atalhyk in the Context of the Middle Eastern Neolithic

Author(s): Ian Hodder

Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 36 (2007), pp. 105-120
Published by: Annual Reviews
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25064947 .
Accessed: 05/12/2013 20:49
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of
Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

in the Context
Catalh?y?k
of theMiddle Eastern
Neolithic
Ian Hodder
Department of C?ilrural and Social Anthropology, StanfordUniversity, Stanford,
California 94305; email: ihodder@stanford.edu

Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2007. 36:105-20

First published online as a Review inAdvance on
May 24, 2007
The Annual Review ofAnthropologyisonline at
anthro.annualreviews.org
This article's doi:
10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094308
Copyright ? 2007 byAnnual Reviews.
All rights reserved
0084-6570/07/1021-0105$20.00

Key words
domestication,

sedentism,

memory,

history,

symbolism

Abstract
This

review

aims

central Turkey

to show

how

the new

to wider

contribute

results from Catalh?y?k

theories

about

the Neolithic

in
in

Anatolia and theMiddle East. I argue thatmany of the themes found

in symbolismand daily practice atCatalh?y?k occur very early in the
of village

and the domestication

of plants and
a social focus
the
These
themes
include
throughout
region.
on memory
a
on
focus
wild
construction;
animals, violence,
symbolic
and death; and a central dominant
to the
in relation
role for humans
processes

formation

animals

animal

world.

region

that we

These
can

occur

themes
claim

they

are

early

throughout
enough
to the
integral
development

the
of

settled lifeand the domestication of plants and animals. Particularly

the focus on time depth

suite of conditions,
that "selected

in house

along with

for" sedentism

sequences

may

environmental

have

and domestication.

io5

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

been

and ecological

part of the
factors,

INTRODUCTION
Asian

region ofTurkey,
although themain

focus here is on the

region from central
to southeastern

the Palaeolithic

and

theNeolithic.
with a

Associated
changed

lithic

more
technology and
intensive subsistence

strategies
Kebaran:
Epipalaeolthic
groups in the Levant
prior to theNatufian
include those with

material

culture

region in
the eastern

now

includes Israel,
Palestine, theWest
Bank, Syria, Jordan,
and Lebanon
Natufian:

so

were

at

prominent

throughout the region have pushed back the

of early

dates

life and have

settled

is diverse?for

the process

between

that

the dif
and

sequence

are marked.

Turkey

understanding
as a result
changed

shown

example,

the Levantine

our

How

of Catalh?y?k
has
of new excavations

startedbyHodder in 1993 (Baiter 2005; Durai

2007; Hodder 1996, 2000, 2005a,b,c, 2006,
For

2007).

it is clear

example,

that the sym

bolism atCatalh?y?k ispart of domestic cults

and

is only
imagery
set in which mother

that female

of a diverse

cultural

(see for ex

Catalh?y?k

ample Cauvin 1994).

Since the 1960s, our understanding of the
Neolithic of theMiddle East has changed
substantially. In particular, new finds from

also

that

of the

Middle East
symbolismof theNeolithic of the
has been interpretedin termsof the bull and
mother goddess themes that
Mellaart thought

ever,

Levant:

paint

complex

and sculptures. Much

that in southeastern

incorporating
microlithic
tools

Mediterranean

shrines with

ings, installations,

ferences

assemblages

because

impact

1976) reconstruc

(1967; Todd

of elaborate

tions

a wide

site also had

The

ofMellaart's

Epipalaeolithic:
time period between

first exca

a small

part

and goddess

group that has

distinctive material

characteristics

culture, lasts from

approximately 12500

the new resultsfrom Catalh?y?k fit into or

challenge wider theories about theNeolithic

to 10000 Be, and is

associated with
predomesticated
cultivation

cultural

group found in the

Levant from -10000
to 8700 cal Be

main

are hard
focus

to find.
is on how

of this review

inAnatolia and theMiddle East. Catalh?y?k,

dated to 7400-6000 bc (Cessford 2005; all
here

are calibrated),

the first

after

Neolithic A
(PPNA):

The

dates

Pre-Pottery

occurs

long time

settlements

sedentary

in the

Middle East (which emerge in the period be

tween the twelfth and ninth millennia bc)
and well after the first domesticated plants
(in the ninth millennium bc but see below
for

the debate

antine

sequence,

about

the dates).

described

below,

The

Lev
involves

Epipalaeolithic groups such as theKebaran

andNatufian (the latterfrom approximately

io6

hunting,

and

gathering,

of

cultivation

wild plants; followed by thePre-PotteryNe

vated by JamesMellaart between 1961 and
olithic A (PPNA) from 10,000 to 8700 bc
1965.At thattime themain impactof the site
and Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) from
was to show that
existed
early settled villages
8700 to 6800; followed by the Pre-Pottery
outside the Fertile Crescent of theMiddle
Neolithic C (PPNC) and PotteryNeolithic
East.

Turkey

was

in central
Turkey

Catalh?y?k

Anatolia:

12,500 Be to 10,000 bc) with increasingly in

tensive

of
character
of the polycentric
of sedentism
and domestication

Because

(PN).

the processes

(Gebel 2004) throughout theMiddle Eastern

and

the Anatolian

these

terms

the Lev

outside

sequences

terms have

ant, and other

to use

it is incorrect

region,

and

been

for

proposed

Anatolia (e.g.,Ozba?aran & Buitenhuis 2002).

the Levantine

However,

is best un

sequence

derstood and documented and provides a

benchmark
As

for the sequences

comparatively

antine

sequence

consensus

well

about

there

be,

may

elsewhere.
as the Lev

known

the causes

remains

little

of the emergence

of sedentism in agglomerated villages and the

domestication

of plants

and

animals.

Despite

the late date of Catalh?y?k, the detailed ev

idence

and

the long-term

at the site

projects

allow insight into the character of prepottery

and earlypottery agglomerated settlement in
the region. The

site has remarkably

dense

set

dement (3500 to 8000 people in 13.5 ha) and

was occupied fora longperiod.The Neolithic
East mound is 21m high, has 18 levelsofoccu
pation, and lasts 1400 years before settlement
on the other
to the West
relocated
Mound

side of the river (the?ar?amba ?ay in theflat

Konya Plain) during the earlyChalcolithic in
the early sixthmillennium bc.The Neolithic
economy

was

based

on a wide

of domes

range

ticated and wild plants (Fairbairn et al. 2005,

Hastorf 2005) and based only partiallyon do
mesticated

animals

(sheep

and

goat?cattle

and pig were not domesticated through the

main Neolithic

sequence

to Russell

according

& Martin 2005). Catalh?y?k can thusprovide

some insight into theways inwhich people

lived in th?se earlyvillages.

Early theories of agricultural origins in
theMiddle East were based on single envi

ronmental,
causes. The

climatic,
last glacial

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

population

maximum

density
at

occurred

24,000 to 18,000 years ago when the region

was

cold

warmer

to
dry. The
gradual
change
and wetter
conditions
after this time
and

suffered a setback in the Younger Dryas

(11,500 to 10,000 bc) during the second half
of theNatufian. Bar-Yosef (2001) is among
that see the Younger

many

leading to intensificationand then to PPNA

and the first agriculture.One limitation of
the

climatic

is that

argument

now

scholars

indicate that sustained domestication of

plants did not occur at the end of theYounger

Dryas in the PPNA but considerably later

in the PPNB (Colledge et al. 2004, Nesbitt
2002,Willcox 2002).
causes

to
of change have tended
recent decades
theories
during
by
on social factors such as
prestige

External
be balanced
that focus

exchange (Bender 1978), feasting (Hayden

1990), and symbolism (Cauvin 1994). So
cial factorsmay have provided the driving
forces behind sedentism and intensification.
Although evidence from theNatufian on
of large-scale
communal
building works,
areas used
and of open
for roasting
pits, is
evidence
the
widespread,
region
throughout
and period
of marked
social ranking,
except
ward

at Cay?n? in southeasternTurkey, is lacking

(?zdogan & ?zdogan 1990).
recent

Certainly

finds

that initial

great

clarity
to ritual.

tied

have

shown

sedentism

was

with

closely
been

have

may
Landscapes
at ritual centers to which peo
together
came
ex
for initiation,
ple
feasting, burial,
etc. (Schmidt
In
fact
2000).
change, marriage,
several of the early sites seem to have been
ritual centers, whatever
other functions
they
In
had.
north
have
and south
may
Syria
drawn

east

at

Turkey,

sites

such

as Tell

'Abr

3,

Jerf el Ahmar, and G?bekli, one finds large

PPNA buildings, circular and semisubter
have

which

ranean,

been

generally

accepted

as communal ritual buildings.Those atTell

'Abr 3 are 7-12 m in diameter (Yartah 2005).

The

internal furnishingsof these communal

buildings

are

certainly

elaborate,

but we

need

to avoid getting caught in a possibly inappro

priate

opposition

of ritual versus

domestic.

lar walls.

At

in turn was

This

stone

lined with

slabs polished and decorated with wild ani

mals.

Bucrania

skulls) were

(cattle

deposited

in a bench. But in another building,Ml,

hearth was

conditions

Dryas

Tell 'Abr 3, building B2 was dug 1.55m into

virgin soil and had a bench within its circu

limestone

and on the floor were

found,
basins

as well

and bowls

as

found

grinding

stones (Yartah 2005).

Jerf

are

el Ahmar

not

elaborate

cultural
(PPNB):
group found in the
Levant from 8700 to
6800 cal bc
PN:

Indeed,Yartah (2005) argues that the large

earlyPPNA communal buildings atMureybet
and

Pre-Pottery

Neolithic B

Pottery
Neolithic

ritu

ally and symbolicallyandwere probably used

for stockage

and multiple

functions.

at

But

the end of PPNA Yartah suggests that there

is less

much

evidence

of economic

decoration

Ahmar, Tell

and

ings, their communal

remain

ual nature,

tices

and

at Jerf el

ritual?e.g.,

'Abr 3, and probably G?bekli.

the interpretations

However,

accounts

functions

of these

until

problematic

of floor

residues

are available.

The

and

build

versus

and domestic

discard

prac
on

work

forensic

rit

detailed

the

floors atCatalh?y?k shows thatfloors can be

carefully

and abandoned

cleaned

that mi

and

can be discerned

of activities

croresidues

only

with careful analysis.This work showed that

the

at

"shrines"

supposed

were

Catalh?y?k

actually used as domestic houses (Bull et al.

2005, Matthews
Even
gathering

et al. 2005).

2005, Middleton

if, as seems
was

an

processes

that

sue of
why

people

likely,

important

created

and

social

component

permanent

ritual
of the

sedentary

gatherings of people, we are leftwith the is

larger-scale

more
elaborate
and
adopted
and ritual practices,
includ
and erection of large mono

social

ing the fashioning

liths and semisubterranean

and all the investments
large-scale

feasting

circular

structures,

of labor necessary

and

ritual.

for

Disadvantages

of economic intensificationand of collective

livinginone spot can be cited:hardwork (seen
in stress markers
of resources,

on

and depletion
etc. (Larsen
disease,

skeletons)

sanitation,

1995). So bywhich process did people submit

themselves

to greater work

and

intensification

to achieve thebenefitsof social and ritualelab

oration and sedentaryvillage life?
www.annualreviews.org

Catalh?y?k

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

107

authors

Many

cial relations

have

scholars

(e.g.,

Ingold

that in hunter-gatherer
are col
of production

argue

the means

societies,

so

the

1972, Sahlins 1972). In

1999,Meillassoux
general

summarized

of hunter-gatherers

achieved
groups
lectively owned,
reciprocal
to the resources
of
other bands by ask
rights
and studies show a lack of ac
ing permission,
cumulation
being

of personal
a

only

with

wealth,

storage
for sea

for preparing

technique

sonal shortfalls.Ingold (1999) discusses the

notion

of "collective

access"

so

and

(p. 401),

before
domesticated
and
places well
plants
animals
Intensive
and
emerged.
collecting
return systems
involved
early farming
delayed

(Woodburn 1980). But fordelayed returnsys

tems to be viable ("selected for"), given the

harder
had

and

work

restrictions

to be wider

also

of these was

there

involved,

structural

One

changes.

sense of
temporal

greater

depth,

history, and memory. Temporal depth is the

main focusof thisreview,but I brieflyconsider
two other regional conditions of possibility
for sedentism

and

the emergence

of farming.

cial relations are immediate (Woodburn 1980) These possibilities include a symbolic focus
in that there is a lack of temporal depth in on wild animals, violence, and death and a cen
the relations between self and other (Ingold
Formal

1999).

so

that structure

institutions

cial rules and regulations (p. 406) are relatively

lacking.People trustgood hunters, but they
trust the hunters

not

to reduce

auton

their

a person
leader cannot
under
place
or
because
this action
obligation
compulsion
is a betrayal of trust.
so
Such descriptions
of hunter-gatherer
omy. A

ciety are difficult to apply to societies in

the millennia

that approach

tion

and

of plants

labor

social

An

of the Kebaran

relations

could

scribed as immediate.
We

of

inten

de

find littleevidence
to tide

for storage beyond

that needed
season
to season,
and accumulation

from

over
of

personal wealth is limited rightup into the

PPNB. But there isundoubtedly an increased
focus on temporaldepth.As people depended
more

on

extraction
needed

and

things,
and
to

on

intensive

resource

cultivation,

have

on

they would
to
others
provide

ob

to construct

ob

depend

jects (in exchange), to tend objects (fieldsand

animals,

houses

and boats),

jects (houses), to discard objects (organizing

refuse
One

in dense

and discard
of

the

conditions

villages),
that made

changed

to time

than immediate
societies

and

in the

and history.

short-term

region

agri

Rather

relationships,
a
strong

developed

sense of temporal depth tied to specific

io8

REPETITIVE PRACTICES IN
THE HOUSE AND MEMORY
CONSTRUCTION
One

the main

of

results

the new

from

ex

cavations at Catalh?y?k is that the buildings

Mellaart

saw as static

(1967)

are now

entities

as

the by-products
of continu
ous processes.
new
The
has docu
project
mented
the extraordinary
of plas
sequences
floors,

and

walls,

These

relief

sculptures.

and yearly replasterings

often occurred
residues

monthly
their associated

with
to

up

450 times inhouses that lasted 70 to 100years.

A

was

house

place.

The

soil,

and

then often
old

house

same

in the

rebuilt

was

often

dismanded,

carefullyandwith much careful cleaning and

placing of objects, and filled in with clean
of

the new

house

the walls

was

on

built

the

the previous
house.
In some places we have up to 6 rebuildings
in the same place. The
of the or
repetition
stumps

of

dering of social space within these building

sequences

is remarkable

hypothesis

East was a

culture possible in theMiddle

relation

etc.

to

in relation

for humans

the animal world.

ters on

and Natufian,

be decreasingly

role

understood

investment

the more

accompanied

already
sive economies
and

animals.

the domestica

tral dominant

least

partly

that

social

through

and
life was

the

has

led

to the
at

organized

routines

and

prac

tices of domestic socialization (Hodder 2006,

Hodder & Cessford 2004). Embedded within
a complex symbolicworld, the daily activities
within

houses

formed

world.

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and reformed

the social

As well

as

in practices

continuities

these

and functions in houses at Catalh?y?k, one

findsvery specifichouse-based continuities in
the art and symbolism (During 2006,Hodder
Mellaart
2006). For example, thebuilding that
called VT.8 had VII.8 below it, and in both
cases

found

investigators

horizontal rows.VIII.8
scenes.

vulture

But

in

hands

stylized

andVtl.8 both had

perhaps

the best

example

was the repetition of the paired leopards in

VH.44 andVI.44. An individual leopard and
rather stylizedfighting leopardswere found
in two other buildings (VIII.27 and VI.80),

but these differedfrom the distinct pairings

in building 44 inLevels VII andVI.
Although some evidence shows feasting
and prestige exchange atCatalh?y?k, thebulk
suggests that status and power
based on the control of people
units.
their socialization
within domestic

of the evidence
were
and

very much

But how widely applicable is this view that

socialization throughdaily routines inhouses
mech
(Watkins 2004,2006) was an important
anism

for creating and maintaining

and access to resources?
tionships

social

rela
article

This

looks at how similar interpretations

might be
relevantelsewhere (Nadel 2006), even though
the preservation
of detailed
activity sequences
not as
as at
is
usually
good
Catalh?y?k.
at
Some
evidence
also
indi
Catalh?y?k
cates

of burying

practice

the dead

beneath

the floors of houses and then digging up

and recirculating

selected

human

heads

before

ties (Cutting 2005). Although plastered skulls

have long been recognized in theNeolithic
of the Levant,

power everywhere was based

of history and links to the past?
could
that the repetition
of
argue
in the same place
results from
the

that social

argue
We
houses

and

crowding

evidence

and animal
and
their use
heads
sculptures
in later houses
in houses. A
and installations

good case can bemade (Hodder 2006,Hodder

& Cessford 2004) thatthehouses thatinvested
more

in the construction
in these ways

ories
and

ritually
to have more

of long-term
also more

were

successful.
burials

These
and

houses
to be more

not

have

larger
more

than other
storage

houses,
or

and

productive

in function

can

neither

the dig

ging down and retrievalof earlier skulls and

In

sculptures.
tion

case we

any

sites occurs

of house

short-term

relatively

see

very

that

settlements.

repeti
in small,

early

Certainly,

by the time of the PPNA and PPNB the

decreased residentialmobility and intensity
of habitation

would

have

greater

produced

site organization

internal

(N.B.

&

Goodale

I. Kuijt, circulatedmanuscript, 2006; Nadel

even

But

1998).
ments

in
settle
densely
occupied
can be taken in
of strategies
houses
above, by, or near older

a number
new

locating

houses (Tringham2000). Rather, it seems that

the repetition

of houses

and

of house-based

memories

were

cesses

that played

tism,

long-term

agglomerated
Of course,
early

a part

in

duration

the construction
formative

pro

seden
producing
in one
and
place,

settlement.

repetitive
in the Palaeolithic.
uses

seasonal

that certain
as cave

practices
These

took place
re

involved

in such
of the landscape
that provided
shel

sites

sites, were

to over

returned

long periods of time. For example,Ksar Akil

inLebanon has 23 m of deposit covering the

period from theMiddle Palaeolithic through

theUpper Palaeolithic to theKebaran Epi
Palaeolithic.

In

the upper

there was

levels

mem

a "fine and complex stratigraphy"(Bergman

socially

1987, p. 3). Kebara

tended
elab

orate in terms of internal fixtures (During

2006, Hodder 2006). The "ancestralhouses"
are not

in this way;

be explained

ter, such

Some

settlements.

continuities

and art just alluded to at Catalh?y?k cannot

and

deposits.

of

permanence

the specific

However,

thefinal burial of these heads in foundation

abandonment

the type

indicate

on the control

peated
a way

demonstrates the digging up of early relief

evidence

does

of recirculation seen at Catalh?y?k? Can we

they do
facili

cave also has

deposits

span

Middle Palaeolithic andNatufian pe

ning the
or
from ~60,000 to 10,000 bc. The
riods,

Middle
use

Palaeolithic deposits show repeated

of part

of the cave

inner part of the cave was

for hearths,
used

as a

while
dump

an
area

(Goldberg 2001). The hearth area has deep

www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

109

deposits of overlappinghearths, each ofwhich

from

results

several

et al.

(Meignen

hearths

phase

itive use
similar

episodes

2000,

indicate

14). These

p.

in the absence

multi

In

(p. 15), and

depression
found in other
sites in

are

theMiddle East. Many fire installationswere

vertically superimposed (p. 16) atKebara, but
the placing
Rather

of these

was

hearths

investigators

not

a zone

found

exact.

in the cave

where, over a long period of time, people

made hearths.Each hearth involved refirings,
but

the hearths

used

generally

A part of the cave was

of overlaps.

palimpsest

a vertical

created

themselves

for hearths,

but

investigators

did not find specificbackward reference.

The Kebaran in the Levant has lowland
sites

aggregation
land

of

camps
been

have

dispersal.
but

a-year

or

25-50

and up
people
and
there
may
people,
and
cycles of aggregation

14?17

seasonal
Little

vated,

of

architecture

evidence
even

has
a

shows

exca

been

possible

occupation

year-long

had

three successive
as a

floors
stone

probable

and erect

(2006)
of place.

tinuity
ably

occurred

a clear

suggests
Burial

beneath

as

con

sedentism.

zones

and Syria,

and

of Israel,
sites

related

are found to thenorth inMureybet and Abu

The
Hureyra.
time as the
ration.

In

starts at the same

later Natufian

deterio

climatic

Younger

Dryas
in the

the Levant

later Natufian,

many but not all hamlets dispersed and be

came more

mobile

the Taurus

in southeastern

cent areas,

in

But

2001).

(Bar-Yosef

and

Turkey
adja
to the
Younger
Dryas
at sites such
sedentism

the response
been

have

may

greater

asHallan ?emi (Bar-Yosef 2004).

noted

Investigators

both

base

and

camps

sites in the Natufian.

intermittent

sites, there

is little evidence

for example,

at Hatula

levels of habitation

inNatu

practices,

and Beidha (Byrd 1989,Ronen & Lechevallier

1991). Even in substantialNatufian siteswe
find little evidence of structured repetition.
Valla (1991) notes that it is often difficultto
follow
fian

coherent
and

sites,

solute

at Kharaneh

in the Kebaran

indicate

in the hill

Lebanon,

Jordan,

Kenyon

prob

has

mouse)

occur

In the short-term

on

floors

as the house

(such

Settlements

of repetitive

under

focus

'AinMallaha

in the

them (Nadel 2006). The mud floorswere cov

eredwith rich artifactdebris, probably in situ.
Nadel

sedentism.

occupation.
some
of
degree
animals and birds

from all seasons (Valla 1991), and commensals

twice

stones

arrangement

of permanent
we
see

the Natufian

short-term

earlyKebaran atOhalo II about 21,500 years

ago (Nadel 1990).The largesthut atOhalo II
well

some
refer
clearly indicates
specific backward
ence in the location of a house
structure, even

of repet

long periods

in the same
processes

of combustion

it is difficult

to show

contemporaneity
1981, Moore

of buildings
et al. 2000).

in the

early Natufian

However,

the ab
(see also
site

of

IV and Ein Gev (Valla 1991). At Ein Gev 1 Wadi Hammeh 2 7 in the centralJordanvalley
in the JordanValley in Israel investigators there is "a continuity in spatial arrangement
a fourteenrh-millennium-BC

found
site on

the eastern

of

Kebaran

side of the Sea

of Galilee

(Arensburg & Bar-Yosef 1973). A hut was

found dug into the slope of a hill. "The hut
was periodically occupied as indicated by six
successive

layers which

accumulated

within

it"

(Arensburg& Bar-Yosef 1973, p. 201). Each

layerhad a floor 5-7 m in diameter littered
with
layer
floors

artifacts
that

included

clearly

of the middle
does

not

and bones,

repeat

each

floors

a grave was

indicate

by

In

artifacts.

specific
ture or artifact
placements,

no

covered

other,

sandy
the

section,
and from

one

cut. Evidence

repetitions
but

of fea

this example

constructed

features

successive

through

phases" (Edwards 1991, p. 125).The earliest

of Natufian

evidence

at

occupation

Hayonim

Cave isGrave XIII "whichwas covered by the

floor of Locus
tures with

is, by one of the struc

stone walls
(Bar-Yosef

3"?that

undressed

1991, p. 86). At 'AinMallaha we definitely

find
cient
ceeded

of houses.

superpositioning
level"
each

131,

houses,
other

on

51,

In the "an

and

the same

62-73
spot

suc
(Perrot

1966). And in the "recent level" houses we

find another

sequence

of houses

dug

into each

other (houses 26, 45, and 22). In the Final

Natufian atMallaha, eachmajor building had

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

a succession
no

with

one

of floors,

sterile

on

layers between

top of another,
(i.e., no aban

donment fill) (N. Samuelian,H. Khalaily, ER.

circulated

Valla,

important evidence for

construction

memory

and reuse

lation,

2003).

manuscript,

At Catalh?y?k

is the removal,

of human

skulls. By

circu
the end

ten oval

and

with

semisubterranean,

inter

nal hearths

and plaster floors. As in northern

were
mounds
often long-lived.
Jerf el
Syria,

Ahmar had at least 10 building levels com

prising~800 years of setdement (Akkermans
2004, p. 287). PPNA and related siteswere
also

more

often much

than most

structured

Natufian sites.Nadel (1998, p. 9) has noted

of thehuman skullafterdeath, although in the that "inNatufian and other Epipalaeolithic
of theNatufian

of evidence

absence

indicates

evidence

the removal

for circulation

and reuse,

thisdoes not by itselfindicatethe construction

links to ancestors.

of historical
have

may

had other
etc. Skeletons

ination,

atMallaha,

houses

Skull

div

but

the stratigraphical

po

the

sitioning is oftenunclear inValla (1991). Ac

cording to the reanalysisby Boyd (1995) the

131-51-62-73 sequence of buildings started

with 12 skeletons beneath the floor of 131.
He

in the same

tivity

to the
continuity

attention

draws

place

of ac
a set of

starting with

At Catalh?y?k thefocuson repetitiveprac

tices

in the house

tion

is associated

abandonment

and on memory
with

careful

practices,

construc

and

the place

including

ment of objects and thefillingof houses with

clean

earth before

For
rebuilding.
and
memory
depth

which

societies

in

construc

temporal
are
important, ending and starting build
are
to be
sur
events
ings
likely
significant
in ritual. Did
rounded
such practices
already
occur
in the Natufian?
In the ruins of one

tion

atMallaha

house

found

investigators

several

boar heads (Valla 1991),which could indicate

ritualized

abandonment

In what

processes.

he

calledAbri 26 atMallaha, Perrot (1966) found

a child
doned

and

skeleton
floor.

on

necklace

Complete

basalt

the aban

artifacts

were

found discarded or cached on interiorfloors

atWadi Hammeh 27 (Edwards 1991), but it
were

is not clear whether

in a context

they
of use or whether

In the PPNA
were

just abandoned
this act was rit

in some way.

ualized

0.2

in the Levant, settlements

to 2.5 hectares

in size

and

are

thus

3 to 8 times larger than the largestNatufian

sites

(Bar-Yosef

2001).

The

houses

were

locus...

in PPNA

However,

between

from
assemblages
loci at a site." N.B.
Goodale

of

cases,

contemporaneous
&

I. Kuijt

(circu

latedmanuscript, 2006) have noted a similar

that sites are formed,

shift in the way

as a result

of theirwork at 'Iraq ed-Dubb inJordan.Here

a late Natufian

of space

non
fairly
to a more

"had

occupation

use

delineated

compared

delineated use of space during thePPNA."

use

see much

of the same

more
space

evidence
or house

of repeated
in the PPNA

the region.
Qermez
throughout
northern
evidence
Iraq has good

elaborate

of

range

it is common to find typological differences

We

burials.

to find the entire

typological variability in each site, and even

in each

removal

such as healing,
were found within

roles

it is common

sites,

in

Dere
of rebuild

ing in the same place (Watkins 2004, 2006).

In Phase II atMureybet on theMiddle Eu

found round houses

that
phrates
investigators
were
on an
house
superimposed
Epi-Natufian
en maisons
xxxvii. "Trois niveaux
d'habitation
se superposent

rondes
son

xxxvii

festement
d'habitat

de
de

IB.

la reutilization

en continuit?

?pinatoufienne"

? la mai

directement

la phase

Il

s'agit
du m?me

mani
espace

avec

directe

la p?riode
1979, p. 26). In part

(Cauvin

of the site theyfoundfive levelsof occupation

in this
phase.

At Jericho inTrench DII Kenyon (1981)

found a huge amount of very repetitive
surfaces

to

between

adjacent
the tower

closures.

It is inside

the

and

tower

in PPNA?
circular

adjacent

the setdement

en

that one

seesmost residential continuityinPPNA and

PPNB deposits, although,on thewhole, walls
were

cut down

In PPNA
were

further

than

at

Catalh?y?k.

in Squares El, EII, and EV there

24 main

there Kenyon

cases
In most
building
phases.
saw
only 2-4 floors for each

www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

in

building phase. "Some of the houses lasted

several

through

but usually

phases,

with

re

buildings almost from the base of thewalls.

with most

Associated
a

succession

long

of the phases

of surfaces,

areas

the courtyard

was

in

particularly
build

ings" (Kenyon 1981, p. 269).

The greaterdelineation of space inPPNA
sites has

been

already
to abandonment

and

can find more

One

and

noted

foundation

found
plan

processes.

(Hardy-Smith& Edwards 2004, Rosenberg &

Redding 2000;N.B. Goodale & I.Kuijt, circu
latedmanuscript, 2006). In PPNA at Jericho
in trenchesEl, EII, andEV Kenyon foundone
buildingwith a central stone linedpost socket
under which was an infantburial (Kenyon
1981), which

may

a foundation

represent

de

in PPNA in phase xlii

posit. In Square Ml
in house MM the clay floor had a founda
tion

stones.

of cobble

sealed

by

temporary

the clay floor,

with

in the cobbles,

"Set

and

therefore

the construction

but
con

of the build

ing,were two burials" (Kenyon 1981, p. 232).

Skull

removal

in the PPNA

occurred

also

(Bar-Yosef 2001). At Jerfel Ahmar in north

ern Syria, in Village 1/east there Stordeur
a sunken

found

building

with

wooden

posts

to hold up the roof.At the bottom of one of

these

"two

posts

human

skulls were

found"

(Stordeur 2000, p. 1).These findingsbegin to

suggest the specificuse of skulls to build his
tories inhouses, although theuse of skulls in
thisway may have been simplyprotective or
Yet

magical.

the use

suggests

that links to the

past and past individualswere of increasing

salience.

in the Levant,
Turning
'AinGhazal has frequent floor replasterings

(Banning 2003), but perhaps thebest evidence

is from

the extensive

excavations

and

sound

ingsatJericho.As inPPNA, walls are built on

walls

and

are

floors

repeated

inside

houses.

So inEl, EII, and EV, inphase xlvii "the lev

els in the northern

room

of the eastern

range

[of rooms] were gradually raised by a series

112

The

buildings.

these;

levels

sug

areas

courtyard
had

courtyards

in these

alter

she did not

but

areas,
we

therefore,

location

cannot

determine

was

of hearths

in

repetitive

areas.

outside

In Jordan at PPNB Beidha, "the inhabi

tants were

in their sit

conservative

extremely

ing of the differentelements of the village"

(Kirkbride 1966, p. 14). In one building at
Beidha the total thicknessof themultiple plas
ter

was

layers

more

than

5.5

and

cm,

paral

lelswere drawn with Catalh?y?k (p. 18). At

con
2 "each house was
Abu Hureyra
usually
structed on the remains of an earlier one, and

the formof thatbuilding largelydetermined

of its successor"

the plan

p. 262). The

rooms

nine

(p.

et al. 2000,

(Moore

of the ruined

were

house

filled in and the stubs of thewalls cut down.

"The houses inTrench E were rebuilt four,
and the houses inTrench B no fewer than
at

times"
least

2-3

wash

times,
also

had mud

refreshed

life. "The
place
series

B.

houses"

"We

conclude

of a new

builders
only

the plan

rangements

often

house
but

to

up

10

or white

plaster

a room's
during
set in the same

(p. 265), e.g., the

in
of phases
2-7

in houses

of hearths

Trench

not

were

in successive

renewed

sometimes

times

several

hearths

were

Floors

266).
and

times. Walls

from

this that the

often

remembered

also

of its predecessor,

the

internal

ar

and considered

itappropriate to replicate both" (p. 265). "We

know,

to the PPNB

in the outside,

hearths

whether

and
practices, with separate middens
on abandonment
out of houses
cleaning

floor

nating layersof clay ormud floors and spreads

of charcoal (Kenyon 1981, p. 294). Kenyon

agement
more

was

between

is relevant

of refuse man

evidence

numerous

The

gest a prolonged period ofuse" (Kenyon 1981,

p. 295). But the best evidence for repeated
surfaces

usually

the various

linking

of floors?

too,

selves were
of the earlier

that in some

instances

of the inhabitants

the descendants
structures"

they them
some

(p. 266) because

distinctive skeletal and dental traits that are

probably genetically transmittedwere identi
fied inhouse burials.
In
seems
dence
tween

at
Cay?n?
Turkey
more
to be much
sight

southeastern
at first

of conformity

within

phases

because

houses

changed

phases

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

there
evi

than be
in form

from round to grill to channeled to pebble

to cell

paved

to

room. We

large

see

a strik

ing homogeneity of building types in each

building layer (Ozdogan & Ozdogan 1990,
of a
indicate more
p. 72). Thus
investigators
on verti
focus on horizontal
than
similarity
even here
cal continuity. However,
Ozdogan

& Ozdogan (1990, p. 73) argue that "in ev

ery building layer, the foundations of the
new building are always direcdy on top of
the

one,

preceding

its stones."

reusing

without

disturbing
are men
buildings

Several

or

ciated with death, is found as part of aban

donment practices (Verhoeven 1999, 2000,
2002). Heads tend to be found in groups in
the Levant,
but

not

clear.

male

sometimes

with features plastered

were
is
circulated
they
found male
and fe
Investigators

how

on,

skulls,

much

as well

as subadults,

of whether

question
cestor veneration

the skulls

at all rather

the

raising
represent

an

than apotropaic

or other protective functions (Bonogofsky

2004, Talalay 2004). However, the deposi
tional contexts of some skull deposition sug

tioned as having several rebuilds, and the gest practices

that may have
back
involved
ward or forward reference.The skull of a
Skull Buildingwent throughat leastfivemajor
rebuilds.
child was found between the stones of the
At A?ikli H?y?k in centralTurkey, dated
foundations ofWall El80 at PPNB Jericho
to the late ninth and early eighthmillennia
(Kenyon 1981). In phase lxi in a room in a
bc, "in one

of the excavated

'room A'

rooms,

variation

between

con

in memory

houses

in El,

house

(trench 3K... ) 13 floor levelshave been rec

ognized" (During 2006, p. 73). At this site

derly

man

EV

EII,

was

set

of an el

the cranium

in the corner

upright

about

15 cm below floor level. InEIII-IV a plastered

skullwas found in a building fill. Goring

struction is a possibility.Only 35% of rooms Morris (2000, p. 119) argues thatmany PPNB
have hearths at this site, but in the deep sound
burials definitely stratigraphicalfypredated
a
was
re
down
knocked
the construction
and
of the
architec
ing, building
overlying
same

in the

built
practice
tire

8-m-deep

& Harmankaya
is seen

hearth

place

that continued

at

throughout
in the mound

sequence

7 times,

least

the en
(Esin

1999). In each rebuilding a

in

same

the

position.
exacdy
the relatively small percentage
of build
this evidence
that
ings with hearths,
suggests
some
down
the practices
of
buildings
passed
hearth use, whereas
others did not. We
also

Given

findmuch continuity at the site in terms of

the

location

ual

complex"

street

of the major
and

the location

by the

"rit

of midden

ar

eas (in the deep sounding).The emphasis on

continuity of houses seen at A?ikli H?y?k
and Catalh?y?k is also found elsewhere in
the Ceramic Neolithic in central Anatolia
(During 2006, p. 236).
Much
tices

evidence

in houses

the PPNB
East

walls

and

were

than at

prac

repetitive

in

construction

and related groups in theMiddle

and Turkey.

donment

indicates

and memory
Evidence

foundation

generally

Catalh?y?k.

cut

also

suggest

practices,
down

Burning

aban

although
more

much

of houses,

asso

tural
at

and

features

least

three

floors.

For
at Kfar

instances

"in
example,
HaHoresh

burial pits clearly stratigraphicallyunderlie

are

sealed

some

cases

and
In

burial

and/or

surfaces"
by plaster
(p. 119).
we
see a time
between
lapse
skull removal and the
of
making

the floor.Thus buildings "remembered" the

location
there
or

or

of the burials

is evidence

skulls.

of markers

skulls. Goring-Morris

Sometimes

above

the burials

suggests

that con

structingbuildings in relation to earlierbuild

ings may
(see

have

above).

started
Special

atMallaha

in the Levant

abandonment

are found atCay?n??for

practices

example, in theCell

phase investigatorsfound blocking of door

ways,

and

intact artifacts

are abandoned

in cell

rooms (?zdogan &

1990). Char
?zdogan
nel houses or buildings for the dead occur
at Cay?n? (the Skull Building) and at Abu
Hureyra andDja'de elMughara (theMaison
desMorts) in Syria (Akkermans2004, p. 289).
Through much of the region in thePPNB
evidence indicates circulation and handing
down of artifactsthroughtime. Practices of
www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

113

stone

recirculation

reuse were

and

at

found

Cay?n?. Standing stones up to 2 m high

were found in the plaza and in the Skull
and

ceremonial

Flagstone

stones were

of the standing

ken and then buried

under

"Some

buildings.

bro

intentionally

re

the subsequent

flooring of the plaza" (Ozdogan & Ozdogan

1990, p. 74). At Jericho in the PPNB lev
els Kenyon found a large bituminous block
(Kenyon 1981, pp. 306-7). It had been care
fullyflaked and was obtained from theNebi

Musa

some

district

17 miles

away.

Investiga

tors found it in the foundation ofwall E223

of phase lxv.But itfit exacdy into a niche of
it
stood
lxiv,where
phase
probably
on a stone set on a
on which
of
earth
pillar
traces of
stone had
there were
plaster. So this
a role in
was then reused in the
lxiv
and
phase
the earlier

foundationof lv.In phase lxiiithis same room

had a distinctivegreen clay floor, all suggest
ing that thispart of the building had a special
over

character
Overall,

three phases.
the pre-Neolithic

then,

concerned

increasingly

and Ne

depth. Evidence
itive practices
areas

outside

with

temporal

repet
increasingly
suggested
in houses,
in
and sometimes
(e.g.,

or midden

courtyard

ar

eas at Jericho andA?ikliH?y?k), aswell as in

public

such

spaces

Evidence

H?y?k).

paved

streets

(at A?ikli

con
specific memory
are built over burials,
or

of

as houses

struction

as

are circulated
and
objects
time
down
is
also
increasing.
passed
through
concern
and
The
with time depth, history,
at
in the PPNB
reaches
its apogee
memory
skulls

and

other

the same time

The

new work

at

that domesticated

plants appear
at least
starts to emerge
in
but
it
by
quantity,
Kebaran
and Natufian
times, even in contexts

has

Catalh?y?k

shown

that

much of the symbolism, farfrom having a

on

focus
olence,

and

teeth,

and

claws,

sex. The

perhaps

beaks

on vi

centers

mother,

nurturing

death,

of animals

horns,
and

birds

are preferentiallybrought into thehouse and

installedon or in house walls (Hodder 2006,

Russell & Meece

scenes

2005). Investigators found

of humans

teasing,

and killing

baiting,

wild animals, and they found phallic images

(Meskell 2007). At Catalh?y?k theprevalence
in domestic

of such

imagery
texts demonstrates

embedded

within

scenes

found

and

that much
these

ritual

themes.

con

life was

social

also

They

in the
paintings

that

suggest

that death and violence were linked to rites

in which

of passage
ated

and recreated

scendence

and

through

dominate

sexuality

of death,

the

feasting,
of large-scale
social

creation

and

of earlier

(Schmidt 2003).
to cere

linked

was

and public

mony

violence,

symbolism

suite of ideas,

particular

1962,

(Bataille

2006). It is of interest,

sites such as G?bekli Tepe

This

cre

of tran

moments

transformation

that themes

therefore,

order was

the social

Bloch 1992,Hodder

olithic societiesof the

Middle East andTurkey
were

THE RITUAL VALUE OF

VIOLENCE, DEATH, AND SEX

to the

central
order

on which

settledvillage or early town lifedepended.

At Nahal Oren and otherNatufian sites
found

Noy

ration,

carved

and animal

stones with
heads

carved

incised

deco

on bone

han

dles (e.g., of sickles) (Noy 1991). The sickle

shaftsfromElWad andKebara are in the form
of deer and goat heads (Henry 1989). Fox
(Vulpes
rials

are
sp.) teeth
widely

for pendants

used

(Goring-Morris

as raw mate
&

Belfer

Cohen 2002, p. 70). In theNatufian we see a

marked

rise

in the numbers

of raptor

talons

inwhich sedentism is limited. It is difficult

(Goring-Morris& Belfer-Cohen 2002, p. 71)
to explain the focus on temporal depth as the
and pendants ofbone and canine teeth (Henry
result of living in dense villages. Rather, the
1989). Investigatorsalso foundphallic objects.
was
a

emergence
necessary
delayed

of greater

condition
returns

temporal

for dense

of intensive

depth

settled

subsistence

tems, and the shift to domesticated

animals,
feasts,

114

as well
exchanges,

life, the

as for the
staging
and marriages.

plants

sys
and

of large-scale

"Natufian

art also had

an erotic

element"

seen

in a calcite statuettefrom Ain Sakhri (Henry

1989, p. 206).
In thePPNA wild cattle imagery is found
throughout the region (Goring-Morris &

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Belfer-Cohen 2002). At Tell 'Abr 3, a se

ries of stone slabs line the bench around the
walls (Yartah 2005) in building B2. These are
polished and decorated with wild animals?
aurochs?as

gazelle,

panther,

ometric

designs. The

well
are

panthers

as with

ge

spotted

and

highly stylized and look rather like lizards.

are

Bucrania
are

there

deposited

also

on

bucrania

buildings,

interpreted

with

a bench,

within

view

as houses,

but

site.

four

cattle

bucrania

proba

bly suspended on the interiorwalls (Stordeur

2000, Yartah 2005). At Jerf el Ahmar there
is also

on

decoration

serpent

the stone

slabs

of the benches of the large circular buildings

(Stordeur 2000), alongwith a separate depic
tion of a vulture (for parallel symbolism at
Hallan ?emi and Nemrik 9 see Rosenberg
& Redding 2000, p. 45; Kozlowski 1992). At
G?bekli Tepe in thePPNA and earlyPPNB,

megalithic
wild boar,
ons,

have

pillars

reliefs of snakes,

fox andwild boar have erectpenises (Schmidt

2003). The reliefs also show a headless hu
man body with an erect penis. In the PPNB
there

continues
on

to be

the fox, wild

birds of prey

widespread
cattle, wild

symbolic
and

boar,

& Belfer-Cohen

(Goring-Morris

2002, pp. 70-71). AtNevali ?ori, Hauptmann

a
large
erect
his
penis.
holding
This
in the
association

(1999)
man

reconstructs

stone

statue

early village

of a

soci

eties of theMiddle East with violence, sex,

and death in the symbolic imagery could
be interpretedinmany ways (Hodder 2006,
Verhoeven 2002). But perhaps at the simplest
level, we

can

say that these

associations

give

power (Guenther 1999).The powers to give

feasts,
hanced

to

provide,

by

the

and
images

to protect would
of violence,

be en
sex, and

death. At Catalh?y?k there is an association

between
tie. The

and wild male

feasting deposits
art shows
large numbers

and

a bin

protects

perhaps

of

lentils (Hodder 2006). The key aspect of giv

ing

a feast
may

vision

not have

of calories,

of intercession

been

but also

with

and

control

and the use of their powers

mals

the pro

simply

the demonstration
of wild

ani

to protect

and

nurture.
The

demonstration

wild

animals

may

have

to

in relation

of power

and animal

spirits created the ba

sis for
the
social structures
building
long-term
of sedentary
and then agricultural
societies.
to harness
The
the
of
animals
power
ability
attracted

and

followers

allowed

the

of trust and dependencies.

exis
The
of an elaborate
world
of
vio
symbolic

creation
tence

danger, and sexual power, and the abil

to intercede with the ancestors,
may have
ity
lence,

created the conditions inwhich sedentary life

and

intensive

economies

delayed-return

be

came possible (selected for).

foxes,

cattle, gazelle, wild ass, lion, scorpi

water birds, and
The
spiders,
centipedes.

focus

covers

horns

in smaller
at the

At Jerf el Ahmar investigators also found

building

Building 1 at Catalh?y?k, a set ofwild goat

cat

of people

HUMAN AND MATERIAL

AGENCY
In many

societies

hunter-gatherer

animals

must be hunted with respect (Fowler &

Turner 1999, p. 422). Appropriate prayers
must be offered to the spiritsof the animals
if humans
up

are

to expect

to

the animals

their lives to the hunters.

If humans

yield
cease

the animals will do less well

and
pr?dation
in numbers
a
re
decline
There
is
(p. 422).
of friendship
and
and
procity
complementarity
and game animal
(Guenther
lationship

maintain
prey...
selves

that animals

assuming

selves with

in mind,

hunters

to be

between

so

taken

long

hunter
"Hunters

1999).

of trust with

relations

of reci

respect,

their animal
them

present
allowing
as hunters

them
treat

themwith respect and do nothing to curb their

autonomy of action" (Ingold 1999, p. 409).
Powerful

ronment"

attract

hunters

tract followers.
so

They
that

animals

inhabit

"far from

as

at
they
envi
"giving

seeking

control

engaged in the killing of dangerous animals over nature, their aim is to maintain
proper
such as bulls that then appear in the feasting relationshipswith thesebeings" in thenatural
residues and in the installations inhouses. In world (Ingold 1999, p. 409).
www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

115

But

we

at G?bekli

already

see

something

very differentfrom this perspective. In the

PPNA and earlyPPNB there are 2-3 m high
stele on which

stone
ages

of wild

scribed
have

animals,

above.

an

have

"The

been

birds,

insects

themselves

pillars

is no

This

Catalh?y?k occur widely in theNeolithic of

clearly

a balanced

longer

re

lationship.Even more clearly at Catalh?y?k

are scenes

in the art showing

people

teasing,

stags.

In these

textualized

Anatolia

2003, p. 3) and the human figure is entirely

dominant.

as bulls,

bear, wild

and

boar,
are

the humans

animals

dominating
increased
interfering with them. This
or active human
tance of the dominant

conditions

the result was

But

were

created

theMiddle

differences

early

in the processes

themes

impor
in the

include

struction

and

cus on wild
a central

that the

lation

animals,

to

The

author

sedentism

and

the

the

depth,

violence,
role

animal

a
symbolic
and death,

for humans

world.

These

fo
and

in re
themes

occur

the region
early enough
throughout
that they are integral to the development
of

settled life and the domestication of plants

the focus
may

is well known for its elaborate

DISCLOSURE

of

temporal

dominant

and animals.

insight

at

equivalence

of plants
and animals. These
a social focus on memory
con

domestication

for the domestication

narrative

social

the re
ismore

Many of the themes found in symbolism

and daily practice at Catalh?y?k occur very

1999).

symbolism,
including
scenes allow a
unique

there

of houses).

sequences

of animals, which involved interferingwith

and dominating animals (Cauvin 1994, Ingold

Catalh?y?k

despite

(for example,

of decentralized

poral

and

CONCLUSION

East,

Catalh?y?k and strongevidence of long tem

symbolic ormythicworld may also be linked

to the ancestors.

and

gional
evidence

baiting, and playingwith wild animals such

cases

to be con
the symbolism
in the micropractices
of daily life.
at
of the themes found in the symbolism

at the site also allows

Many

de

(Schmidt

meaning"

anthropomorphic

the im

carved
and

world of its inhabitants.

The richpreservation

scenes. These

into the symbolic

have

Some

on time
been

of the themes,

particularly

in house

sequences,

depth
part

of

the

suite

tions, along with environmental

cal factors, that "selected
for"

of

condi

and ecologi
and
sedentism

domestication.

STATEMENT

is not

aware

of any biases

that might

be perceived

as

affecting

the objectivity

of

this review.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thankDani Nadel
thank

and Ian Kuijt forhelp in gaining access to literaturefor thispaper. I also

the team of Catalh?y?k

researchers

on whose

work

this review

is based.

LITERATURE CITED
Akkermans P. 2004. Hunter-gatherer continuity: the transitionfrom the Epipalaeolithic to
theNeolithic in Syria. In From theRiver to theSea. The Palaeolithic and theNeolithic on
theEuphrates and in theNorthern Levant, ed. O Aurenche, M Le Mi?re, P Sanlaville,
1263:281-93. Oxford: BAR Int. Ser.

Arensburg

B,

Bar-Yosef

O.

1973. Human

remains

from

Ein

Gev

1, Jordan

Pal?orient 1:201-6
BalterM. 2005. The Goddessand theBull.New York: Simon and Schuster

ii6

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

valley,

Israel.

EB.

Banning
Bar-Yosef

O.

farmers. Near

2003. Housing
Neolithic
1991. The
archaeology

of the Natufian

Valla 2001, pp. 81-92

O.

Bar-Yosef

2001.

institutions.

From
sedentary
foragers
Social
In The Origin
ofHuman

to

East. Archaeol.

66(l-2):4?21

at

Cave.

layer

village

Hayonim

hierarchies:

Institutions,

ed.WG

See Bar-Yosef

the emergence

&

of social

Proc. Br. Acad.

Runciman,

110:1-38. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press

Bar-Yosef

0.2004.

Guest

editorial:

east to

west?agricultural

origins

and dispersal

into Europe.

Curr.Anthropol.45(Suppl.):l-4
Bar-YosefO, Valla FR, eds. 2001. TheNatufian Culture in theLevant. Ann Arbor: Int.Monogr.
Prehistory
Bataille G. 1962.Erotism:Death and Sensuality.
New York:Walker
Bender

B.

1978. Gatherer-hunter

to farmer:

a social

World

perspective.

Archaeol.

10:204?22

Bergman CA. 1987.Ksar Akil Lebanon,Vol II. Oxford: BAR Int. Ser. 329
Hunter. The PoliticsofReligiousExperience.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
BlochM. 1992.Prey into
Univ.

Press

BonogofskyM. 2004. Includingwomen and children:Neolithic modeled skullsfrom Jordan,

Israel, Syria andTurkey.Near East. Archaeol. 67(2): 118-19
Boyd

B.

1995. Houses

and hearths,

and burials:

pits

Natufian

mortuary

atMallaha

practices

(Eynan),Upper JordanValley. In The ArchaeologyofDeath in theAncientNear East, ed. S

Campbell, A Green, pp. 17-23. Oxford: Oxbow Monogr. 51
Bull ID, Elhmmali MM, Perret P,Matthews W, Roberts DJ Evershed RP. 2005. Biomarker
evidence of faecal deposition in archaeological sediments at Catalh?y?k. See Hodder

2005b, pp. 415-20

Byrd BF. 1989. TheNatufian Encampmentat Beidha. Late Pleistocene
Adaptation in theSouthern
Levant.

Arhus:

Jutland Archaeol.

Soc.

Cauvin J. 1979. Les fouilles deMureybet (1971-1974) et leur significationpour les origins de
la s?dentarisation

au Proche-Orient.

Annu.

Am.

Schools Orien.

Res. 44:19-48

Cauvin J. 1994.Naissance desDivinit?s,Naissance de VAgriculture.

Paris: CNRS
Cessford C. 2005. Absolute dating at Catalh?y?k. In ChangingMaterialities at Catalh?y?k:
Seasons, ed. IHodder,
pp. 65-100.
Reports from the 1995-1999
Inst. Archaeol.
Res./Br.
Ankara Monogr.
Inst. Archaeol.

Cambridge,

UK:

McDonald

Colledge S, ConollyJ, Shennan S. 2004. Archaeobotanical evidence for the spread of farming
in the Eastern

Mediterranean.

Curr. Anthropol.

45(Suppl.):35-58

CuttingM. 2005. The architectureofCatalh?y?k: continuity,household and settlement.See

Hodder 2005c, pp. 151-70
Memoir ofanArchaeologicalSiteGuard.Walnut Creek, CA:
Durai S. 2007. ProtectingCatalh?y?k.
Left Coast Press
Communities:ClusteredNeighbourhoodSettlementsof theCentral
During BS. 2006. Constructing
AnatolianNeolithic, ca. 8500-5500 Cal. BC. Leiden: Ned. Inst. voor hetNabije Oosten
Edwards

PC.

1991. Wadi

Hammeh

27:

an

early Natufian

site at Pella,

Jordan.

See

Bar-Yosef

& Valla 2001, pp. 123-48

Esin U, Harmanakaya S. 1999. Asddi in the frame of Central Anatolian Neolithic. InNe
olithicinTurkey:The Cradle ofCivilization.New Discoveries, ed.M ?zdogan, N Ba?gelen,
pp. 115-32. Istanbul:Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayinlan

FairbairnA, Near J,Martinoli D. 2005.Macrobotanical investigationof theNorth, South and

KOPAL area excavations atCatalh?y?k East. See Hodder 2005a, pp. 137-202

Fowler CS Turner NJ. 1999.Ecological/cosmological knowledge and landmanagement among

hunter-gatherers.See Lee & Daly 1999, pp. 419-25
www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

iij

Gebel

was

2004. There

HGK.

no

center:

P.

Goldberg

2001.

Some

evolution

of the Near

of prehistoric

cave

the polycentric

olithic.Neo-Lithics 1/04:28-32

aspects

micromorphological

Ne

Eastern

deposits.

Cahiers

d'Arch?ol.CELAT 10:161-75
Goring-Morris N. 2000. The quick and the dead. In Life inNeolithic Farming Communities:
Social Organization,Identity,andDifferentiation,ed. IKuijt, pp. 103-36.New York: Kluwer
Acad./Plenum

Goring-Morris N, Belfer-Cohen A. 2002. Symbolic behavior from the Epipalaeolithic and

early Neolithic
Practices
Magic

of the Near
and Ritual

on
and change.
observations
continuity
preliminary
BD Hermansen,
in theNear Eastern Neolithic,
ed. HGK
Gebel,
East:

In

CH Jensen,pp. 67-79. Berlin: Ex Oriente

M.

Guenther

1999.

From

to shamanism:

totemism

to world

contributions

hunter-gatherer

mythology and spirituality.See Lee & Daly 1999, pp. 426-33

Hardy-Smith T, Edwards PC. 2004. The garbage crisis inprehistory:artifactdiscard patterns
at the earlyNatufian siteof
Wadi Hammeh 27 and theorigins ofhousehold refusedisposal
strategies.J. Anthropol.Archaeol. 23(3):253-89
Hastorf

C.

2005. Macrobotanical

investigation:

field methods

and

laboratory

proce

analysis

dures. See Hodder 2005c, pp. 129-36

Hauptmann H. 1999.The Urfa region. InNeolithic inTurkey:The Cradle ofCivilization.New
Discoveries,ed.M Ozdogan, N Ba?gelen, pp. 65-87. Istanbul:Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayinlan
Hayden

B.

1990. Nimrods,

piscators,

pluckers,

and planters:

of food production.

the emergence

J. Anthropol.Archaeol. 9(1):31-69
Henry DO. 1989.FromForaging toAgriculture.The Levant at theEnd oftheIceAge. Philadelphia:
Univ.

Penn.

Press

Hodder I, ed. 1996. On theSurface:Catalh?y?k 1993-1995. Cambridge, UK: McDonald

Archaeol.
I, ed.

Hodder

2000.
UK:

Cambridge,
28

Inst.

22
Ankara Monogr.
No.
at
in
The Example
Catalh?y?k.
Reflexive Method
Archaeology:
Ankara Monogr.
No.
Res./Br.
Inst. Archaeol.
Inst. Archaeol.

Inst. Archaeol.

Res./Br.

Towards
McDonald

I. 2005a. ed. Catalh?y?kPerspectives:Themesfrom the 1995-1999 Seasons.Cambridge,

Hodder
UK:

Inst. Archaeol.

McDonald

Hodder
sons.

Res./Br.

Inst. Archaeol.

Ankara

Monogr.

No.

40

I, ed. 2005b. ChangingMaterialities at Catalh?y?k: Reportsfrom the 1995-1999 Sea

Cambridge,

UK:

McDonald

Inst. Archaeol.

Res./Br.

Inst. Archaeol.

Ankara Monogr.

No. 39
Hodder I, ed. 2005c. InhabitingCatalh?y?k:Reportsfrom the1995-99 Seasons.Cambridge, UK:
Inst. Archaeol.

McDonald

Res./Br.

Inst. Archaeol.

Ankara Monogr.

No.

38

Hodder I. 2006. Catalh?y?k.The Leopards Tale. London: Thames andHudson

Hodder I, ed. 2007. ExcavatingCatalh?y?k:South,North andKOPAL Area reports
from the1995
99

seasons.

Cambridge,

UK:

McDonald

Inst. Archaeol.

Res./Br.

Inst. Archaeol.

Ankara

Monogr.

Hodder I, Cessford C. 2004. Daily practice and social memory at Catalh?y?k. Am. Antiq.
69:17-40
IngoldT. 1999. On the social relations of the hunter-gathererband. See Lee & Daly 1999,
pp. 399-410
Kenyon KM. 1981. Excavations atJericho.Vol. 3: The Architectureand Stratigraphyof theTell.
London:

Kirkbride D.
Palestine

ii8

Br. Sch. Archaeol.

Jerus.

1966. Five seasons at the pre-potteryNeolithic village of Beidha in Jordan.

Explor.

Q.

98:8-72

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Neolithic Site inIraq 2.Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniw.

Kozlowski SK. 1992.Nemrik 9. PrePottery
Warszawskiego
CS.
Larsen
1995.

Biological

in human

changes

with

populations

Annu.

agriculture.

Rev. An

thropol.24:185-213
Lee RB, Daly R, eds. 1999. The CambridgeEncyclopediaofHunters and Gatherers.Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
W.

Matthews

2005. Micromorphological

traces of uses

and microstratigaphic

of

and concepts

space. See Hodder 2005b, pp. 355-98

Meignen L, Bar-YosefO, Goldberg P,Weiner S. 2000. Le feu au Pal?orientMoyen: recherches
sur les structures

de

et le statut

combustion

des

Pal?orient 26(2):9-22
C.

Meillassoux

1972. From

to

reproduction

foyers.
Econ.

production.

du Proche-Orient.

L'exemple
Soc.

1:93-105

Mellaart J. 1967. ?atal H?y?k: A Neolithic Town inAnatolia. London: Thames andHudson
A GlobalPrehistory
Meskell L. 2007. Refiguring thecorpus atCatalh?y?k. InMaterial Beginnings:
I
UK:
C
McDonald Inst.
ed.
Renfrew,
Morley. Cambridge,
ofFigurative Representation,
Archaeol.

Res./Br.

Inst. Archaeol.

Ankara Monogr.

Middleton WD, Douglas Price T, Meiggs D. 2005. Chemical analysis of floor sediments for
the identificationof anthropogenic activityresidues. See Hodder 2005b, pp. 399-412
Moore A, Hillman G, Legge A. 2000. Village on theEuphrates.From Foraging toFarming atAbu
Oxford:

Hureyra.

Oxford

Univ.

Press

Nadel D. 1990.Ohalo II?a preliminaryreport.

MitekufatHaeven 23:48-59
Nadel D. 1998.A note on PPNA intrasitetool variability.Neo-Lithics 1/98:8-10
Nadel D. 2006. Residence ownership and continuity:from the early Epipalaeolithic unto
In

the Neolithic.

Space,

Domesticating

ed. EB

Banning,

Chazan,

pp.

25-34.

Berlin:

Ex Oriente
Nesbitt M. 2002.When andwhere did domesticated cereals firstoccur in southwestAsia? In
The Dawn ofFarming in theNear East, ed. RTJ Cappers, S Bottema, pp. 113-32. Berlin:

Ex Oriente, Berlin
1991.Art and decoration of theNatufian atNahal Oren. See Bar-Yosef& Valla 2001,
T.
Noy
pp.557-68
?zba?aran

Buitenhuis

M,

H.

2002.

Proposal

for a regional

for Central

terminology

Anatolia.

In TheNeolithic ofCentralAnatolia. InternalDevelopmentsand External Relationsduring the

Ninth-SixthMillenniacalBC, Proc. Int. CANeWRound Table, Istanbul23-24 November 2001
ed. F G?rard,

?zdogan

M,

L Thissen,

pp.

61-11.

1990. Cay?n?.

A.

?zdogan

Istanbul:
A

Ege

conspectus

Yayinlan
of recent work.

Pal?orient

15:65-74

Perrot J. 1966. Le gisementNatoufien deMallaha (Eynan), Israel. L'Anthropologie70:437-84

Ronen A, Lechevallier M. 1991. The Natufian of Hatula. See Bar-Yosef & Valla 2001,
pp. 149-60
Rosenberg M, Redding RW. 2000. Hallan ?emi and early village organization in eastern
Anatolia. In Life inNeolithicFarming Communities:Social Organization, Identity,andDiffer
entiation,

ed. I Kuijt,

pp.

39-61.

New

York:

Kluwer

Acad./Plenum

Russell N, Martin L. 2005. The Catalh?y?k mammal remains. See Hodder 2005b, pp. 33-98
Russell

N, Meece

S.

2005.

Animal

representations

and

animal

remains

at

Catalh?y?k.

See

Hodder 2005c, pp. 209-30

SahlinsM. 1972. StoneAge Economics.New York: Aldine
SchmidtK. 2000. Zuerst kam der tempel,dann die Stadt.Vorl?ufiger bericht zu de grabungen
amG?bekli Tepe und amG?rc?tepe 1995-1999. Istanbul
Mitteilungen 50:5-40
Schmidt K. 2003. The 2003 campaign at G?bekli Tepe (SoutheasternTurkey). Neo-Lithics
2/03:3-8

www.annualreviews.org

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Catalh?y?k

n?

Stordeur D. 2000. New discoveries in architecture and symbolism at Jerf el Ahmar (Syria),
1997-1999. Neo-Lithics 1/00:1-4
Talalay LE. 2004. Heady business: skulls,heads, and decapitation inNeolithic Anatolia and
Greece.

J. M?diter.

Archaeol.

17(2):

139-63

Menlo Park, CA: Cummins

Todd I. 1976. ?atal H?y?k inPerspective.
R.
2000.
continuous
A view from the deep past. In BeyondKinship.
The
house.
Tringham
Social andMaterial ReproductioninHouse Societies,ed. R Joyce, SD Gillespie, pp. 115-34.

Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

Valla FR. 1991.Les Natoufiens deMallaha et l'espace. See Bar-Yosef& Valla 2001, pp. 111-22
Verhoeven M. 1999.An ArchaeologicalEthnographyofa Neolithic Community. Istanbul:Ned.
Inst.
M.

Verhoeven

2000.

fire and

Death,

Archaeol.

abandonment.

7:46-83

Dialog.

Verhoeven M. 2002. Ritual and ideology in the Pre-PotteryNeolithic B of the Levant and
southeastAnatolia. CambridgeArchaeolog.J. 12/2:233-58
Watkins

T.

Watkins

T.

Space,
G.

Willcox

pendent

30:5-24
worlds.
Pal?orient
houses, framing
concepts,
constructing
Building
construction
of new worlds.
In Domesticating
Architecture
and the symbolic
ed. EB Banning, M Chazan,
pp. 15-24. Berlin: Ex Oriente
2004.
2006.

2002.

Geographical

domestication

variation
events

in major

inWestern

cereal

Asia.

ed. RTJ Cappers, S Bottema, pp. 133-40. Berlin: Ex Oriente

Woodburn
Western

J. 1980. Hunters
Anthropology,

and gatherers
ed. E Gellner,

today

and

pp. 95-117.

reconstruction
London:

Yartah T. 2005. Les b?timents communautaires de Tell

1/05:3-9

120

and

components

In The Dawn

ofFarming

evidence

for inde

in theNear

of the past.

In Soviet

East,
and

Duckworth

'Abr 3 (PPNA, Syrie).Neo-Lithics

Hodder

This content downloaded from 150.135.239.97 on Thu, 5 Dec 2013 20:49:09 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions