level in front of it to the S. Just where the front wall of this would have been is a matter for speculation. The turnup of U. 1, then, could have been to a rear-building wall, or to a “bench” such as was constructed in 29-1st-B. The latter appears most probable, since it looks as though destruction of the rear wall of 29-3rd took place when 1st-B was built. Given this, it seems likely that the rear of 2nd was built up from the rear of Str. 29-3rd.
STRUCTURE 7F-29-1ST-B
Construction of this structure (Fig. 2) may be divided into at least six construction stages on the basis of evidence from the axial trench, although it is possible that more were involved. Construction Stage 6 saw the almost complete demolition of the earlier Str. 7F-29-2nd. Along with this, the N portion of U. 2 was apparently torn down to its base surface where the wall of the new structure was to be built.
Following preparation of the site, the supplementary platform for 29-1st was built, probably as a single construction stage (CS. 5). Gray earth fill was dumped on the surviving surface of U. 2, and the front retaining wall was set down into that floor. Evidence for this intrusion consists of the stratigraphic relationship between U. 2 and the floor of Plat. 7F-1-2nd already discussed, as well as the presence of Imix sherds in the partially sealed sample from beneath U. 2 (Table 5.1 [see below]; LG. 1b). The only way to account for these sherds is by the intrusion of the wall for Str. 7F-29-1st-B (Fig. 3:3), for sealed samples from beneath U. 2 did not produce such sherds. To the N, where U. 2 had been destroyed, a battered wall was built. Composed of two rows of rectangular masonry against a rubble core, it sat on the old base surface (U. 6) for the structure represented by U. 2. An old retaining wall (U. 7), associated with U. 6, continued to serve with the new structure, which was set back 0.48 m from U. 7. Unit 4, a pause-line with some rubble to the S, marks the top of the fill for CS. 5.
The actual building platform was built as CS. 4. For this, single-course walls were assembled on the fill of the supplementary platform; 3.30 m N of its front wall, 1.64 m from its end walls, and 0.04 m S of the face of its back wall. As seen in Rm. 1, a fill of rubble was placed under what was to become the floor of the room, while earth was dumped N of this over U. 4. The pavement of the supplementary platform may have been laid up to the walls of the building platform at this time. It is more likely, however, that this floor was laid at a later time, when the interior was finished.
The next stage of construction (CS. 3) saw completion of the building walls, although probably not the roof. These walls were set back 2 to 4 cm from those of the building platform. They were constructed of thin rectangular masonry stretchers as facing on a core of rubble (Fig. 39a). Some of the corners were bonded, others were not. The original height of the walls is unknown. There was no sign of wall inserts near the entrances to Rm. 1, 4, or 5.
The roof of Str. 7F-29-1st had completely collapsed, but the amount of debris, and the presence of beveled stones, clearly proves that the building was vaulted. It is assumed that the vault was built before the interiors of the rooms were finished (CS. 2). The angle of the bevel of the vault stones averages 116 degrees. The back ends of the stones were tapered, so as to bond into the hearting of the vault. Roof collapse on the E end platform of Rm. 1 showed an intact vault spring of 0.10 m.
Construction Stage 1 saw completion of 29-1st-B. In the rear of Rm. 1, 4, and 5 (and probably Rm. 2 and 3), platforms were constructed on the fill of the building platform (Fig. 2). They were faced with vertically set rectangular masonry that abuts the room-end walls. A second course of like masonry was set horizontally above the first, so as to produce a cornice on the platforms in Rm. 1 and 4 (and probably 2). The fill of the interior platforms was covered by plaster surfaces, and plaster floors (Fl. 2) were laid in each room. These floors cover the masonry of the building platforms in the doorways, and turn up to the building walls and interior platform walls. A peculiarity of Fl. 2 in Rm. 5 is the presence of a round hole (Fig. 2:U. 8). Its regularity suggests that a post was set here, but for what reason it is hard to imagine. Unit 8 is located directly in front of the S end of the interior platform. It was probably also in the course of CS. 1 that the exposed top of the supplementary platform was surfaced.
STRUCTURE 7F-29-1ST-A
After a period of use, Str. 29-1st was extensively renovated. The exact sequence of events is not known, but an overall contemporaneity seems indicated. The supplementary platform was modified by the construction of a new front wall, 0.60 m S of the original front wall (Fig. 1 and 3:11). This new wall was based on Plat. 7F-1-2nd:Fl. 1, which was associated with Str. 7F-29-2nd. Whether an entirely new floor was laid on the exposed surface of the supplementary platform is not known. Evidence from the E end suggests that much of the original floor continued in use, with new floor surface added where necessary. In front of the doorway to Rm. 5 (Fig. 2:2), a single floor surface was found, with a plaster patch that turns up to an extension of the building platform (see below).
Room 1 was altered by the addition of two very high room-end interior platforms (Fig. 2:12,13). The walls for these were built directly on the original floors of the room and interior platform. A new floor (Fl. 1) was then laid. This turns up to the face of the old interior platform, the faces of the new platforms, and the building walls. The room-end platforms, like the earlier platform, were built with a cornice. The total length of the platforms is 0.32 m, less than the width of the room, with the added thickness of the front building wall.
In Rm. 4, a new floor (Fl. 1) was laid over Fl. 2, as in Rm. 1. A plastered masonry block (Fig. 2:U. 5) may have been placed on the surface of the interior platform at this time. The plastered face of the block was even with the cornice face of the platform. The E end of the block abuts the E wall of the room. The purpose of the block is unknown; perhaps the whole E end of the interior platform was raised.
The modification of Rm. 5 apparently commenced with the interment of Bu. 192 through Fl. 2 in front of the interior platform and against the S wall of the room. The end wall of the building platform was extended to the E by the addition of a new wall (Fig. 2:10). The surface of the supplementary platform was patched to turn up to this wall, and a new floor was laid inside the room (Fl. 1). This sealed Bu. 192 and turned up to the walls of the building and the interior platform. The U. 8 hole is also apparent in Fl. 1. Later, another hole was dug into the floor to receive PD. 166.
Structure 7F-30
Structure 7F-30 is the larger of two structures on the E side of the plaza area bounded on the N and S by Str. 7F-29 and 32. Coe and Broman in 1957 (TR. 2) investigated St. 23, which was reset in front of Str. 7F-30. Their excavations revealed four burials, one apparently initial relative to a later, small, terracelike feature that was added onto the front of Str. 7F-30. The structure, though, was substantially untouched by their work, which was focused on the stela. In 1963, Becker returned to investigate the structure itself. To do so, he began a deep trench through the apparent E-W axis, beginning where Coe and Broman left off in 1957. This work revealed a complex sequence of burials, caches, and problematical deposits associated with the initial construction and later renovations of 7F-30. The overall pattern suggested an elaborate version of a pattern seen elsewhere at Tikal: relatively formal burials associated with the construction or alteration of an apparently ritual structure, always positioned on the E edge of a plaza (TR. 21). Finally, in 1965, I dug two tunnels into the structure N and S of Becker’s trench, producing more burials, a cache, and further architectural data.
In spite of all this work, Str. 7F-30 is still difficult to interpret. All available information is from the deep trench, the N and S tunnels, and a trench through the axis of neighboring Str. 7F-31 (built over earlier architecture associated with Str. 7F-30). Hence, the full extent of various walls and floors is not certainly known. In addition, the correlation of walls and floors between trenches and tunnels is dependent on indirect evidence. The only remedy would be to excavate extensively Str. 7F-30, something that, in hindsight, should have been done. In 1963, Becker was merely seeking verification for his hypothesis that 7F-30 conformed to his “temple on the E” pattern (“Plaza Plan 2,” TR. 21). At that
