Une nouvelle squence de datation pour

preniezCatalhoyuk.
"\"\\\"\\\\\\\" Introduction\\\\\\\\nCatalhoyuk (1) in Central Anatolia is a large Early Neolithic tell site
made famous by the work of James Mellaart in the 1960s (Mellaart 1962; 1963; 1964; 1966; 1967;
1998). Mellaart phased Catalhoyuk by levels of buildings and discovered 15 Neolithic levels
numbered 0 (latest) to XIII (earliest), with level VI divided into two phases A and B. Despite
attempts in 1963 and 1965 Mellaart never reached the base of the mound. Work restarted at
Catalhoyuk in 1993 (Hodder 1996) and during the 1999 season a trench was excavated to the base
of the mound (Farid 1999). This trench lay beneath Mellaart's level X buildings 1 and 8 and
partially incorporated his 1963 deep sounding. The upper part of the trench was interpreted as an
area for penning ovicaprids; the evidence of walls shows that this can be equated with Mellaart's
level XI (space 198) and level XII (space 199). Beneath these deposits there was an extended
sequence of deposits (space 181) indicating a wide variety of activities. Below level XII there was no
evidence for buildings so that the general system of phasing the site developed by Mellaart
could not be applied. The area could, however, be broadly divided into five phases: \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n*
Pre-level XII.A: thinly banded midden dumps with http://www.meilleursitepourplancul.xyz evidence
for burning episodes. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Pre-level XII.B: thinly banded midden dumps with evidence
of activity in the form of gullies and post-pads and distinctive dumps of material associated with
lime burning. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Pre-level XII.C: thinly banded midden dumps.\\\\\\\\n* Pre-level
XII.D: alluviated deposits filling earlier quarry pits into which material was being
dumped. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Pre-level XII.E: quarrying activity to obtain natural clay and lake
marl. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThis sequence, which is 3.4-3.8m deep, indicates a prolonged period of activity
at Catalhoyuk prior to level XII and elements of the artefactual assemblages recovered were
potentially indicative of temporal change. To date these deposits, a sequence of 10 samples
were selected, covering the entire sequence. (2) Where practical these were selected from contexts
with a low potential for containing residual material and charred seeds were utilised as there are
considerable problems with dates obtained from charcoal at Catalhoyuk with regard to 'old wood'
and the reuse-of timber. None of the material dated has a demonstrable functional relationship to
the deposits they occur in so there is only a reasonable probability that the material is associated
with the archaeological events being dated (Aitken 1991:90-91). The use of seeds means that the
time difference between the samples and the deposits is likely to be negligible and the fact
that they come from prolonged systematic excavations increases their reliability (Aitken 1991: 9091). The species selected were typical of the source contexts and the samples were so rich in
botanical remains that any contamination is likely to be insignificant. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe early
sequence \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe results achieved agreed well with the stratigraphic
sequence (FIGURES 1 and 2; TABLE 1). Stratigraphically the earliest dates belong to phase prelevel XII.D and although OxA-9893 is earlier than OxA-9778 these alluviated dumping deposits were
not well stratified and probably represent a mixture of materials from different sources. The
results indicate dates in the range 7330 to 7050 and 7480 to 7080 cal BC at 95% probability (OxA9893, 8155 [+ or -] 50 BP and OxA-9778, 8240 [+ or -] 55 BP). The earliest phase pre-level XII.E
quarrying activity probably dates to the same time span, as there is unlikely to have been
a substantial time lag between the digging of these features and their infilling. These
http://www.planculsgratuit.xyz dates agree well with those from a nearby core CH94A, these were
obtained from charcoal in a clay-silt matrix (Roberts et http://www.sitederencontrescougar.xyz
al. 1996, 25 figure 2.2; Gokturk et al. forthcoming) which appears to be physically similar to the
pre-level XII.D deposits. The possibility of a phase of activity prior to the quarrying can not be
discounted. Some residual patinated lithic material was recovered but this is not a
major component of the assemblage, possibly implying that there is a low danger of residual

archaeo-botanical material, and does not necessarily confirm the existence of earlier occupation in
the immediate vicinity. The next phase pre-level XII.C begins with a distinctive deposit
(5323) sealing the earlier alluviated dumps; this was dated to 7330 to 7050 cal BC at 95%
probability (OxA-9777, 8160 [+ or -] 55 BP). An identical result was achieved from a fire spot (5317)
lying stratigraphically a few deposits above this (OxA-9892, 8150 [+ or -] 50 BP). Taken
in conjunction these results suggest that the material in phase pre-level XII.D was relatively recent
at the point when it was deposited and that there was no significant time lag between phase prelevel XII.D and pre-level XII.C. The transition to phase pre-level XII.B is marked by the appearance
of distinctive deposits of material associated with lime burning and some insubstantial structural
evidence. Two of these were dated and although stratigraphically (5292) is later than (5276)
the radiocarbon results were practically indistinguishable at 7060 to 6690 and 7090 to 6700 cal BC
at 95% probability (OxA-9776, 7985 [+ or -] 55 BP and OxA-9950, 8030 [+ or -] 50 BP). These
results are noticeably later than those of the preceding two phases and suggest that the
midden deposits in the latter stages of phase pre-level XII.C took some time to accumulate. The
next event dated is (4848) a distinctive in situ burning episode which marks the transition to phase
pre-level XII.A and is dated 7300-6700 cal BC at 95% probability (OxA-9949, 8050 [+ or -] 50
BP). This is not readily distinguishable from the preceding phase and suggests that there was no
significant time lag. After this the appearance of a wall, forming the western limit of the excavation
area, indicates that subsequent deposits can be assigned to Mellaart's level XII. The transition to
level XII is marked by a burning event (4826) which produced a date of 7290-6860 cal BC at 95%
probability (combination of OxA-9775, 8090 [+ or -] 55 BP and OxA-9948, 8090 [+ or -] 50 BP).
During level XII this area was used for penning ovicaprids, one of these penning deposits (4822)
produced a date of 7060-6690 cal BC at 95% probability (OxA-9947, 7985 [+ or -] 50 BP), which is
discernibly later than the earlier phase. In level XI the area continues to be used for penning; one
of these penning deposits (4715) produced two similar determinations of 7050-6650 BC and 70606690 cal SC at 95% probability suggesting a date of 7050-6690 cal BC (OxA-9774, 7935 [+ or -] 50
BP and OxA-9946, 7980 [+ or -] 55 BP). This sequence of dates offers a reliable foundation for
understanding the dating of the earliest levels at Catalhoyuk. It is also possible to use the dates to
try and determine the relative length of the early phases (TABLE 2). \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n[FIGURES
1-2 OMITTED]\\\\\\\\nDating later levels \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe sequence of dates discussed so far
extends only as far as level XI. For later levels at the site we are primarily reliant upon radiocarbon
dates obtained in the 1960s and dendrochronology. (3) The radiocarbon dates from the 1960s
(Mellaart 1964: 114-19; 1967: 49-53; Stuckreth & Lawn 1969: 154-6; Stuckreth & Ralph 1965:1912) span levels XII to II but it has long been recognized that they are problematical for constructing
an intra-site chronology. The material for dating was obtained from five different types of
source: \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Structural timbers. These come from either in situ posts or material in the
fill of buildings, usually interpreted as collapsed roofbeams. These formed the major source for
dates obtained in the 1960s but are inherently highly problematical as they suffer from two
major sources of error. The piece of charcoal dated may represent 'old wood'; this is a particular
problem as many of the dated samples were from juniper or oak, which are likely to be long-lived,
but is less of a problem for elm. Additionally the recent excavations have demonstrated that the
majority of structural timbers were removed from buildings prior to abandonment, presumably for
re-use in later structures. This is confirmed by dendrochronological analysis (Newton & Kuniholm
1999: table 3 and plate cxiv.a) and charcoal studies, which indicate that some timbers had been reused. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* In situ charcoal from hearths. The fuel in hearths could have been used
previously as structural timbers. This is especially true if the charcoal is juniper or oak were
primarily imported for use as timbers. Such material may also suffer from the 'old
wood' problem. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* In situ grain deposits. Grain deposits were found in a number
of contexts including in storage bins, associated with hearths and in piles on floors (e.g. Mellaart
1963: 45-6). As grain is short-lived and such deposits are likely to be in their primary context, they
should provide good dating evidence. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Human skeletal remains. Skeletons should

provide good dating evidence but were sometimes subject to post-depositional disturbance
and movement. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n* Charcoal in building fill. The recent excavations have demonstrated
that the material used to fill abandoned buildings varies considerably and appears to have come
from a variety of sources; in some cases it may incorporate residual
material. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nReassessment of the radiocarbon dates from the 1960s based upon these
factors produced a list of 12 determinations considered to be reliable indicators of the date of the
level from which they were obtained. Additionally from the recent dendrochronological work
(Newton & Kuniholm 1999) it appears that there are three dated sequences which may accurately
date the levels in which they were recovered (TABLE 3 & FIGURE 3). These dates from later levels
were then combined with the more recently obtained dates from the earlier levels to produce
an internally coherent overall sequence. The recent excavations have demonstrated that levels do
not form absolutely contemporary events as individual structures have their own unique life
histories and that a degree of overlap between levels is probable. It is therefore impossible to
define the relationship of dates between two successive levels but it appears that if there is an
intervening level then it is reasonable to assume that an absolute temporal relationship does exist.
Using this it was possible to produce a sequence amenable to analysis using Bayesian statistics
(TABLE 4). (4) \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n[FIGURE 3 OMITTED] \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe time elapsed between prelevel XII.D and level II can be calculated as 830-1212 years at 95% probability or 891-1071 years at
68% probability. Given that levels I and 0 are not included, it seems reasonable to suggest that the
main occupational sequence at Catalhoyuk probably falls within the range 900-1300 years and in all
likelihood was between 950 and 1150 years. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nOff-site activities \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe
dating sequence discussed so far covers on-site activities at the tell. In 1999 an area lying
immediately to the north of Catalhoyuk, known as the KOPAL Area, was excavated revealing that
activities relating to quarrying, crop processing and the disposal of material took place here (Boyer
1999). Artefactually there were a number of parallels between this area and the early on-site
assemblages, suggesting that they might be contemporary. To date these deposits five samples
were taken, of which four were successfully dated (TABLE 5 & FIGURE 4). (5) Stratigraphic
definition was poorer in the KOPAL Area and there was a markedly lower level of archaeobotanical
material. This means that the dates are inherently more problematical and their
stratigraphic relationships less reliable. OxA-9945 is particularly problematical as it was
anticipated that this would be the earliest date from the KOPAL Area, but its results do not agree
with the rest of the sequence; this suggests that the cut feature from which the sample was
obtained is likely to be a later intrusion. Determinations OxA-9980 and OxA-10092 which were
obtained from the same sample are not in good agreement with each other, (6) suggesting that the
layer in question is a mixed deposit containing material of different ages. It now seems likely that
this is a composite deposit consisting of alluvial material and buried soils. If OxA-9980 relates to an
early stage of these processes and OxA-10092 to a later stage these dates are compatible. The
problems with these dates mean that the earliest off-site activities have not been dated. The dates
which were successful suggest that the off-site activities are highly unlikely to be contemporary
with the pre-level XII.D or pre-level XII.C deposits in space 181, as the earliest results achieved
were 7060-6700 cal BC at 95% probability (combination of OxA-9772, 8025 [+ or -] 55 BP and OxA9944, 7975 [+ or -] 50 BP). It is possible that the dates could make these deposits as early as prelevel XII.B but the greatest probability is that they are actually as late as level
XI. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n[FIGURE 4 OMITTED] \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nOther sites \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nThe dating of the
early excavated sequence at Catalhoyuk means that the site can be usefully compared with other
Central Anatolian sites such as Asikli Hoyuk (Esin & Harmanakaya 1999; Yakar 1994: 436). Canhasan III (Yakar 1991: 194-6), Suberde (Yakar 1991: 172-5; Bordaz 1973) and Musular
(Yakar 1991: 148-51; Ozbasaran 1999; 2000) (FIGURE 5). At Asikli Hoyuk the latest activity at the
site is represented by phases 2C-2A which cover a wide area on the summit of the mound (Esin
& Harmankaya 1999: 123). Comparison with the latest dates from each of the different areas
excavated at Asikli Hoyuk indicates that they are all likely to be 100-400 years earlier than phase

pre-level XII.D at Catalhoyuk and are certainly no later than this phase. The earliest dates from
Canhasan III are earlier than Catalhoyuk but the later dates overlap with the sequence up to
approximately level XI. The earliest dates from Suberde may pre-date the earliest deposits at
Catalhoyuk but could well overlap with phase pre-level XII.D and conceivably pre-level XII.C as
well. The later dates could reasonably be contemporary with deposits as early as level pre-level
XII.B and might be as late as level X. The dates from Musular suggest that the occupation may be
earlier that the earliest deposits at Catalhoyuk but that it could overlap with pre-level XII.D and
possibly pre-level XII.C. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n[FIGURE 5
OMITTED] \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nConclusion \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nOverall these dates show that the recently
excavated level XI to pre-level XII.D sequence runs from 7480-7050 cal BC (OxA-9778, 8240 [+ or -]
55 BP and OxA-9893, 8155 [+ or -] 50 BP) to 7050-6690 cal BC (OxA-9774, 7935 [+ or -] 50 BP and
OxA-9946, 7980 [+ or -] 55 BP), suggesting a probable total time-span of around 300-500 years.
The assemblages from the early deposits at Catalhoyuk are characterized by a number of
differences from later levels on the mound. (7) There is a rich botanical assemblage with
domesticated wheat, barley and pulses similar to the later levels but there is also evidence for
other elements such as flax\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/linseed. The chipped stone assemblage from the lower levels
was distinctive with the presence microliths, sickle elements, some artefact types with parallels at
Asikli Hoyuk and Canhasan III, including two pieces with incised decoration, and a wider range of
flint types. No pottery was recovered from pre-level XII deposits but clay figurines and `balls' were
present; the 'balls' come in a wide range of geometric shapes and some are decorated. Sheep, goat,
cattle and wild horse are still present in the faunal assemblage but red deer, pig and dog become
more common. As well as deposits of materials associated with lime burning there were frequent
fragments of a hard lime plaster, frequently painted red. These indicate the existence of buildings
with a type of floor found only in the very earliest buildings excavated by Mellaart (1965: 169) and
with parallels at Asikli Hoyuk and Musular. Whilst there is no evidence for radical breaks in the
stratigraphic sequence there is evidence for a prolonged period of activity prior to level XII with a
number of differences in the material assemblage. These dates do not necessarily relate to the very
earliest occupation at Catalhoyuk; indeed, such concepts are something of a chimera at large tell
sites where the original core of a site which was presumably relatively small may be practically
impossible to locate. They do, however, place the site much more firmly within the Early Neolithic of
Central Anatolia. \\\\\\\\n TABLE 1. AMS dates from spaces 198, 199 and 181. lab no. unit level
material dated age (all charred seeds) (uncal BP) OXA-9774 4715 XI Scirpus 7935 OXA-9946
4715 XI Scirpus 7980 OXA-9774 & 4715 XI Scirpus 7955 OXA-9946 combined OXA-9947 4822
XII Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Hordeum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ 7985 Scirpus OXA-9775 4826 XII
Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Scirpus 8090 OXA-9948 4826 XII Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Scirpus 8090 OXA-9775 &
4826 XII Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Scirpus 8090 OXA-9948 combined OXA-9949 4848 Pre XII.A Pisum
8050 OXA-9950 5276 Pre XII.B Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Pisum 8030 OXA-9776 5292 Pre XII.B Scirpus
7985 OXA-9892 5317 Pre XII.C Lens 8150 OXA-9777 5323 Pre XII.C Lens 8160 OXA-9778 5324 Pre
XII.D Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Pisum 8240 OXA-9893 5329 Pre XII.D Triticum\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Scirpus\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/
8155 Cerealae lab no. standard age (cal BC) age (cal BC) deviation to 1 s.d. to 2 s.d OXA-9774
50 7030-6960 7050-6650 OXA-9946 55 7050-6770 7060-6690 OXA-9774 & 37 7040-6710 70506690 OXA-9946 combined OXA-9947 50 7060-6820 7060-6690 OXA-9775 55 7290-6860 73206820 OXA-9948 50 7290-6860 7310-6820 OXA-9775 & 37 7180-7040 7290-6860 OXA-9948
combined OXA-9949 50 7080-6820 7300-6700 OXA-9950 50 7080-6820 7090-6700 OXA-9776 55
7060-6770 7060-6690 OXA-9892 50 7300-7060 7330-7050 OXA-9777 50 7300-7070 73307050 OXA-9778 55 7450-7080 7480-7080 OXA-9893 50 7300-7070 7330-7050 TABLE 2. Elapsed
time between events in the early sequence calculated using BCal. earlier event later event time
elapsed in years to 1 s.d. pre-level XII.D start of pre-level XII.C 15-149 (OXA-9778) (OXA9777) pre-level XII.D start of pre-level XII.B 120-286 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9776) pre-level XII.D start
of pre-level XII.A 177-354 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9949) pre-level XII.D start of level XII 210-423 or 215422 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9948 & OXA-9775) pre-level XII.D level XII 213-413 (OXA-9778) (OXA-

9947) pre-level XII.D level XI 300-499 or 315-515 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9946 & OXA-9774) pre-level
XII.D end of level XI 300-499 or 315-515 (OXA-9778) (as defined by BCal) earlier event later event
time elapsed in years to 2 s.d. pre-level XII.D start of pre-level XII.C 1-274 (OXA-9778) (OXA9777) pre-level XII.D start of pre-level XII.B 61-408 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9776) pre-level XII.D start of
pre-level XII.A 85-484 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9949) pre-level XII.D start of level XII 124-520 or 128524 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9948 & OXA-9775) pre-level XII.D level XII 120-526 (OXA-9778) (OXA9947) pre-level XII.D level XI 196-622 or 189-632 (OXA-9778) (OXA-9946 & OXA-9774) pre-level
XII.D end of level XI 196-622 or 189-632 (OXA-9778) (as defined by BCal) TABLE 3. Reliable 1960s
conventional radiocarbon dates and dendrochronological sequences. lab no. material dated level
age years BC (uncal BC) cal wiggle matched P-796 charred grain II 7521 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-774
charcoal III 7531 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-769 grain VIA 7505 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-827 charred human brain VI
7579 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-781 charcoal, oak VI 7524 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A CTL-6 charcoal, juniper VI
N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A 6456 CTL-17 charcoal, juniper VII N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A 6542 CTL-16&20 charcoal, juniper
VII N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A 6588 P-1366 charcoal VIII 7684 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-1367 charcoal, elm\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/oak
VIII 7853 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-1369 charcoal X 7937 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-1371 charcoal X 7844
N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-1372 charcoal, elm X 7915 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-1370 charcoal, elm X 8036
N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A P-782 charcoal X 8092 N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/A lab no. standard age (cal BC) age (cal BC)
deviation to 1 s.d. to 2 s.d. P-796 77 6440-6250 6480-6220 P-774 91 6460-6250 6570-6210 P-769
93 6440-6250 6510-6090 P-827 89 6510-6260 6600-6230 P-781 90 6450-6250 6510-6100 CTL-6
+26\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/-39 6482-6417 6508-6378 CTL-17 +26\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/-39 6568-6503 6594-6464 CT-16&20 +26\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/-39 6614-6549 6640-6510 P-1366 90 6640-6440 6700-6260 P-1367 97 70306530 7050-6450 P-1369 109 7040-6680 7150-6500 P-1371 102 7050-6500 7050-6450 P-1372 85
7030-6650 7060-6590 P-1370 104 7140-6700 7350-6600 P-782 98 7310-6820 7450-6650 TABLE 4.
Radiocarbon dates calibrated to 1 and 2 standard deviations using BCal. lab no. age (cal BC) age
(cal BC) to 1 s.d. to 2 s.d. using BCal using BCal P-796 6310-6220 6370-6090 P-774 6370-6270
6420-6240 P-769 6450-6380 6480-6330 P-827 6460-6390 6490-6330 P-781 6450-6380 64806330 P-1366 6640-6510 6670-6460 P-1367 6640-6500 6700-6470 P-1369 6850-6710 6950-6660 -1371 6850-6700 6960-6660 P-1372 6850-6710 6940-6660 P-1370 6860-6700 6950-6680 P-782
6860-6700 6940-6680 OXA-9774 6920-6750 7010-6720 OXA-9946 6930-6770 7030-6730 OXA-9947
7050-6840 7060-6830 OXA-9775 7060-6840 7070-6830 OXA-9948 7060-6840 7070-6830 OXA-9949
7070-6920 7080-6860 OXA-9950 7080-7000 7080-6920 OXA-9776 7080-7020 7090-6950 OXA-9892
7130-7060 7180-7050 OXA-9777 7150-7080 7250-7060 OXA-9778 7330-7180 7450-7110 OXA-9893
7310-7150 7340-7100 TABLE 5. AMS dates from KOPAL Area. lab no. unit material dated age
standard (all charred (uncal BP) deviation seeds) OxA-9980 6020 Triticum 7955 75 OxA-10092
6020 Triticum 7185 65 OXA-9980 & 6020 Triticum 7543 49 OXA-10092 combined (X-Test fails
at 5%) OxA-9771 6013 Triticum 7965 55 OXA-9943 6013 Triticum 7910 55 OXA-9771 & 6013
Triticum 7938 39 OXA-9943 combined OXA-9772 6075 Triticum 8025 55 OXA-9944 6075
Triticum 7975 50 OXA-9772 & 6075 Triticum 7998 37 OXA-9944 combined OXA-9945 6079
Scirpus 7775 50 lab no. age (cal BC) age (cal BC) to 1 s.d. to 2 s.d. OxA-9980 7040-6700 70606650 OxA-10092 6160-5920 6220-5910 OXA-9980 & 6460-6260 6470-6240 OXA-10092
combined (X-Test fails at 5%) OxA-9771 7040-6770 7060-6690 OXA-9943 7030-6650 70406640 OXA-9771 & 7030-6700 7040-6680 OXA-9943 combined OXA-9772 7070-6820 71406690 OXA-9944 7050-6770 7060-6690 OXA-9772 & 7060-6820 7060-6700 OXA-9944
combined OXA-9945 6650-6500 6690-6460 \\\\\\\\nAcknowledgements. Thanks are due to the entire
Catalhoyuk Research Project. In particular I would like to thank Ian Hodder, Shahina Farid, Anja
Wolle for their assistance. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nCaitlin Buck, Tristan Carter, Christine Hastorf, Julie Near,
Andy Fairbairn, Maryanne Newton and Eleni Asouti all helped with information from their various
specialities. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(1) Catalhoyuk in this article refers solely to the Neolithic eastern mound
and does not include the later Chalcolithic western mound. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(2) The dates were funded
by a NERC grant and processed using accelerator mass spectrometry at the Oxford Radiocarbon
Accelerator Unit of the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, They were

calibrated using the OxCal program (v.3.5) (Bronk Ramsey 2000) using atmospheric data from
Stuiver et al. (1998). Where two replicate determinations were produced from a single sample these
were pooled using the R Combine function of OxCal. As they come from different charred seeds
these combined dates have not been utilised in further analysis. The results were analysed using the
Bayesian calibration programme BCal (Buck et al. 1999). \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(3) Another series of
accelerator mass spectrometry dates from Purdue and Arizona (Gokturk et al. forthcoming), on
recently excavated buildings assigned to levels IX to VIII, are being considered independently and
will be compared to this sequence in the future. Preliminary analysis suggests that they are largely
compatible with this sequence but that some determinations may have been based upon
residual material. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(4) Bayesian statistics, which use Monte Carlo methods to
obtain results, mean that no two runs will produce identical results. If the methodology is working
well, multiple runs should produce similar results which are within the tolerance of the other errors
inherent in radiocarbon dating. To check for this five runs were undertaken. The results of these
five runs at both one and two standard deviations show only a very limited range of variation,
generally of less than five years, suggesting that the sequence is reliable. The results quoted
are from a representative run and have been rounded outwards to the nearest 10 years at both
ends. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(5) These dates were part of the same programme as those from the main
mound and have been treated in the same manner (see footnote 2). \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(6) These
determinations failed the X test at 5% of the OxCal R Combine function. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n(7) Specialist
information in the following section is taken from annual archive reports of the Catalhoyuk
Research Project for 1999 and 2000 accessible at
http:\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/catal.arch.cam.ac.uk\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/
catal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/archive_reps.html \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nReferences \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nAITKEN, A.J. 1990.
Science-based dating in archaeology. London: Longman. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nBORDAZ, J. 1973. Current
research in the Neolithic of South central Turkey: Suberde, Erbaba and the chronological
implications, American Journal of Archaeology 77: 282- 8. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nBOYER, P. 1999.
Excavations in the KOPAL Area,
http:\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ catal.arch.cam.ac.uk\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/catal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Archive_rep99\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/b
oyer99.html \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nBRONK-RAMSEY, C. 2000. OxCal 3.5,
http:\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/info.ox.ac.uk\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/departments\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ rlaha\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/orau.index.
htm \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nBUCK, C.E., J.A. CHRISTEN & G.N. JAMES. 1999. BCal: an on-line Bayesian
radiocarbon calibration tool, Internet Archaeology
7, http:\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/intarch.ac.uk\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/journal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/issue7\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/buck_toc.htm
l \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nESIN, U. & S. HARMANAKAYA. 1999. Asikli in the frame of central Anatolian
Neolithic, in Ozdogan & Basgelen 1999: 115-32. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nFARID, S. 1999. Archive summary
for the South Area,
http:\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ catal.arch.cam.ac.uk\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/catal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/Archive_rep99\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/fa
rid99.html \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nGOKTURK, E.H., D.J. HILLEGONDS, M.E. LIPSCHUTZ & I.
HODDER. Forthcoming. Accelerator mass spectrometry dating at
Catalhoyuk. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nHODDER, I. (ed) 1996. On the surface Catalhoyuk 1993-95.
Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ British Institute
of Archaeology at Ankara. Monograph 22. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nMATTHEWS, W. & S. FARID. (1996).
Exploring the 1960s surface --the stratigraphy of Catalhoyuk, in Hodder 1996: 271300. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nMELLAART, J. 1962. Excavations at Catal Huyuk, first preliminary report, 1961,
Anatolian Studies 12: 41-65. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1963. Excavations at Catal Huyuk, second preliminary
report, 1962, Anatolian Studies 13: 43-103. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1964. Excavations at Catal Huyuk, third
preliminary report, 1963, Anatolian Studies 14: 39-119. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1966. Excavations at Catal
Huyuk, fourth preliminary report, 1965, Anatolian Studies 16: 15-191. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1967. Catal
Huyuk: A Neolithic town in Anatolia. London: Thames & Hudson. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1998. Catal Huyuk:
the 1960s seasons, in R. Matthews, Ancient Anatolia. Fifty years' work by the British Institute of
Archaeology at Ankara: 35-41. Ankara: BIAA. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nNEWTON, M.W. & P.I. KUNIHOLM.

1999. Wiggles worth watching -- making radiocarbon work. The case of Catal Hoyuk, in P.P.
Betancourt, V. Karageorghis, R. Laffineur & W.-D. Niemeier, Meletemata. Studies in Aegean
archaeology presented to Malcolm H. Weiner as he enters his 65th year: 527-37. Liege: Universite
de Liege. Aegaeum 20. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nOZBASARAN, M. 1999. Musular: A general assessment on a
new Neolithic site in central Anatolia, in Ozdogan & Basgelen 1999: 147-55. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n2000.
The neolithic site of Musular -- Central Anatolia, Anatolica 26: 129-51. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nOZDOGAN, M.
& N. BASGELEN. 1999. Neolithic in Turkey: the cradle of civilization. Ankara: Arkeoloji ve Sanat
Yayinlari. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nROBERTS, N., P. BOYER & R. PARISH. 1996. Preliminary results
of geoarchaeological investigations at Catalhoyuk, in Hodder 1996: 1939. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nSTUCKRETH, R. & B. LAWN. 1969. University of Pennsylvania Radiocarbon Dates
XI, Radiocarbon 11: 1150-62. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nSTUCKRETH, R. & E.K. RALPH. 1965. University of
Pennsylvania Radiocarbon Dates VIII, Radiocarbon 7: 187-99. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nSTUIVER M., P.J.
REIMER, E. BARD, J.W. BECK, G.S. BURR, K.A. HUGHEN, B. KROMER, G. MCCORMAC, J. VAN
DER PLICHT & M. SPURK. 1998. INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration, 24000-0 cal BP,
Radiocarbon 40.3: 1041-83. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nYAKAR, J. 1991. Prehistoric Anatolia. The Neolithic
transformation and the Early Chalcolithic Period. Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv, Institute of
Archaeology. Monograph 9. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\n1994. Prehistoric Anatolia: the Neolithic transformation
and the early Chalcolithic period. Supplement 1. Tel Aviv: University of Tel Aviv, Institute of
Archaeology. Monograph 9a. \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nCraig Cessford, Catalhoyuk Research Project,
Department of Archaeology, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3DZ, England.
cc250@cam.ac.uk \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\\nReceived 11 April 2001, accepted 3 July 2001, revised 11 July
2001 \\\\\\\\n\\\\\\\"\\\"\"