Çatalhöyük is a site famous for all the wrong reasons. It has been the centre of accusations of fraud (Mallett 1993) and the focus of new-age histrionics that may distract from the reasons they are included in the site’s interpretations (Türkcan 2007;
http://www.catalhoyuk.com/library/goddess.html). Nonetheless, it is an important site as it spans the transition to a pottery-using lifestyle and has produced some of the most
spectacular evidence for symbolic activity. The huge horizontal exposures allow for much concatenation and cross-referencing of data (Fig. 4.32). The earliest levels (before level XII) date to the very end of the Aceramic Neolithic, though the exposure is limited. The bulk of the occupation took place during the Ceramic Neolithic, with levels X-VI dating to the early ceramic Neolithic.
Figure 4.31: Çatalhöyük trenches. Figure 4.32: Density of construction in the northern part of the East mound. After Hodder 2012, Fig. 1 After Hodder 2012, Fig. 3
96
Düring (2006) separates the spaces found at Çatalhöyük into three types: mudbrick buildings, courtyards (or enclosed open areas), and unbounded open areas (Fig. 4.33). Buildings were likely grouped into neighbourhoods (Düring 2006: 159). Between the buildings, and often in the shell of an abandoned building, were middens for dumping rubbish or keeping animals. Buildings were rebuilt in the same place several times, perhaps due to a lack of stone for foundations, or perhaps due to symbolic identifying factors. The previous structure was dismantled, doors and ovens blocked up, closing deposits may have been placed, and then the walls were pushed in and filled to create a platform for the following structure. New walls were usually built directly atop the old, and party walls were few. Flat roofs were likely sealed by mud packed into branches which had been spread over beams. Buildings are created with one or more rooms, yet even some multiple-room buildings do not have an internal hearth. The majority of buildings are single roomed-structures with a fire installation and possibly one or two small anterooms. The compartmentalization of space was most common in “living rooms” (rooms with hearths). This delineation of spaces was achieved through raising and lowering different sections of a floor; through posts or pilasters; wall paintings; or benches. The northeast part of these rooms was usually raised the highest and kept the cleanest. This cognitive separation invokes ideas of purity. Ladders for entry were usually in south part of house, with the hearth (a kind of Neolithic trash can) underneath. Impurity entered and exited in the south. Posts were not likely structural, as they were rarely paired. Most often posts were found on the north or east side of a building, and low benches for display were almost always in the east.
This careful attention to cardinal direction is also visible in the evidence for symbolic activity in the placement of wall paintings, installations, and burials. Most wall paintings and fragment are geometric, but the figural ones are of course the famous ones. Some images are associated with certain structures or building levels, for example; vultures (and headless people) appear only in levels VIII and VII, while people in skins with weapons around animals are seen only in V, IV, and III. Wall paintings are most likely to be found on the north and east walls, which causes Last and Hodder (1998) to suggest that these paintings are associated with burials, though Düring disagrees (2006: 192).
Another type of evidence for symbolic activities is the installations and mouldings depicting and/or including parts of animals. The visible types are most commonly found in levels VII and VI, and include figural representation of animals (such as leopards in levels VII, VII and VI; or the splayed bear in levels VII and VI); moulded plaster heads of ruminants with or without horns; animal horns in pillars and benches (mostly found in the north east of levels VI and V); and curious features variably called “breasts” (Mellaart 1968) or “clay protrusions” (Düring 2005). These clay protrusions are usually found on the east wall (Russell and Meece 2005). An interesting hypothesis is that the clay protrusions had not been covered in plaster during the use-life of the buildings, and that they were covered over as a type of closing act (Düring 2006: 198). Invisible installations include caches, and objects pressed into plastered walls or thresholds.
97
Burials are typically found under house floors. There is some evidence for skull treatment, but the one plastered skull was found in a grave, and is likely a relic owned by the inhumed party.
The chipped stone is mostly obsidian, and a majority of knapping took place off site, as debitage is rare. Direct percussive techniques were used between levels XII-VII, but during level VI and after pressure flaking was employed. Common features of the assemblage are large oval arrowheads and daggers. Caches of obsidian blanks were frequently found in shallow pits in houses (Carter 2007).
Pottery was rare until level VI. When it did exist in the earlier levels it was tempered with vegetation, very thick, and unevenly fired. Figurines were made of both stone and baked clay. After level VI nearly all are female and clay. Some of the humanoid figurines had been intentionally decapitated. Animal figurines usually had their heads, but many showed signs of having been stabbed. In general, the animal figurines were less carefully made than humanoids. Most figurines were recovered from middens, and they were never found in graves. From the highest levels of the site come baked clay seals with both geometric and figural designs. Many kinds of personal ornaments were found in all levels.
Crop plants were domesticated at all levels, leading to the supposition that the settlers of the site had brought with them the seeds (Düring 2006: 227).
The most discussed issue that comes of the Çatalhöyük excavations is the role of interpretation (Hodder 1996; 1999). While this is interesting theoretically, the key issues that the results of excavations can inform include the effects of living with animals on early people, and the conceptualization of a house and its liminal spaces and the results on human social interaction. Other theoretical issues that may be profitable involve processes of hiding and revealing, re-use of human artefacts and the delineation of space into
neighbourhoods. 4.9 Conclusions
The introduction of the previous issues (geography in 4.2; palaeoclimate in 4.3; chronology in 4.4; households and settlement planning in 4.5; the role of animals in 4.6; mortuary practices in 4.7; and a more detailed description of key sites in 4.8) helped define the intellectual space I will occupy in relation to broader questions for the Neolithic of the Near East. These broader questions revolve around the role of ritual and religion in the developments of the Neolithic in the Near East. For example, in order to investigate the role of ritual in the shaping of households, the major issues and theoretical background to the study of households must first be fixed. Other questions involve the role ritual might have played in the appearance of new relationships with animals, or with the landscape; how social interactions are expressed through the location of ritual acts; how the materials used in certain rituals changed in accordance with geographical or chronological considerations; or even the relationship of communal or private ritual with the presence or types of on-site mortuary rituals. These broader issues concerning ritual will be addressed in chapter 6, now that my study has been situated within the context of previous studies. It was necessary to
98
highlight the background issues that informed the conditions under which ritual activity flourished in the early Neolithic in order to perform a contextual analysis (See chapter 5). The types of questions that can be asked of the data are broadened, and the possible relationships between types of structured depositions and contextual variables can be investigated with logical validity. How these questions will be asked is the topic of the following chapter.
99
Chapter 5: Methodology and Model