B.I is characterised by a spatial differentiation within each building, where a bifurcation represents a form of choice of movement. Genotype B.II, probably a type of courtyard house, is characterised by the control of the largest room over six or seven smaller rooms. The Late Antique Period can be divided into two phases where the layout of the building interior changed but not the set of rules guiding it (genotype C). The rules of spatial configuration seem to have evolved from the Roman genotype B.I (path with bifurcation).

  objects and archaeozoological evidence, that might indicate room-functions, which can then be correlated with the spatial differentiation proposed in this study; (b) discussing the different types of permeability, i.e. distinguishing between staircases, doorways, open spaces, etc., and understanding their implication on movement; and (c) analysing more in-depth certain spaces, such as courtyards, roofed areas and entrances, and explore their function within the residential area. The deeper insight obtained of the residential area at Tayma through this interdisciplinary study would then be reanalysed in the NW Arabian context.

  that follows/adapts from a set of abstract rules of a preceding type genotype transpatial concept; underlying set of abstract rules with which phenotypes comply global measure analysis of a node in relation to all other nodes on a justified graph = max RRA, b = mean RRA, c = min RRA measure of the degree of variation existent in a chosen set of values justified graph graphic representation of spatial configuration with a root space; composed of nodes and lined vertices K total number of nodes in a according to the quantity of links that a node has and to whether they are positioned on a ring or not spatial configuration description of the relationship between spaces TD total depth TD = sum of depths of a node to all other nodes topological distance number of lined vertices between spaces transpatial link elements shared by contemporary phenotypes transtemporal link elements shared with previous or succeeding genotypes tree branch linear movement on a justified graph Building F-b1 East var. 1Visitor-inhabitant relationship (K=11; D=0.295)

Table 1 :

 1 Chronostratigraphy: Occupation periods (OPs) in Tayma(Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, Table1) .... 18

Table 2 :

 2 Chronostratigraphy: Occupation periods (Ops) and occupation levels (OLs) in Tayma (Francelin Tourtet 2017, modified by Anja Prust 2018; personal communication) .................................................................. 19

Table 3 :

 3 Residential area (Area E-South and Area F): Occupation levels (OLs) (adapted from

Table 26 :

 26 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2..................................... 103 xxi

Table 27 :

 27 Nano level analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 12 and D = 0.285 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 .

Table 28 :

 28 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 ...............................

Table 29 :

 29 Nano level of analysis of Building

Table 33 :

 33 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 West (inhabitant-inhabitant) ...................................................

Table 34 :

 34 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 West, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .............

Table 35 :

 35 Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 West ......

Table 36 :

 36 Micro level analysis of Building F-b2 (visitor-inhabitant) .................................................................

Table 37 :

 37 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b2, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (visitor-inhabitant) ...........................

Table 38 :

 38 Micro level analysis of Building F-b2 (inhabitant-inhabitant) ............................................................

Table 39 :

 39 Nano level of analysis of Building

Table 58 :

 58 Micro level analysis of Building E-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant)..........................................................

Table 59 :

 59 Nano level analysis of Building E-b11, K =5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) .........................

xxii

Table 60 :

 60 Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b11.............

Table 61 :

 61 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ............................................

Table 62 :

 62 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1 ......

Table 63 :

 63 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1.......................................

Table 64 :

 64 Nano level of analysis of Building

Table 66 :

 66 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ............................................

Table 67 :

 67 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2 ......

Table 68 :

 68 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2.......................................

Table 69 :

 69 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2 .

Table 70 :

 70 Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b5, variation 2 ..................................................................................................................................................................

Table 71 :

 71 Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (visitor-inhabitant) ................................................

Table 72 :

 72 Nano level of analysis of Buildings

Table 88 :

 88 Average RRA values depending on the variations of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -first phase xxiii Late Antique Period (OL 2b) .....................................................................................................................

Table 89 :

 89 Average RRA values depending on the variations of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -first phase Late Antique Period (OL 2b) .....................................................................................................................

Table 90 :

 90 Summary of main characteristics for each genotype (A, B.II, B.I and C, ordered by difference/similarity: white -no information; red -difference; green -similarity) ..................................

Table 91 :

 91 Mada'in Saleh, Area 1, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) .........................

Table 92 :

 92 Mada'in Saleh, Area 2, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) .........................

Table 93 :

 93 Mada'in Saleh, Area 9 (trench A and trench B), comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) ..............................................................................................................................................

Table 94 :

 94 Mada'in Saleh, Area 9 (trench A and trench B), comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) -Correlation of local phases trench C and trench D based on Nehmé 2018b, 179 -Table 1. ..................................................................................................................................................................

Table 95 :

 95 Dumat al-Jandal, Building A and Building B, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) ..............................................................................................................................................

Table 96 :

 96 Comparative chronostratigraphy: Tayma, Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) ..................................................................................................................................

	Abbreviation	Meaning
	a.s.l.	above sea level
	CE	Common Era
	BCE	Before Common Era
	BS	Building Stage
	E	east
	GIS	Geographic Information System
	N	north
	OL	Occupation Level
	OP	Occupation Period
	R	Room
	S	south
	SU	Stratigraphic Unit
	W	west
	vis-inh	visitor-inhabitant relationship
	inh-inh	inhabitant-inhabitant relationship
	var.	variation

xxiv ABBREVIATIONS Research was mainly carried out at the Orient Department of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI) in Berlin and, especially the methodology, at the Maison d'Archéologie et Ethnologie (MAE) in Nanterre.

POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DYNAMICS FROM THE NABATEAN TO THE LATE ANTIQUE PERIOD

Archaeological research in NW Arabia is far from reaching its full potential. This part of the Arabian Peninsula has had a late start concerning systematic research, mainly because of unfavourable circumstances, such as climate. 11 Fortunately, today the investigations have multiplied and are based on diverse international collaborations. It is in this context that more light is being shed on a former largely unknown area.

  After 400 CE there is no permanent Roman military presence south of Aila, including those formerly stationed in Hegra and Duma, 53 losing at the same time the administrative power in the region. Local governments rise at that point, 54 although it is not

	clear if and what kind of connection they continued to have with the Romans. 55 This is also the
	time when the Himyaritic kings get involved in the Arabia Deserta, annexing in 445 CE parts
	of central and western Arabia. 56
	2 THE OASIS OF TAYMA
	Tayma (coordinates: 27°37′37.20″N 38°32′58.21″E) -Province of Tabuk/Kingdom of Saudi
	Arabia 57 -is a NW Arabian oasis situated between the Nafūd desert to the East and the Hijaz
	Mountains to the West (Figure

Tayma Occupation Periods or Occupation Periods (

	OPs): 77 from the Late Neolithic up until
	today. The Occupation Periods (OPs) are overall chronological divisions applied to the entire
	settlement (Table 1) 78 ; those are, from the latest to earliest: OP 1 -Contemporary; OP 2 -
	Islamic Period; OP 3a -Late Antiquity; OP 3b -Roman/Late Roman Period; OP 4 -Nabataean
	Period; OP 5 -Lihyanite Period; OP 6 -Mid-to Late Iron Age; OP 7 -Early Iron Age; OP 8
	-Late Bronze Age; OP 9 -Middle Bronze Age; OP 10 -Early Bronze Age; OP 11 -
	Chalcolithic; OP 12 -Late Neolithic.

Table 2 :

 2 Chronostratigraphy: Occupation periods (Ops) and occupation levels (OLs) in Tayma(Francelin Tourtet 2017, modified by Anja Prust 2018; personal communication)

	Tayma Occupation Period	A	C	D	E	E-East	E-South	F	H	Canals	O	Q3	W9	W41	Z
										(Compound A)
	Tayma 1				E:1	E-East:1a					O:0				Z:1
						E-East:1b
	Tayma 2				E:2			F:1							Z:2a
															Z:2b
															Z:2c
	Tayma 3a							F:2a			O:1?				Z:3a
							E-South:2	F:2b
	Tayma 3b	C4:2		D:x	E-b1:3a	E-East:2a	E-South:3	F:3
		(SU 2138)		E-b1:3b
	Tayma 4				E-b1:3c	E-East:2b	E-South:4	F:4							(Z:3b?)
					E-b1:3d	E-East:2c									(Z:4?)
						E-East:3a						Q3:1
						E-East:3b
	Tayma 5				E-b1:3e	E-East:4a					O:2
								F:5a (?)				Q3:2
	Tayma 6				E:4				H-b2			Q3:3
												Q3:4
	Tayma 7	A:1a						F:5b (?)	H-b1:1	Canals 1	O:3(a)	Q3:5
		A:1b							H-b1:2		O:3(b)	Q3:6
		A:1c							H-b1:3
		A:2a
		A:2b1
		A:2b2
		A:2c
		A:3a
		A:3b
		A:4a
		A:4b
	Tayma 8									Canals 2?				W41:1
												Q3:7a
	Tayma 9				E:5a	E-East:4b						Q3:7b		W41:2
					E:5b	E-East:4c						Q3:7c
	Tayma 10				E:5c	E-East:5a
					E:5d	E-East:5b
	Tayma 11				E:6							Q3:8	W9
													(SU 5908)

Tayma 12 2.3 The oasis of Tayma in the NW Arabian context 2.3.1 The oasis of Tayma until the Nabataean Period (OP 12 -OP 5)

Table 3

 3

	: Residential area (Area E-South and Area F): Occupation levels (OLs) (adapted from Weigel
	2019, 108, Table 1)
	Chronology	Area E-South	Area F
	Post 6 th -19 th /20 th c. CE	OL E-South:1	OL F:1
	4 th -6 th c. CE	OL E-South:2	OL F:2a and OL F:2b
	1 st /2 nd -4 th c. CE	OL E-South:3	OL F:3
	4 th /3 rd c. BCE-1 st /2 nd c. CE	OL E-South:4	OL F:4
	Late 2 nd -early 1 st millennium BCE	hiatus	hiatus
	3 rd millennium BCE (?) -mid 2 nd millennium BCE	OL E-South:5?	OL F:5
	(dating unclear)

Table 4

 4

		: Buildings of the residential area (Area E-South and Area F) -in bold the buildings where a
			space syntax analysis is possible
	OP	Area E-South	Area F	Buildings
	OP 3a	OL E-South:2	OL F:2a E-b7, F-b8 (phase 2), F-b11
			OL F:2b E-b8, E-b11, F-b5, F-b6, F-b8 (phase 1)
	OP 3b	OL E-South:3	OL F:3	E-b10, E-b13, E

-b15, F-b1 West, F-b1 East, F-b2, F-b4, F-b7,

				F-
				b9, F-b10, F-b12
	OP 4	OL E-South:4	OL F:4	E-b9, F-b3

Table 5

 5

				: D-values calculated for K=1 to K=20
	K D-value	K	D-value	K	D-value	K	D-value
	1	-	6	0.349	11 0.295	16 0.251
	2	-	7	0.340	12 0.285	17 0.244
	3	0.211	8	0.328	13 0.276	18 0.237
	4	0.333	9	0.317	14 0.267	19 0.231
	5	0.352	10 0.306	15 0.

Table 6 :

 6 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b3 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	12.000	2.000	0.400	1.178
	Mean	1.000	16.000	2.667	0.667	1.963
	Max	1.500	21.000	3.500	1.000	2.944
	Nano level

Table 7

 7

shows the results obtained for each space. Two rooms are of type A and five are of type B. Alley F-s3 and F-b3:R4 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b3:R1 and F-b3:R6 have the highest CV. F-b3:R3 has the lowest RA value, whereas alley F-s3 and F-b3:R4 have the highest RA values.

Table 7 :

 7

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b3:F-s3	A	1	0.500	21	3.500	1.000	2.944
	F-b3:R1	B	2	1.500	16	2.667	0.667	1.963
	F-b3:R2	B	2	1.000	13	2.167	0.467	1.374
	F-b3:R3	B	2	1.000	12	2.000	0.400	1.178
	F-b3:R4	A	1	0.500	21	3.500	1.000	2.944
	F-b3:R5	B	2	1.000	13	2.167	0.467	1.374
	F-b3:R6	B	2	1.500	16	2.667	0.667	1.963

Nano level of analysis of Building F-b3, K = 7 and D = 0.340

(visitor-inhabitant)

Table 8 :

 8 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b3 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	6.000	1.500	0.333	1.000
	Mean	1.000	8.000	2.000	0.667	1.894
	Max	1.500	10.000	2.500	1.000	2.841

Table 9 :

 9

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b3:R1	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	F-b3:R2	B	2	1.500	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	F-b3:R3	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	F-b3:R4	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841
	Fb3:R5	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841

Nano level of analysis of Building F-b2, k = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

Table 10 :

 10

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b3:alley	0.500	-	1.000	-
	F-b3:R1	1.500	1.500	0.667	0.500
	F-b3:R2	1.000	1.500	0.467	0.333
	F-b3:R3	1.000	1.500	0.400	0.500
	F-b3:R4	0.500	0.500	1.000	1.000
	F-b3:R5	1.000	0.500	0.467	1.000
	F-b3:R6	1.500	-	0.667	-

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b3

Table 11 :

 11 Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	Mean	1.000	10.667	2.133	0.567	1.624
	Max	2.500	14.000	2.800	0.900	2.579
	Nano level

Table 12

 12

shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. Alley F-s8 and E-b15:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b15:R4 has the highest CV. E-b15:R3 and E-b15:R4 have the lowest RA values, whereas E-b15:R1 has the highest RA value.

Table 12 :

 12

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b15:F-s8	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006
	E-b15:R1	A	1	0.500	14	2.800	0.900	2.579
	E-b15:R2	B	2	1.500	10	2.000	0.500	1.433
	E-b15:R3	B	2	0.833	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	E-b15:R4	B	3	2.500	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	E-b15:R5	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006

Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant)variation 1

Table 13 :

 13 Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	6.000	1.500	0.333	0.947
	Mean	1.000	8.000	2.000	0.667	1.894
	Max	1.500	10.000	2.500	1.000	2.841
	Nano level

Table 14

 14

shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Two rooms are of type A and three are of type B. E-b15:R1 and E-b15:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b15:R2 and E-b15:R4 have the highest CV. E-b15:R3 has the lowest RA value, whereas E-b15:R1 and E-b15:R5 have the highest RA value.

Table 14 :

 14

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b15:R1	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841
	E-b15:R2	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	E-b15:R3	B	2	1.000	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	E-b15:R4	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	E-b15:R5	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841

Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)variation 1

Table 15 :

 15

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	E-b15:F-s8	0.333	-	0.700	-
	E-b15:R1	0.500	0.500	0.900	1.000
	E-b15:R2	1.500	1.500	0.500	0.500
	E-b15:R3	0.833	1.000	0.300	0.333
	E-b15:R4	2.500	1.500	0.300	0.500
	E-b15:R5	0.333	0.500	0.700	1.000

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b15, variation 1

Table 16 :

 16 Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	7.000	1.400	0.200	0.573
	Mean	1.000	9.667	1.933	0.467	1.337
	Max	2.333	11.000	2.200	0.600	1.719
	Nano level

Table 17

 17

shows the results obtained for each space. Four rooms are of type A and two are of type B. Alley F-s8, E-b15:R1, E-b15:R2 and E-b15:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b15:R3 and E-b15:R4 have the highest CV. E-b15:R3 and E-b15:R4 have the lowest RA values, whereas alley F-s8, E-b15:R1, E-b15:R2 and E-b15:R5 have the highest RA values.

Table 17 :

 17

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b15:F-s8	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b15:R1	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b15:R2	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b15:R3	B	3	2.333	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	E-b15:R4	B	3	2.333	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	E-b15:R5	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719

Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant)variation 2

Table 18 :

 18 Micro level analysis of Building E-b15 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	5.000	1.250	0.167	0.473
	Mean	1.000	7.200	1.800	0.533	1.515
	Max	2.500	9.000	2.250	0.833	2.367
	Nano level

Table 19

 19

shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and two are of type B. E-b15:R1 and E-b15:R2 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b15:R3 has the highest CV. E-b15:R3 has the lowest RA value, whereas E-b15:R5 has the highest RA value.

Table 19 :

 19

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b15:R1	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	E-b15:R2	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	E-b15:R3	B	3	2.500	5	1.250	0.167	0.473
	E-b15:R4	B	2	1.333	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	E-b15:R5	A	1	0.500	9	2.250	0.833	2.367

Nano level of analysis of Building E-b15, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)variation 2

Table 20 :

 20

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	E-b15:F-s8	0.333	-	0.600	-
	E-b15:R1	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.667
	E-b15:R2	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.667
	E-b15:R3	2.333	2.500	0.200	0.167
	E-b15:R4	2.333	1.333	0.200	0.333
	E-b15:R5	0.333	0.500	0.600	0.833

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b15, variation 2

Table 21 :

 21 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.143	16	1.600	0.133	0.452
	Mean	1.000	25.273	2.527	0.339	1.151
	Max	6.500	40	4.000	0.667	2.261

Table 22 :

 22 Nano level analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 11 and D = 0.295 (visitor-inhabitant)variation 1

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:F-s5	A	1	0.500	40	4.000	0.667	2.261
	F-b1:R9	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130
	F-b1:R10	B	2	0.643	19	1.900	0.200	0.678
	F-b1:R11	B	7	6.500	16	1.600	0.133	0.452
	F-b1:R12	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130
	F-b1:R13	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130
	F-b1:R14	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130
	F-b1:R15	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130
	F-b1: R16	B	2	1.500	29	2.900	0.422	1.432
	F-b1:R17	B	2	1.000	24	2.400	0.311	1.055
	F-b1:R18	A	1	0.143	25	2.500	0.333	1.130

Table 23 :

 23 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.143	9.000	1.125	0.036	0.113
	Mean	1.000	15.556	1.944	0.270	0.852
	Max	6.500	21.000	2.625	0.464	1.466

Table 24 :

 24 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 9 and D = 0.317 (inhabitant-inhabitant)variation 1

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:R9	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b1:R10	B	2	1.143	14	1.750	0.214	0.676
	F-b1:R11	B	7	6.500	9	1.125	0.036	0.113
	F-b1:R12	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b1:R13	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b1:R14	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b1:R15	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b1:R17	A	1	0.500	21	2.625	0.464	1.466
	F-b1:R18	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902

Table 25 :

 25

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b1:F-s5	0.500	-	0.667	-
	F-b1:R9	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286
	F-b1:R10	0.643	1.143	0.200	0.214
	F-b1:R11	6.500	6.500	0.133	0.036
	F-b1:R12	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286
	F-b1:R13	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286
	F-b1:R14	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286
	F-b1:R15	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286
	F-b1: R16	1.500	-	0.422	-
	F-b1:R17	1.000	0.500	0.311	0.464
	F-b1:R18	0.143	0.143	0.333	0.286

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 East, variation 1

Table 26 :

 26 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.143 18	1.636 0.127 0.447
	Mean 1.000 29.333 2.667 0.333 1.170
	Max	6.000 46	4.182 0.636 2.234

Table 27 :

 27 Nano level analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 12 and D = 0.285 (visitor-inhabitant)variation 2

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:F-s5	A	1	0.500	46	4.182	0.636	2.234
	F-b1:R9	A	1	0.143	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R10	B	2	0.643	22	2.000	0.200	0.702
	F-b1:R11	B	7	6.000	18	1.636	0.127	0.447
	F-b1:R12	A	1	0.143	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R13	A	1	0.143	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R14	A	1	0.143	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R15	B	2	1.143	26	2.364	0.273	0.957
	F-b1: R16	B	2	1.500	36	3.273	0.455	1.596
	F-b1:R17	B	2	1.000	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R18	A	1	0.143	28	2.545	0.309	1.085
	F-b1:R19	A	1	0.500	36	3.273	0.455	1.596

Table 28 :

 28 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 East (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.143	11.000	1.222	0.056	0.182
	Mean	1.000	19.000	2.111	0.278	0.909
	Max	6.000	25.000	2.778	0.444	1.455

Table 29 :

 29 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 East, K = 10 and D = 0.306 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:R9	A	1	0.143	19	2.111	0.278	0.909
	F-b1:R10	B	2	1.143	17	1.889	0.222	0.727
	F-b1:R11	B	7	6.000	11	1.222	0.056	0.182
	F-b1:R12	A	1	0.143	19	2.111	0.278	0.909
	F-b1:R13	A	1	0.143	19	2.111	0.278	0.909
	F-b1:R14	A	1	0.143	19	2.111	0.278	0.909
	F-b1:R15	B	2	1.143	17	1.889	0.222	0.727
	F-b1:R17	A	1	0.500	25	2.778	0.444	1.455
	F-b1:R18	A	1	0.143	19	2.111	0.278	0.909
	F-b1:R19	A	1	0.500	25	2.778	0.444	1.455

Table 30 :

 30 Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 East, variation 2

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b1:F-s5	0.500	-	0.636	-
	F-b1:R9	0.143	0.143	0.309	0.278
	F-b1:R10	0.643	1.143	0.200	0.222
	F-b1:R11	6.000	6.000	0.127	0.056
	F-b1:R12	0.143	0.143	0.309	0.278
	F-b1:R13	0.143	0.143	0.309	0.278
	F-b1:R14	0.143	0.143	0.309	0.278
	F-b1:R15	1.143	1.143	0.273	0.222
	F-b1: R16	1.500	-	0.455	-
	F-b1:R17	1.000	0.500	0.309	0.444
	F-b1:R18	0.143	0.143	0.309	0.278
	F-b1:R19	0.500	0.500	0.455	0.444

  263

262 SU 2379=7374.

263

Charred millet -setaria (TA 3285); Lab: University of Kiel; Lan number: KIA 30892; date: 1759 ± 26 BP; 2σ range date: 215 -363 calAD (92.5%); Calib rev 4.3. For more details see

Tourtet and Weigel 2015, 395.

Table 31 :

 31 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 West(visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	9.000	1.500	0.200	0.589
	Mean	1.000	13.143	2.190	0.476	1.402
	Max	2.333	17.000	2.833	0.733	2.159

Table 32 :

 32 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 West, K = 7 and D = 0.340(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:F-s2	A	1	0.333	14	2.333	0.533	1.570
	F-b1:R1	A	1	0.500	17	2.833	0.733	2.159
	F-b1:R2	B	2	1.333	12	2.000	0.400	1.178
	F-b1:R3	A	1	0.333	15	2.500	0.600	1.767
	F-b1:R4	B	3	1.833	9	1.500	0.200	0.589
	F-b1:R5	B	3	2.333	10	1.667	0.267	0.785
	F-b1:R8	A	1	0.333	15	2.500	0.600	1.767

Table 33 :

 33 Micro level analysis of Building F-b1 West (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	Mean	1.000	10.667	2.133	0.567	1.624
	Max	2.500	14.000	2.800	0.900	2.579

Table 34 :

 34 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b1 West, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b1:R1	A	1	0.500	14.000	2.800	0.900	2.579
	F-b1:R2	B	2	1.500	10.000	2.000	0.500	1.433
	F-b1:R3	A	1	0.333	12.000	2.400	0.700	2.006
	F-b1:R4	B	2	0.833	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b1:R5	B	3	2.500	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b1:R8	A	1	0.333	12.000	2.400	0.700	2.006

Table 35 :

 35 Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b1 West

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b1:F-s2	0.333	-	0.533	-
	F-b1:R1	0.500	0.500	0.733	0.900
	F-b1:R2	1.333	1.500	0.400	0.500
	F-b1:R3	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.700
	F-b1:R4	1.833	0.833	0.200	0.300
	F-b1:R5	2.333	2.500	0.267	0.300
	F-b1:R8	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.700

Table 36 :

 36 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b2 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.250	9.000	1.500	0.200	0.589
	Mean	1.000	13.143	2.190	0.476	1.402
	Max	3.500	18.000	3.000	0.800	2.355

Table 37 :

 37 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b2, K = 7 and D = 0.340(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b2:F-s7	A	1	0.250	14	2.333	0.533	1.570
	F-b2:R1	B	2	1.500	13	2.167	0.467	1.374
	F-b2:R2	A	1	0.500	18	3.000	0.800	2.355
	F-b2:R3	A	1	0.250	14	2.333	0.533	1.570
	F-b2:R4	B	2	0.750	10	1.667	0.267	0.785
	F-b2:R5	B	4	3.500	9	1.500	0.200	0.589
	F-b2:R6	A	1	0.250	14	2.333	0.533	1.570

Table 38 :

 38 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b2 (inhabitant-inhabitant) Table39shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Three rooms are of type A and three are of type B. F-b2:R3 and F-b2:R6 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b2:R5 has the highest CV. F-b2:R4 and F-b2:R5 have the lowest RA values, whereas F-b2:R2 has the highest RA value.

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	Mean	1.000	10.667	2.133	0.567	1.624
	Max	2.500	14.000	2.800	0.900	2.579
	Nano level

Table 39 :

 39 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b2, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b2:R1	B	2	1.500	10	2.000	0.500	1.433
	F-b2:R2	A	1	0.500	14	2.800	0.900	2.579
	F-b2:R3	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006
	F-b2:R4	B	2	0.833	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b2:R5	B	3	2.500	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b2:R6	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006

Table 40 :

 40

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-

b2 space CV vis-inh CV inh-inh RA vis-inh RA inh-inh

	2.6 Building F-b4
	2.6.1 Description
	F-b2:F-s7	0.250	-	0.533	-
	F-b2:R1	1.500	1.500	0.467	0.500
	F-b2:R2	0.500	0.500	0.800	0.900
	F-b2:R3	0.250	0.333	0.533	0.700
	F-b2:R4	0.750	0.833	0.267	0.300
	F-b2:R5	3.500	2.500	0.200	0.300
	F-b2:R6	0.250	0.333	0.533	0.700

Table 41 :

 41 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b4 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.250	8.000	1.333	0.133	0.393
	Mean	1.000	12.571	2.095	0.438	1.290
	Max	3.000	16.000	2.667	0.667	1.963

Table 42 :

 42 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b4, K = 7 and D = 0.340(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b4:alley	A	1	0.250	13	2.167	0.467	1.374
	F-b4:R1	A	1	0.500	16	2.667	0.667	1.963
	F-b4:R2	B	4	3.000	8	1.333	0.133	0.393
	F-b4:R3	A	1	0.250	13	2.167	0.467	1.374
	F-b4:staircase	B	2	1.250	11	1.833	0.333	0.981
	F-b4:other floor?	A	1	0.500	16	2.667	0.667	1.963
	F-b4:not excavated	B	2	1.250	11	1.833	0.333	0.981

Table 43 :

 43 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b4 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	2.000	1.000	0.000	0.000
	Mean	1.000	10.333	2.067	0.533	1.528
	Max	2.000	3.000	1.500	1.000	4.742

Table 44 :

 44 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b4, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b4:R1	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292
	F-b4:R2	B	3	2.000	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	F-b4:R3	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	F-b4:staircase	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146
	F-b4:other floor?	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292
	F-b4:not excavated	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146

Table 45 :

 45

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-

b4 space CV vis-inh CV inh-inh RA vis-inh RA inh-inh

	F-b4:alley	0.250	-	0.467	-
	F-b4:R1	0.500	0.500	0.667	0.800
	F-b4:R2	3.000	2.000	0.133	0.200
	F-b4:R3	0.250	0.333	0.467	0.600
	F-b4:staircase	1.250	1.333	0.333	0.400
	F-b4:other floor?	0.500	0.500	0.667	0.800
	F-b4:not excavated	1.250	1.333	0.333	0.400

Table 46 :

 46 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b7 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.143	9.000	1.125	0.036	0.113
	Mean	1.000	15.556	1.944	0.270	0.852
	Max	6.500	21.000	2.625	0.464	1.466

Table 47 :

 47 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b7, K = 9 and D = 0.317(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b7:F-s4	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R1	B	7	6.500	9	1.125	0.036	0.113
	F-b7:R2	B	2	1.143	14	1.750	0.214	0.676
	F-b7:R3	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R4	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R5	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R6	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R7	A	1	0.143	16	2.000	0.286	0.902
	F-b7:R8	A	1	0.500	21	2.625	0.464	1.466

Table 48 :

 48 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b7(inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.167	8.000	1.143	0.048	0.145
	Mean	1.000	13.500	1.929	0.310	0.943
	Max	5.500	18.000	2.571	0.524	1.595

Table 49 :

 49 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b7, K = 8 and D = 0.328 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b7:R1	B	6	5.500	8	1.143	0.048	0.145
	F-b7:R2	B	2	1.167	12	1.714	0.238	0.725
	F-b7:R3	A	1	0.167	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b7:R4	A	1	0.167	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b7:R5	A	1	0.167	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b7:R6	A	1	0.167	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b7:R7	A	1	0.167	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b7:R8	A	1	0.500	18	2.571	0.524	1.595

Table 50 :

 50

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b7:alley	0.143	-	0.286	-
	F-b7:R1	6.500	5.500	0.036	0.048
	F-b7:R2	1.143	1.167	0.214	0.238
	F-b7:R3	0.143	0.167	0.286	0.333
	F-b7:R4	0.143	0.167	0.286	0.333
	F-b7:R5	0.143	0.167	0.286	0.333
	F-b7:R6	0.143	0.167	0.286	0.333
	F-b7:R7	0.143	0.167	0.286	0.333
	F-b7:R8	0.500	0.500	0.464	0.524

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b7

Table 51 :

 51 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b12 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	14.000	2.000	0.333	1.015
	Mean	1.063	19.000	2.714	0.571	1.740
	Max	2.000	26.000	3.714	0.905	2.755
	Nano level

Table 52

 52

shows the results obtained for each space. Three rooms are of type A and five are of type B. F-b12:R2 has the lowest CV, whereas F-b12:R3 has the highest CV. F-b12:R3 and F.b12:R5 have the lowest RA values, whereas the possible other floor has the highest RA value.

Table 52 :

 52 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b12, K = 8 and D = 0.328(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b12:F-s8	A	1	0.500	24	3.429	0.810	2.465
	F-b12:R1	B	2	1.000	16	2.286	0.429	1.305
	F-b12:R2	A	1	0.333	20	2.857	0.619	1.885
	F-b12:R3	B	3	2.000	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b12:R4	B	2	1.333	18	2.571	0.524	1.595
	F-b12:R5	B	2	0.833	14	2.000	0.333	1.015
	F-b12:staircase	B	2	1.500	20	2.857	0.619	1.885
	F-b12:other floor?	A	1	1.000	26	3.714	0.905	2.755

Table 53 :

 53 Micro level analysis ofBuilding F-b12 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	11.000	1.833	0.333	0.981
	Mean	1.000	14.857	2.476	0.590	1.738
	Max	2.500	20.000	3.333	0.933	2.748

Table 54 :

 54 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b12, K = 7 and D = 0.340 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b12:R1	B	2	1.000	12	2.000	0.400	1.178
	F-b12:R2	A	1	0.333	17	2.833	0.733	2.159
	F-b12:R3	B	3	2.500	12	2.000	0.400	1.178
	F-b12:R4	A	1	0.333	17	2.833	0.733	2.159
	F-b12:R5	B	2	0.833	11	1.833	0.333	0.981
	F-b12:staircase	B	2	1.500	15	2.500	0.600	1.767
	F-b12:other floor?	A	1	0.500	20	3.333	0.933	2.748

Table 55 :

 55

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b12:F-s8	0.500	-	0.810	-
	F-b12:R1	1.000	1.000	0.429	0.400
	F-b12:R2	0.333	0.333	0.619	0.733
	F-b12:R3	2.000	2.500	0.333	0.400
	F-b12:R4	1.333	0.333	0.524	0.733
	F-b12:R5	0.833	0.833	0.333	0.333
	F-b12:staircase	1.500	1.500	0.619	0.600
	F-b12:other floor?	1.000	0.500	0.905	0.933

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b12

Table 56 :

 56 Micro level analysis ofBuilding E-b11 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	7.000	1.400	0.200	0.573
	Mean	1.000	10.333	2.067	0.533	1.528
	Max	2.000	13.000	2.600	0.800	2.292

Table 57 :

 57 Nano level of analysis of Building E-b11, K = 6 and D = 0.349(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b11:F-s8	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b11:R1	B	3	2.000	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	E-b11:R2	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146
	E-b11:R3	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292
	E-b11:staircase	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146
	E-b11:upper floor?	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292

Table 58 :

 58 Micro level analysis of BuildingE-b11 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	6.000	1.500	0.333	0.947
	Mean	1.000	8.000	2.000	0.667	1.894
	Max	1.500	10.000	2.500	1.000	2.841
	Nano level

Table 59

 59

shows the results obtained for each space. Two rooms are of type A and three rooms are of type B. E-b11:R3 and the upper floor have the lowest CV, whereas E-b11:R2 and the staircase have the highest CV. E-b11:R1 has the lowest RA value, whereas E-b11:R3 and the upper floor have the highest RA values.

Table 59 :

 59 Nano level analysis of Building E-b11, K =5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b11:R1	B	2	1.000	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	E-b11:R2	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	E-b11:R3	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841
	E-b11:staircase	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	E-b11:upper floor?	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841

Table 60 :

 60

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-

b11 space CV vis-inh CV inh-inh RA vis-inh RA inh-inh

	E-b11:F-s8	0.333	-	0.600	-
	E-b11:R1	2.000	1.000	0.200	0.333
	E-b11:R2	1.333	1.500	0.400	0.500
	E-b11:R3	0.500	0.500	0.800	1.000
	E-b11:staircase	1.333	1.500	0.400	0.500
	E-b11:upper floor?	0.500	0.500	0.800	1.000

Table 61 :

 61 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	7.000	1.400	0.200	0.573
	Mean	1.000	10.333	2.067	0.533	1.528
	Max	2.000	13.000	2.600	0.800	2.292

Table 62 :

 62

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b5:F-s8	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292
	F-b5:R1	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	F-b5:R2	B	3	2.000	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	F-b5:R3	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146
	F-b5:R4	B	2	1.333	9	1.800	0.400	1.146
	F-b5:R5	A	1	0.500	13	2.600	0.800	2.292

Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 1

Table 63 :

 63 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 1

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	5.000	1.250	0.167	0.473
	Mean	1.000	7.200	1.800	0.533	1.515
	Max	2.500	9.000	2.250	0.833	2.367

Table 64 :

 64

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b5:R1	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b5:R2	B	3	2.500	5	1.250	0.167	0.473
	F-b5:R3	B	2	1.333	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	F-b5:R4	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b5:R5	A	1	0.500	9	2.250	0.833	2.367

Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)variation 1

Table 65 :

 65

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b5:F-s8	0.500	-	0.800	-
	F-b5:R1	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.667
	F-b5:R2	2.000	2.500	0.200	0.167
	F-b5:R3	1.333	1.333	0.400	0.333
	F-b5:R4	1.333	0.333	0.400	0.667
	F-b5:R5	0.500	0.500	0.800	0.833

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b5, variation 1

Table 66 :

 66 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	8.000	1.600	0.300	0.860
	Mean	1.000	10.667	2.133	0.567	1.624
	Max	2.500	14.000	2.800	0.900	2.579

Table 67 :

 67

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b5:F-s8	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006
	F-b5:R1	A	1	0.333	12	2.400	0.700	2.006
	F-b5:R2	B	2	0.833	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b5:R3	B	2	1.500	10	2.000	0.500	1.433
	F-b5:R4	B	3	2.500	8	1.600	0.300	0.860
	F-b5:R5	A	1	0.500	14	2.800	0.900	2.579

Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 6 and D = 0.349 (visitor-inhabitant) -variation 2

Table 68 :

 68 Micro level analysis of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant) -variation 2

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	6.000	1.500	0.333	0.947
	Mean	1.000	8.000	2.000	0.667	1.894
	Max	1.500	10.000	2.500	1.000	2.841

Table 69 :

 69 Nano level of analysis of Building F-b5, K = 5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)variation 2

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b5:R1	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841
	F-b5:R2	B	2	1.000	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	F-b5:R3	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	F-b5:R4	B	2	1.500	7	1.750	0.500	1.420
	F-b5:R5	A	1	0.500	10	2.500	1.000	2.841

Table 70 :

 70

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b5:F-s8	0.333	-	0.700	-
	F-b5:R1	0.333	0.500	0.700	1.000
	F-b5:R2	0.833	1.000	0.300	0.333
	F-b5:R3	1.500	1.500	0.500	0.500
	F-b5:R4	2.500	1.500	0.300	0.500
	F-b5:R5	0.500	0.500	0.900	1.000

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building F-b5, variation 2

Table 71 :

 71 Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1)(visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	5.000	1.250	0.167	0.473
	Mean	1.000	7.200	1.800	0.533	1.515
	Max	2.500	9.000	2.250	0.833	2.367

Table 72 :

 72 Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1), K = 5 and D = 0.352(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b8:F-s8	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b8:R1	A	1	0.500	9	2.250	0.833	2.367
	F-b8:R2	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b8:R3	B	2	1.333	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	F-b8:R4	B	3	2.500	5	1.250	0.167	0.473

Table 73 :

 73 Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	4.000	1.333	0.333	1.000
	Mean	1.000	5.000	1.667	0.667	2.000
	Max	1.500	6.000	2.000	1.000	3.000
	Nano level
	Table 74 shows the results obtained for each space on the nano level. Two rooms are of
	type A and two are of type B. F-b8:R1 and F-b8:R2 have the lowest CV, whereas F-b8:R3 and
	F-b8:R4 have the highest CV. F-b8:R3 and F-b8:R4 have the lowest RA values, whereas F-

b8:R1 and F-b8:R2 have the highest RA values.

Table 74 :

 74 Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 1), K = 4 and D = 0.333 (inhabitantinhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b8:R1	A	1	0.500	6	2.000	1.000	3.000
	F-b8:R2	A	1	0.500	6	2.000	1.000	3.000
	F-b8:R3	B	2	1.500	4	1.333	0.333	1.000
	F-b8:R4	B	2	1.500	4	1.333	0.333	1.000

Table 75 :

 75

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b8:F-s8	0.333	-	0.667	-
	F-b8:R1	0.500	0.500	0.833	1.000
	F-b8:R2	0.333	0.500	0.667	1.000
	F-b8:R3	1.333	1.500	0.333	0.333
	F-b8:R4	2.500	1.500	0.167	0.333

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh) and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Buildings F-b8 (phase 1)

Table 76 :

 76 Micro level analysis ofBuilding E-b7 (visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	7.000	1.400	0.200	0.573
	Mean	1.000	9.667	1.933	0.467	1.337
	Max	2.333	11.000	2.200	0.600	1.719
	Nano level
	Table 77 shows the results obtained for each space. Four rooms are of type A and two are
	of type B. Alley F-s8, E-b7:R3, E-b7:R4 and E-b7:R5 have the lowest CV, whereas E-b7:R1
	and E-b7:R2 have the highest CV. E-b7:R1 and E-b7:R2 have the lowest RA values, whereas

alley F-s8, E-b7:R3, E-b7:R4 and E-b7:R5 have the highest RA values.

Table 77 :

 77 Nano level of analysis of Building E-b7, K = 6 and D = 0.349(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b7:F-s8	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b7:R1	B	3	2.333	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	E-b7:R2	B	3	2.333	7	1.400	0.200	0.573
	E-b7:R3	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b7:R4	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719
	E-b7:R5	A	1	0.333	11	2.200	0.600	1.719

Table 78 :

 78 Micro level analysis of Building E-b7 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	5.000	1.250	0.167	0.473
	Mean	1.000	7.200	1.800	0.533	1.515
	Max	2.500	9.000	2.250	0.833	2.367

Table 79 :

 79 Nano level analysis of Building E-b7, K =5 and D = 0.352 (inhabitant-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	E-b7:R1	B	2	1.333	6	1.500	0.333	0.947
	E-b7:R2	B	3	2.500	5	1.250	0.167	0.473
	E-b7:R3	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	E-b7:R4	A	1	0.500	9	2.250	0.833	2.367
	E-b7:R5	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894

Table 80 :

 80

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	E-b7:F-s8	0.333	-	0.600	-
	E-b7:R1	2.333	1.333	0.200	0.333
	E-b7:R2	2.333	2.500	0.200	0.167
	E-b7:R3	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.667
	E-b7:R4	0.333	0.500	0.600	0.833
	E-b7:R5	0.333	0.333	0.600	0.667

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Building E-b7

Table 81 :

 81 Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2)(visitor-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.333	5.000	1.250	0.167	0.473
	Mean	1.000	7.200	1.800	0.533	1.515
	Max	2.500	9.000	2.250	0.833	2.367

Table 82 :

 82 Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2), K = 5 and D = 0.352(visitor-inhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b8:F-s8	A	1	0.500	9	2.250	0.833	2.367
	F-b8:R1	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b8:R2	A	1	0.333	8	2.000	0.667	1.894
	F-b8:R3	B	3	2.500	5	1.250	0.167	0.473
	F-b8:R4	B	2	1.333	6	1.500	0.333	0.947

Table 83 :

 83 Micro level analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

		CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	Min	0.500	4.000	1.333	0.333	1.000
	Mean	1.000	4.500	1.500	0.500	1.500
	Max	1.500	6.000	2.000	1.000	3.000

Table 84 :

 84 Nano level of analysis of Buildings F-b8 (phase 2), K = 4 and D = 0.333 (inhabitantinhabitant)

	space	type	NC	CV	TD	MD	RA	RRA
	F-b8:R1	A	1	0.333	5	1.667	0.667	2.000
	F-b8:R2	A	1	0.333	5	1.667	0.667	2.000
	F-b8:R3	B	3	3.000	3	1.000	0.000	0.000
	F-b8:R4	A	1	0.333	5	1.667	0.667	2.000

Table 85 :

 85

	space	CV vis-inh	CV inh-inh	RA vis-inh	RA inh-inh
	F-b8:F-s8	0.500	-	0.833	-
	F-b8:R1	0.333	0.333	0.667	0.667
	F-b8:R2	0.333	0.333	0.667	0.667
	F-b8:R3	2.500	3.000	0.167	0.000
	F-b8:R4	1.333	0.333	0.333	0.667

Comparison visitor-inhabitant (vis-inh)

and inhabitant-inhabitant (inh-inh) Buildings F-b8 (phase 2)

Table 86 :

 86 Average RRA values depending on variations of Building E-b15 and Building F-b1 East (visitor-inhabitant) -Roman Period(OL 3)

	2.000
	1.500
	1.000
	0.500
	0.000
	E-b15 var. 1E-b15 var. 2 F-b1 East	F-b1 East	F-b1 West	F-b2	F-b4	F-b7	F-b12
		var. 1	var.2
		mean RRA vis-inh	mean RRA inh-inh
	E-b15	E-b15	F-b1 East		F-b1 East	average RRA value
	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1		var. 2
	x		x			1.351
		x	x			1.311
	x				x	1.354
		x			x	1.313

Table 87

 87

	: Average RRA values depending on variations of Building E-b15 and F-b1 East (inhabitant-
			inhabitant) -Roman Period (OL 3)
	E-b15	E-b15	F-b1 East	F-b1 East	average RRA value
	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1	var. 2
	x		x		1.457
		x	x		1.403
	x			x	1.466
		x		x	1.412

Table 88 :

 88 Average RRA values depending on the variations of Building F-b5 (visitor-inhabitant) -first phase Late Antique Period(OL 2b)

	F-b5	F-b5	average RRA value
	var. 1	var. 2
	x		1.524
		x	1.558

Table 89 :

 89 Average RRA values depending on the variations of Building F-b5 (inhabitant-inhabitant)first phase Late Antique Period(OL 2b)

	F-b5	F-b5	average RRA value
	var. 1	var. 2
	x		1.789
		x	1.924

  Now that the genotypes have been defined, the same line of argument, as in the first two sections of this chapter, can be followed for each: average RRA values, difference factor H* and the overlap of justified graphs. The next step, as in Section 1 and Section 2 of this chapter, is to calculate the difference factor H*, which quantifies the variance of the range of RRA values, mentioned in the previous paragraph. For genotype A is H* in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and in the inhabitantinhabitant relationship 1.00, which results, as already stated, from the fact that there is only one phenotype analysed for this genotype. Genotype B.I has an H* value of 0.98 in the visitorinhabitant relationship and 0.99 or 1.00 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. Both relationships show that there is almost none or no variance of RRA values. The H* value for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of genotype B.II is 0.98 and in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship 1.00, which also here indicates almost none or no variance at all. The difference factor H* is much higher for this division of OL 3 into two genotypes than the factor calculated in Section 2 of this chapter for the same OL as a whole (0.90 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and between 0.88 and 0.92 in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship), therefore genotype B.I and B.II are far more likely. Genotype C has a difference factor H* in the visitorinhabitant relationship of 0.99 or 1.00 and in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of 0.99. The difference factor is for OL 2b and OL 2a, when separate, basically the same as when joined to one genotype, meaning that although each OL has almost none or no variance of RRA values, they keep having the same quantity of variance as one genotype.

		2.000
		1.500
		1.000
	0.500 The average RRA value for genotype A is 1.963 in visitor-inhabitant relationship and
	1.894 in inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. Genotype B.I has an average RRA value of 1.446
	E-b15 var. 1 or 1.495 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship the E-b15 var. 2 F-b1 East var. 1 F-b1 East var.2 F-b1 West F-b2 F-b4 F-b7 F-b12 0.000
	mean RRA vis-inh 1.624 average RRA value is 1.613 or 1.676. Genotype B.II has an average RRA value of 1.1016 or 1.337 1.151 1.170 1.402 1.402 1.290 0.852 1.740
	mean RRA inh-inh 1.894 1.034 in the visitor-inhabitant relationship and an RRA value of 0.895 or 0.924 in the 1.515 0.852 0.909 1.624 1.624 1.528 0.943 1.738
	inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. Genotype C has an average RRA value of 1.483 or 1.503 in
	the visitor-inhabitant relationship and an average RRA value of 1.679 or 1.762 in the inhabitant-
	inhabitant relationship. The range of average RRA values per OL is in all cases lower than
	0.450, indicating a very low variance of those values and therefore substantiate the suggested
	genotypes.
	2.000
	1.500
	2.000 1.000
	1.500 0.500
		1.000
	0.500 0.000	A		var. 1 B.I	var. 2 B.I		var. 1 B.II	var. 2 B.II	var. 1 C	var. 2 C
	vis-inh	0.000 1.963	E-b11	F-b5 var.1 1.495 1.446	F-b5 var.2 F-b8 (Phase 1) 1.016 1.034	E-b7 1.483 1.503 F-b8 (Phase 2)
	mean RRA vis-inh range vis-inh 0.000	1.528	1.528 0.450 0.450	1.624	1.515 0.299 0.318	1.337 0.191 0.287	1.515
	mean RRA inh-inh inh-inh 1.894	1.894	1.515 1.676 1.613	1.894	2.000 0.895 0.924	1.515 1.679 1.762	1.500
	range inh-inh 0.000		0.366 0.223		0.091 0.034	0.379 0.469
	Figure 202: Mean RRA values per building -Late Antique Period (first phase: OL 2b + second phase:
							2a)
	Figure 203: Average RRA and range per genotype (A, B.I, B.II and C), including variations for
					genotypes B.I, B.II and C
	296 See justified graphs in Chapter IV, Section 3.2.2 for Building E-b11, Section 3.3.2 for Building F-b5, Section
	3.4.2 for Building F-b8 (Phase 1), Section 4.2.2 for Building E-b7 and Section 4.3.2 for Building F-b8 (Phase 2).

Table 90 :

 90 Summary of main characteristics for each genotype (A, B.II, B.I and C, ordered by difference/similarity: white -no information; red -difference; green -similarity)

Focus on cases of subsequent buildings

  This part focuses in more detail on subsequent buildings from different OLs but built on the same location. These are: Building F-b3 from OL 4, succeeded by Building F-b1 East and Most of the outer walls from Building F-b3 have been reused or rebuilt on the same location. The interior layout has been built completely new and movement within the two new buildings is now different from the earlier building. Although both new buildings have a spatial configuration that follows a set of rules of different genotypes (Building F-b1 East is genotype B.II and Building F-b1 West is genotype B.I), still Building F-b3 was much more asymmetric.

	3.3 Building F-b1 West from OL 3; Building F-b12 from OL 3, first succeeded by Building F-b8
	(phase 1) from OL 2b and then Building F-b8 (phase 2) from OL 2a; Building E-b15 from OL
	3, first succeeded by Building E-b11 (OL 2b) and then Building E-b7 from OL 2a.
	After the disuse of Building F-b3 from OL 4, it was divided, in OL 3, into two buildings,
	Building F-b1 East and Building F-b1 West, separated by a common wall but with different
	0.96 0.98 1.00 entrances. This is due to the rooms in Building F-b3 being aligned on a path, leaving a moving individual
	0.94 with no choice, while Building F-b1 East is based on a central courtyard that distributes the
	0.92 movement to smaller rooms and Building F-b1 West has two bifurcations that leaves the
	0.90 individual with a choice. Interestingly, the number of rooms increases in OL 3 although the
	0.88 buildings are half the size.
	0.86
	0.84
	0.82
	0.80				B.I	B.I	B.I	B.I	B.II	B.II	B.II	B.II
	A +	A +	A +	A +	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1	var. 2
	B.I	B.I	B.II	B.II	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
	var. 1	var. 2	var. 1	var. 2	C var.	C var.	C var.	C var.	C var.	C var.	C var.	C var.
					1	1	2	2	1	1	2	2
	H* vis-inh 0.96 0.96	0.86 0.86	0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98	0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92
	H* inh-inh 0.99 0.99	0.86 0.88	0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99	0.88 0.89 0.88 0.90

Table 91 :

 91 Mada'in Saleh, Area 1, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) Room 10301).334 The plan shows four more adjacent rooms to the eastern side, but they have not been named. A doorway was identified between Room 10294 and Room 10295 and possible doorways between Room 10296 and Room 10301, and Room 10301 and the room to the eastern side. 335 Further permeability has not been identified. The street is still being used in this phase and Channel 10324 is built on top of the previous one.336 Phase 5 (Figure216) is dated to the 4 th to 5 th c. CE.337 New walls were built in this phase, adding new rooms to the eastern side and changing the circulation.338 One room is used as in Phase 4 (Room 10301), while the other six rooms have walls changed (Room 10297, Room 10298, Room 10302, Room 10303, Room 10304, Room 10307).339 The plan shows another adjacent room to the south-eastern side, but they have not been named. A doorway was identified between Room 10302 and Room 10304 and between Room 10302 and Room 10301.340 A possible doorway was identified between Room 10303 and Room 10304, 341 and from Room 10307 to the east. 342 Further permeability has not been identified. The street keeps being used in this phase and two channels (both Channel 1033) were built substituting the previous one.343

	Phase Dating	Events
	Phase 5 4th -5th c. CE	-street + two channels substituting Ph. 4 channel
		-E: change of circulation
		-new rooms

Table 92 :

 92 Mada'in Saleh, Area 2, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy)

	Phase Dating	Events
	Phase 5 6th -7th c. CE? -hearths, junk pits
		-layer of disuse
	Phase 4 3rd/	-reoccupation N sector: minor changes
	early 4th c. CE	-S sector abandoned
		-disuse

Table 93 :

 93 Mada'in Saleh, Area 9 (trench A and trench B), comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy)

	Phase	Dating	Events
	Phase 9-10 until 4th c. CE	-"upper complex"
			-walls: N wall reused, newly built
			-doorway from "lower complex" blocked
			-reuse Nabatean building elements
	Phase 8	end 1st c./	-destruction, flooding
		beg 2nd c. CE
	Phase 7	1st c. CE	-first "well-defined" occupation
			-"lower complex"
			-T. A: room, doorway, drainage system, domestic?
			-T. B: corner, monumental doorway, cultic?
	Phase 6	late 1st c. BCE -	-minor occupation
	(only T. B)	1st half 1st c. CE
	Phase 3-5 2nd/1st c. BCE	-dumping operations
	Phase 2	4th/3rd c. BCE
		Roman/Late Antique Period
		Roman Period
		Nabataean/Roman Period
		Nabataean Period
		pre-Nabataean Period

Table 94 :

 94 Mada'in Saleh, Area 9 (trench A and trench B), comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy) -Correlation of local phases trench C and trench D based on Nehmé 2018b, 179 -Table1.Two Nabataean buildings have been identified in Sector A, trench 1 (Figure226), Building A and Building B, during the excavations between 2010 and 2015.414

	Phase	Dating	Phase	Dating	Phase	Dating	Events
	Trench C	Trench C	Trench	Trench C	Trench	Trench D
	Trench D	Trench D	C		D
	Phase 4 (3rd -) 4th c. CE	C3	2nd -4th c. CE	D4	late 3rd ? -	-monumental architecture
						4th c. CE	-rectangular enclosure
							-open-air forecourt?
							-reused Nabataean elements
							-domestic?
	Phase 3 (2nd -) 3rd c. CE -	-	D3	3rd c. CE	-room
						2nd/3rd c. CE	-platform?
	Phase 2 1st/	C2	late 1st/	D2	later 1st/	-walls: newly built
		early 2nd c. CE		2nd c. CE		early 2nd c. CE	-disuse in between two subphases
				late 1st c. BCE -			-end: destruction (can't be connected
				early 1st c. CE			to annexation)
	Phase 1 2nd/1st c. BCE	C1	(2nd -)	D1	2nd/	-some walls
				1st c. BCE		late 1st c. BCE	-oven or kiln
		Roman/Late Antique Period
		Roman Period
		Nabataean/Roman Period
		Nabataean Period
		pre-Nabataean Period

Table 95 :

 95 Dumat al-Jandal, Building A and Building B, comparative phases (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy)

	level	Dating	Events
	level 8 2nd -6th c. CE -reoccupation of buildings
			-destruction (Islamic Period)
	level 9 1st c. CE	-construction Building A and Building B
			-floor level buildings
			-reuse older building material
	level 10 1st c. BCE -	-foundation buildings
		1st c. CE	-reuse older building material
		Roman/Late Antique Period
		Roman Period
		Nabataean/Roman Period
		Nabataean Period
		pre-Nabataean Period

Table 96 :

 96 Comparative chronostratigraphy: Tayma, Mada'in Saleh and Dumat al-Jandal (colours based on Tayma stratigraphy)

	OL Dating	Phase Dating	Phase Dating	Phase	Dating	Phase	Dating	Phase	Dating	Phase	Dating	level	Dating
						Trench C	Trench C	Trench C		Trench D	Trench D
						Trench D	Trench D
	2a
	2b	Phase 5 4th -5th c. CE
			Phase 4 3rd/
			early 4th c. CE
											3rd c. CE
											2nd/3rd c. CE
												level 9 1st c. CE
				Phase 7	1st c. CE
				Phase 6
				(only T

. B) late 1st c. BCE - 1st half 1st c. CE late 1st c. BCE - early 1st c. CE Phase 3-5 2nd/1st c. BCE Phase 1 2nd/1st c. BCE C1 (2nd -) 1st c. BCE D1 2nd/ late 1st c. BCE

	Tayma	Mada'in Salih									Dumat al-Jandal
	Area E-South/F	Area 1		Area 2	Area 9, Trench A and B	Area 9, Trench C and D				Sector A, Trench 1
			Phase 6 6th -7th c. CE	Phase 5 6th -7th c. CE?
		4th -											level 8	2nd -6th c. CE
		6th c. CE
	3	2nd -	Phase 4	2nd -3rd c. CE		Phase 9-10 until 4th c. CE	Phase 4	(3rd -) 4th c. CE	C3	2nd -4th c. CE	D4	late 3rd ? -
		4th c. CE											4th c. CE
					Phase 3 2nd/
					early 3rd c. CE			Phase 3	(2nd -) 3rd c. CE	-	-	D3
	4	2nd c. BCE -	Phase 3 mid -	Phase 2 1st c. CE	Phase 8	end 1st c./	Phase 2	1st/	C2	late 1st/	D2	later 1st/
		early 2nd c. CE		end 1st c. CE			beg 2nd c. CE		early 2nd c. CE		2nd c. CE		early 2nd c. CE
													level 10	1st c. BCE -
			Phase 2 2nd/1st c. BCE -									1st c. CE
				mid 1st c. CE
					Phase 1 late 1st c. BCE -
					early 1st c. CE
		5th -2nd c. BCE Phase 1 3rd -2nd c. BCE		Phase 2	4th/3rd c. BCE
		Roman/Late Antique Period
		Roman Period
		Nabataean/Roman Period
		Nabataean Period
		pre-Nabataean Period

tardo-antique. La séquence des niveaux d'occupation, mise au jour entre 2004 et 2015 et relativement bien préservée, en permet une investigation détaillée. Les principaux objectifs de cette étude consistent en l'identification de la configuration spatiale du bâti domestique et, par ailleurs, en la compréhension du rôle joué dans la perception et la conception de l'espace en environnement urbain par des facteurs politiques, économiques et sociaux. Dans ces recherches sur l'espace et son utilisation, le concept de la syntaxe spatiale -space syntax -joue un rôle essentiel. La syntaxe spatiale est une technique d'analyse spatiale permettant de saisir les règles abstraites qui définissent la configuration d'un espace à un moment donné de son utilisation et lors de différentes occupations.En ayant recours à des données nombreuses et variées ainsi qu'à une approche multidisciplinaire, cette analyse permet de mieux saisir la configuration spatiale des bâtiments ainsi que les changements qui eurent lieu à Tayma entre les II ème et VI ème siècles de notre ère. Parmi les principaux résultats obtenus, on peut citer l'identification des accès aux bâtiments individuels, l'analyse de la circulation à l'intérieur de ces bâtiments ainsi que la caractérisation des différences fonctionnelles observées au sein de ces espaces de vie.À travers cette étude, il a aussi été possible de replacer Tayma, dont l'organisation spatiale a apparemment était notoirement modifiée entre les périodes nabatéenne et romaine, dans le cadre plus large des changements attestés au même moment sur d'autres sites archéologiques de l'Arabie du Nord-Ouest. À l'inverse, la transition vers la période tardoantique montre des signes évidents de continuité avec la période précédente, les bâtiments réutilisant souvent une configuration spatiale héritée de la période romaine. Par conséquent, ce résultat suggère soit l'absence d'investissements importants en ressources, soit une continuité dans l'utilisation des espaces domestiques.

Research Director CNRS, General Director of the French Institute in the Middle East (MEAE -Liban / IFPO).

Macdonald 1991, 106.

Nehmé 2011b, 137.

Loreto 2012, 166.

Wenning 2007, 26.

Fiema et al.

2015, 373.20 Nehmé 2011b, 137.21 [START_REF] Macdonald | Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century[END_REF], 30-32. 22 Fiema et al. 2015, 375. 23 Fiema et al. 2015, 375. 24 Bowersock 1983, 64-65. 25 Fiema et al. 2015, 375. 26 There are some sources that are ambiguous about this statement, seeRetsö 2003, 625;[START_REF] Hackl | Quellen zur Geschichte der Nabatäer: Textsammlung mit Übersetzung und Kommentar[END_REF] Schneider 2003, 52. 27 Hackl, Jenni, and Schneider 2003, 52-53. 28 Such as in Hegra -Mada'in Saleh, Area 9(Nehmé 2015, 130). See also[START_REF] Fiema | Provincia Arabia: Nabataea, the Emergence of Arabic as a Written Language, and Graeco-Arabica[END_REF], 375. 29 Fiema et al. 2015, 375.

Table 1: Chronostratigraphy: Occupation periods (OPs) in Tayma (Hausleiter and Eichmann 2018, Table 1)

Weigel 2019, 104.

Eichmann et al. 2011, 92; Eichmann, Schaudig, and Hausleiter 2006, 167.

"[…] individual behavioral decisions, which reflect more general cultural values, are embodied in the formation and use of built environment(Sanders 1990, 43)".

"…in order to compare dwellings with one another and to interpret their sociological significance, we have to solve a prior problem, that of identifying the elements and relations which make up the space pattern(Hanson 1998, 22)."

For an overview of the methods seeCarver 2009, 245-66.

Munday 1984, 32; Stadler 1985, 164-65.

"Phenotypes" and "genotypes" will be explained in detail in this chapter, Section 2.1.

Clarke 1977, chap. 4.

Clarke 1977, 11.

Clarke 1977, 11.

Clarke 1977, 14.

"[…] the terms and entities are merely summarising terms-of-convenience and may be altered at will in particular studies by further subdivisions or the choice of other specific scales and criteria. […] The scale of definition and resolution is a matter of choice for the purpose of the particular study in hand(Clarke 1977, 14)".

This can be seen in various case studies, such as:[START_REF] Keith | The Spatial Patterns of Everyday Life in Old Babylonian Neighborhoods[END_REF][START_REF] Rainville | Investigating Upper Mesopotamian Households Using Micro-Archaeological Techniques[END_REF]. Further theoretical framework on this subject was provided by[START_REF] Fletcher | Issues in the Analysis of Settlement Space[END_REF][START_REF] Carver | Archaeological Investigation[END_REF], to name a few.

Hillier et al. 1978b.

[START_REF] Foster | Analysis of Spatial Patterns in Buildings (Access Analysis) as an Insight into Social Structure: Examples from the Scottish Atlantic Iron Age[END_REF][START_REF] Cooper | Space Syntax Analysis of Chacoan Great Houses[END_REF][START_REF] Van Dyke | Space Syntax Analysis at the Chacoan Outlier of Guadalupe[END_REF][START_REF] Dawson | Space Syntax Analysis of Central Inuit Snow Houses[END_REF][START_REF] Kirsan | Detective Work with a Deficient Sample: Syntactic Analysis of the Houses of Conflict[END_REF][START_REF] Starzmann | Archäologie des Raumes: soziale Praxis und kulturelle Bedeutung am Beispiel der Wohnarchitektur von Fara[END_REF][START_REF] Benech | The Use of 'Space Syntax' for the Study of City Planning and Household from Geophysical Maps: The Case of Dura-Europos (Syria)[END_REF][START_REF] Stöger | Roman Ostia: Space Syntax and the Domestication of Space[END_REF][START_REF] Letesson | Du phénotype au génotype: Analyse de la syntaxe spatiale en architecture minoenne (MMIIIB-MRIB)[END_REF][START_REF] Wells | A Space Syntax Analysis of Dohack and Range Phase Villages in the American Bottom[END_REF][START_REF] Blanton | Houses and Households: A Comparative Study[END_REF]

Bafna 2003, 17; Al-Sayed 2014, 7.

See Glossary for a list of terms and calculations. There are various ways of abbreviating the single terms. For a consistent system of abbreviations, the author used the ones used in the software Agraph.

Definition of genotype and phenotype based onHillier and Hanson 2005, 42-45.

Sometimes "justified permeability graph/map", "(justified) access graph/map".

Hanson 1998, 24.

"Node" and "space" are often interchanged because the former represents the latter graphically.

Description based on Al-Sayed 2014, 12, 13; Hillier and Hanson 2005, 93.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 146.

Though the steps can also be applied to the axial map when required.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 109.

Hanson

1998, 243.

Van Dyke 1999, 466-67.

Hillier, Hanson, and Graham 1987, 364.

Ostwald 2011, 452.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 108.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 108.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 108.

Al-Sayed 2014, 13; Hillier and Hanson 2005, 108-9.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 113.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 113.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, Table 3.

Results for K = 3 and K = 4 are not very reliable.

Hanson 1998, 30-31.

"The graphical representation of dwellings is dimensionless. It does not distinguish between spaces of differing sizes, hallways of differing lengths, or sizes of courtyards(Blanton 1994, 30)." Also seeRatti 2004, 480; Osman and Suliman 1994, 196-98.

"[…] space syntax model suggests possibilities rather than provide a definitive tool to determine the function of a building(Cooper 1995, 281)".

Van Dyke 1999, 470.

Leach 1978, 400.

Ratti 2004, 492.

Hillier et al. 1978a, 403.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 108.

In Section 2.1.1 of this chapter.

For a detailed account of the history of GIS see[START_REF] Wheatley | Spatial Technology and Archaeology: The Archaeological Applications of GIS[END_REF][START_REF] Seibert | Introduction[END_REF]

Wheatley and Gillings 2002, 12-14.

Seibert 2006, xvii.

Darvill 2002, s. v. "space.".

Pfälzner defined how to analyse usable area and rooms(Pfälzner 2001, 60-61).

Analysing total area and usable area have been carried out in various other case studies that deal with architectural evidence, such asCastel 1992, XIII; Pfälzner 2001, 60-61.

Hillier and Hanson 2005, 150-54.

Henrickson 1981, 58, 79.

Pfälzner 2001, 24-38.

The collected information for the description of the residential area and, particularly, each building is based on the unpublished reports from the Joint Saudi-Arabian-German Archaeological Project(Hausleiter and Al-Najem 2005, 2006, 2007[START_REF] Stöger | Roman Ostia: Space Syntax and the Domestication of Space[END_REF], 2009, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015) and the articles published in the journal ATLAL[START_REF] Eichmann | Tayma -Autumn 2004 and Spring 2005, 2nd Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF][START_REF] Eichmann | Tayma -Autumn 2005 and 2006 (Spring and Autumn), 3rd Report on the Joint Saudi-Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF][START_REF] Eichmann | Tayma 2007 -4th Report on the Joint Saudi-Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF][START_REF] Hausleiter | Tayma 2008 -5th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF] Hausleiter et al. , 2018[START_REF] Hausleiter | Tayma 2011 -8th Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF]. Further details were collected from the field documentation, drawings, photos and the Tayma database (http://tayma.dainst.org/).

There is an article authored by Friedrich Weigel about Building E-b9, located in Area E-South/F (Weigel 2019).

The room was first identified as three distinct rooms (F-b1:R4, F-b1:R6 and F-b1:R7), but then identified as one (F-b1:R4=6=7). Henceforth the room will be indicated as F-b1:R4.

Since there is no evidence of division of space in the unexcavated area, it will be considered as one space for the purpose of the space syntax analysis.

Deep small rooms. SeePurschwitz [2009?], 20.

Charred hordeum and barley (TA 8615); Lab: Center for Applied Isotopes Study, University of Georgia, Athens (GA); Lab number: UGAMS 5542; date: 1730 ± 25 BP; 2σ range date: 245-385 calAD (95.4%); OxCal v4.1.7; June 2010. For more details seeTourtet and Weigel 2015, 395.

Date stone (TA 7745); Lab: Center for Applied Isotopes Study, University of Georgia, Athens (GA); Lab number: UGAMS 13428; date: 1620 ± 25 BP; 2σ range date: 389-535 calAD (95.4%); OxCal v4.2.2; May 2013.

Date stone (TA 11831); Lab: Center for Applied Isotopes Study, University of Georgia, Athens (GA); Lab number: UGAMS 30733; date: 2160 ± 20 BP; 2σ range date: 355-118 calBC (95.4%); OxCal v4.3.2; September 2017.

See "Graphic output and interpretation" in Chapter IV, Section 1.

See "Graphic output and interpretation" in Chapter IV, Section 2.

See "Graphic output and interpretation" in Chapter IV, Section 3.

This case study does not contain a room function analysis but works rather with the functions already interpreted by the archaeologist that excavated the residential area.

Note of caution: "functional differentiation" and not "room function". The former focuses on the fact that rooms have different functions while the latter focuses on the function itself.

Figure 205: Overlapping of all justified graphs per genotype (A, B.I, B.II, C), including variations for genotype B.I, B.II and C -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (visitor-inhabitant)

Figure 206: Overlapping of all justified graphs per genotype (A, B.I, B.II, C), including variations for genotype B.I, B.II and C -from often represented path (dark green) to little represented path (yellow) (inhabitant-inhabitant)

See Chapter IV, Section 2.2.

In this case the size is an estimation, since part has not been excavated.

Building E-b15 var. 2 would be more like the other buildings.

See Chapter IV, Section 2.3.

The correlation coefficient will always be 1.00 or -1.00, indicating maybe a false correlation.

See Chapter IV, Section 3.3.

See Tourtet and Weigel 2015;[START_REF] Eichmann | Tayma -Autumn 2004 and Spring 2005, 2nd Report on the Joint Saudi Arabian-German Archaeological Project[END_REF] Eichmann et al. , 131-32, 2011, 89-95;, 89-95; Hausleiter et al. 2019, 77-82. Furthermore, a PhD thesis in preparation by Francelin Tourtet at the Freie Universität Berlin: "Pottery at the oasis of Tayma (Kingdom of Saudi-Arabia): Chronological, typological and technological studies".

Building E-b9, OL 4: Weigel 2019; Building F-b12, OL 3, and Building F-b8, OL 2a and 2b: Kohl, unpublished BA thesis.

Figure 213: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 2(Nehmé 2011a, 42, fig. 13)

Figure 214: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 3(Nehmé 2011a, 43, fig. 14)

Figure 215: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 4(Nehmé 2011a, 44, fig. 15)

Figure 216: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 5(Nehmé 2011a, 45, fig. 16)

Figure 217: Mada'in Saleh. Area 1, Phase 6(Nehmé 2011a, 35, fig. 3)

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 10. More precisely, it is later than 9 BCE because of the discovery of a coin from the reign of Aretas IV(Nehmé 2011a, 52, 59).

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 294.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 289.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 289.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 289, 292.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 292.

Figure 220: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 2(Rohmer and Fiema 2016, fig. 11)

Figure 221: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 3(Nehmé 2011a, 73, fig. 31)

Figure 222: Mada'in Saleh. Area 2, Phase 4 (Nehmé 2011a, 75, fig. 34)

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 286.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 286.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 286.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 286.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Rohmer and Fiema 2016, 287.

Nehmé 2011a, 186.

Nehmé 2011a, 187.

Chapter VI takes up the research question presented in Chapter I, discussing if a crossperiod genotype could be identified or if each OL is represented by one genotype. This is based on the descriptions and space syntax analyses of all phenotypes of all OLs. Average RRA values and the difference factor H* play here an important role because they make it possible to quantify transpatial and transtemporal links. It remains to be seen if transpatial links can be applied to this case study, since it assumes that they are contemporary. If the hypothesis presented in the research question in Chapter I, where a cross-period phenomenon for the genotypes might be possible, turns out to be verified by the space syntax analysis, then the term transpatial cannot be applied. There would be a transtemporal link, which is transpatial by default.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 28 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b3, while the plan in Figure 29 visualises the last two values.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 46 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building E-b15, while the plan in Figure 47

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 58 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitorinhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 East, while the plan Figure 59 focuses on the last two.

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 61 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b1 West, while the plan in Figure 62 focuses on the last two.

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 West is composed of K=7 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 66).

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b1 West is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 69).

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b2 is composed of K=7 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 75).

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 79 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building F-b2, while the plan in Figure 80

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b7 is composed of K=9 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 95).

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b7 is composed of K=8 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 98).

Features and finds

F-b12:R2 was probably roofed, since there is evidence of beam holes on its west (SU 6285, Figure 104) and east (SU 6286) confining wall. The thick walls of the building lead to the hypothesis of a second storey to the building.

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building F-b12 is composed of K=8 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 105).

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified in the south-eastern corner, accessing the building from alley Fs-8 to F-b8:R3. This entrance is evidence by a threshold (SU 6297, UE 830.70 m a.s.l., Figure 139), a reused stone with grinding depressions. Doorways were identified between F-b8:R4

and F-b8:R3, between F-b8:R4 and F-b8:R2, and between F-b8:R3 and F-b8:R1.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in three rooms. In F-b8:R3, the trodden mud and stone floor SU 6294 at 829.30 m a.s.l. (east) to 829.76 m a.s.l. (northwest). In F-b8:R1, the trodden mud floor SU 6676 at 830.30 m a.s.l. In F-b8:R2, the trodden mud floor SU 6293 at 830.25 m a.s.l.

Additional data

Building F-b8 (Phase 1) was remodelled after OL 2b. The changes, along with the space syntax analysis, will be presented in Section 4.3 of this chapter concerning OL 2a under the same building name F-b8 (Phase 2).

Permeabilities

The entrance was identified in the south side, accessing the building from alley F-s8 to E-b7:R1, evidenced by a threshold (SU 4739, 830.95 m a.s.l.). Doorways were identified between E-b7:R1 and E-b7:R2. There is no division evidenced between E-b7:R1 and E-b7:R4, probably being a large open space. Further permeabilities can only be identified through absence of evidence, such as interruptions in walls between E-b7:R2 and E-b7:R3 and between E-b7:R2 and E-b7:R5.

Features and finds

Floors were identified in three rooms. In E-b7:R1, the mud floor SU 2646 at approx.

830.50 m a.s.l. on the west side. In E-b7:R4, the trodden mud floor SU 6677 at 830.21 m a.s.l.

In E-b7:R2, floor SU 7562 was identified at 830.67 m a.s.l. In E-b7:R3, the trodden floor SU 2416 at approx. 830.70 m a.s.l.

A date stone sample from floor SU 7567 was dated to 355-118 calBC with 14 Canalysis. 271 The older date might be an inclusion due to the long usage of the building, which has large parts reused from other OLs -Building E-b11 from OL 2b and Building E-b15 from OL 3.

Additional data

Building E-b7 was remodelled, as can be evidenced by the floor being raised in E-b7:R2, where first the mud floor SU 6804 was built and then the trodden floor SU 4742 at 830.82 m a.s.l. A casual hearth (SU 4743, 830.82 m a.s.l.) is located on top of floor SU 4742 on the east side of E-b7:R2.

Space syntax analysis

Visitor-inhabitant relationship

Micro level

Building E-b7 is composed of K=6 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the visitor-inhabitant relationship (Figure 149).

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 150 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the visitor-inhabitant relationship of Building E-b7, while the plan in Figure 151 visualises the last two values.

Inhabitant-inhabitant relationship

Macro level

Building E-b7 is composed of K=5 spaces, as can be seen in the justified graph of the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 152).

Graphic output and interpretation

The justified graph in Figure 153 shows the space types, CV and RA values for the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship of Building E-b7, while the plan in Figure 154 visualises the last two values. Nevertheless, these are average RRA values for each OL and some buildings decrease their mean RRA value in an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship (Figure 184). This is the case of Building F-b3 from OL 4, Building F-b1 East (both variations) and Building F-b12 from OL 3, Building F-b5 var. 1 from OL 2b and Phase 2 of Building F-b8 from OL 2a.

Figure 184: RRA values per OL and building with variations -Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (first phase: 2b, second phase: 2a) Periods

The next part will focus on movement patterns for a visitor-inhabitant relationship and an inhabitant-inhabitant relationship. For this the justified graphs will be considered. None of the buildings provide the means for a circulatory movement. As can be seen in each space syntax analysis of buildings in Chapter IV, none of the buildings' analysis included the The most connected rooms in a visitor-inhabitant relationship have a high or very high control since they have access to the most spaces (Figure 191, left). They are always B-type spaces, since they have at least two connections. Some of these rooms change in an inhabitantinhabitant relationship (Figure 191, right), especially the rooms that decrease their number of connections: they now have a higher segregation and a lower control than before; in one case it even becomes an A-type space, since it loses its position as most connected room if the second variation of the building is considered. 289 The rooms that still have the highest connectivity in the building always have a higher control than other spaces. They are also still B-type spaces. 289 Building E-b15 var. 2 (OL 3), R4. This would not be the case for Building E-b15 var. 1 (OL 3), R4. The spaces labelled as staircase are from a visitor-inhabitant perspective usually in a more integrated or more segregated position and have a high value of control (Figure 192, left).

Although the latter value it is very high, still it is much lower than differently labelled B-type spaces (such as the most connected or the largest rooms) and is more similar to the A-type spaces labelled as the exterior. All these transition spaces between the lower and upper floor are B-type spaces. The inhabitant-inhabitant perspective does not change on average both the analysed values (Figure 192, right). The spaces labelled as upper floor are from a visitor-inhabitant perspective usually in a more segregated or segregated position and have a low or high value of control (Figure 193Figure 192, left). The one high value of control must be interpreted with caution because it is the minimum value (1.000) to belong to that category and not the low control category. In all cases the upper floor is an A-type space. The segregation and lack of control increases in the inhabitant-inhabitant relationship, displaying the same characteristics as the spaces labelled exterior (Figure 193, right).

Area 1

Area 1 was excavated between 2008 and 2011. 317 Five of the six phases identified in the excavated area, Phase 2 to Phase 6, have comparable evidence, dating between the 2 nd /1 st c.

BCE and the 7 th c. CE (Table 91). 318

316 See reports: Nehmé, Al Thali, and Villeneuve 2010a; [START_REF] Dentzer | Report on the Second Season (2009) of the Madâ'in Sâlih Archaeological Project[END_REF]Nehmé, Al Thali, and Villeneuve 2010b;Nehmé 2011a[START_REF] Nehmé | Report on the Fifth Season (2014) of the Mada'in Salih Archaeological Project[END_REF]Nehmé , 2016aNehmé , 2016b[START_REF] Nehmé | [END_REF]Nehmé , 2018a. 317 . 317 See reports : Nehmé, Al Thali, and Villeneuve 2010a, 47-82;Nehmé, Villeneuve, and Al Thali 2011, 17-41;Nehmé, Al Thali, and Villeneuve 2010b, 19-46;Nehmé 2011a, 27-47. 318 Nehmé 2011a, 32-33.

CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION

The last chapter of this thesis is divided into three sections. The first section is a restatement of the research questions together with the main research findings. The second section contains an evaluation of the limitations encountered during research and the significance of the results. The third section suggests possible avenues for further research.

RESEARCH 1.Restatement of the research questions

The aim of this study was to gain a more in-depth understanding of the perception and conception of space in the residential area (Area E-South and Area F) at the oasis of Tayma during the Nabataean (OL 4), Roman (OL 3) and Late Antique (OL 2a and OL 2b) Periods 433 by carrying out a space syntax analysis of the architectural evidence. 434 The purpose of such an analysis was to provide the necessary means to perform a synchronic and diachronic analysis of the spatial configuration of the buildings from all three periods. The results of this analysis would then enable us to understand the configuration of the buildings themselves -phenotypes -as well as the underlying set of abstract rules they comply with -genotypes.

Regarding phenotypes, the focus in the study presented here was on two aspects of the spatial configuration, namely (a) the interaction between public and domestic space and access to buildings (visitor-inhabitant relationship), and (b) the movement through the buildings, through the individual rooms and their interaction (inhabitant-inhabitant relationship).

Regarding genotypes, the first step was to determine the set of rules that characterise them, after which they were compared in terms of continuity and variation. The "transtemporal" links (similarities with older or earlier genotypes) and transpatial links (similarities with contemporary buildings) could either be confirmed or not. The aim of defining these links was to gain an understanding as to whether genotypes evolved from or to 433 See Chapter I, Section 2 for the detailed research question. 434 See Chapter III, Section 2 and Section 5 for the space syntax analysis.