Figuring Diversity The Neolithic Catalho

5.
Figuring diversity:
the Neolithic Çatalhöyük figurines
Carolyn Nakamura
(with contributions from Lynn Meskell)
After 13 seasons of documenting and studying Çatal- and replication studies and made videos of people
höyük materials, our initial impressions of the figurines handling figurines and the different perspectives (see
have not significantly changed: we stand by our earlier https://web.stanford.edu/group/figurines/cgi-
observation that the diversity of the Çatalhöyük figurine bin/omeka/collections/browse). We have also done
assemblage resists any easy or simplistic categorisation comparative work across the Neolithic, both in
of its practices (Meskell et al. 2008; Nakamura, Meskell Anatolia and more globally (Meskell, Nakamura 2009;
2013b). From the beginning, we have approached Hodder, Meskell 2011; Nakamura, Meskell 2013b).
‘figurines’ as processes rather than as end products, Figurine assemblages, like Çatalhöyük building
examining their production, circulation, practice and plans, seem to conform to certain general guidelines, yet
disposal, all of which enact a set of choices and they also demonstrate remarkable flexibility and
processes embedded in a particular social world. variation. As a social technology, the Çatalhöyük
Challenging the entrenched image of figurines that figurines suggest particular attention to certain themes or
James Mellaart made famous as objects of distanced areas, namely animality, and bodily abbreviation, parta-
veneration, we have argued instead that these objects bility, excess, ambiguity and maturity. These themes,
constituted a diverse and flexible suite of embodied which often converge or overlap, underscore the diverse
actions and ideas. The significance of these objects ways in which figurine practices mediated certain
unfolded through practice and action, not in distanced pressing concerns in Neolithic life: the negotiation of
separation and contemplation. They were things to be relationships with animals, forebears or the dead, and the
used and even re-used. success and survival of the community as mediated
Our approach to figurines has always treated through ideas of body and flesh.
figurines as any other archaeological material. In Since our last summary in 2008, the project has
various Archive Reports, chapters and articles, we have added 1,215 figurines excavated during the 2009–2017
studied figurine production, deposition and circulation, seasons. With the exception of one remarkable building
correlated artefact density with various features, in the TPC Area that contained a number of impressive
buildings and contexts (Meskell et al. 2008); stone anthropomorphic figurines – including the only
performed stone and clay experiments and analyses two figurines found in a definitively primary context
(with other specialists) in order to study manufacture during the Hodder excavations – these additional finds
techniques, heat exposure and material selection generally do not suggest any radically new figurine
(Meskell, Nakamura 2009; Avis 2010; Meskell et al. types, material or practices. Therefore, we will not
2016); examined bodily representations through substantively revisit various themes discussed in detail
quantifications of figurine features, qualities, measure- in other publications such as figurine recording,
ments (Nakamura, Meskell 2009); and written about figurine as process, figurine fabrics and production
how the miniature, portable and multisensorial materi- techniques, headedness and headlessness, enfleshing
ality of figurines affords particularly affective and and embedding, animality, or bodily maturity and
tactile bodily relations with their makers and users and sexuality (for summary with references, see Nakamura,
biographical inscription (Nakamura, Meskell 2004; Meskell 2013b). Instead, in this chapter, we will update
Nakamura 2008; Meskell 2015). We have also worked the site-wide analyses of figurine distributions, describe
across specialisations, examining potential correlations a few notable examples, and look more closely at
between figurine practices and the burial of human aspects of figurine practice that might mediate social
remains (Meskell, Nakamura 2009), as well as faunal power or world-making through various articulations of
(Martin, Meskell 2011) and isotopic data (Pearson, form, degree of elaboration/abbreviation, pose/posture
Meskell 2015). We have also carried out 3D scanning and materiality.
1
The Matter of Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2009–2017 Seasons
Figurine distributions Depositional practices (tables 5.2 and 5.3; figures 5.1
The Çatalhöyük figurine database now contains 2,994 and 5.2)
Neolithic figurines, including those from Mellaart’s The added materials from the last eight years of
excavations and spoil heap (REC), and non-diagnostic excavation have not significantly changed the distri-
and indeterminate forms; 2,027 from this corpus are bution patterns of figurines across the site. Figurines are
figural forms excavated by the Hodder team between predominantly found in external contexts (78%) rather
1993 and 2017. The 3,145 figurines in the database than in buildings (22%) (table 5.3) and are most common
further include West Mound (Chalcolithic) and post- in midden contexts, followed by fill (fig. 5.1). As noted
Neolithic materials. The contextual analyses below will above, figurine practices across the site peak during the
only consider the 2,027 Neolithic figural forms Middle occupation levels and then drop off dramatically
excavated by the Hodder team, while basic tallies will in the Final period. One difference can be seen in
include all Neolithic figurines. Analyses involving levels numbers and densities across the Middle and Late
and patterns over time will only consider the 1,830 periods: in external spaces, figurine practices are
figurines given level assignments. Analyses will focus on sustained through the Late period, whereas in buildings
four main figural forms: anthropomorphic (humans), they drop by nearly fourfold (table 5.3).
zoomorphic (quadrupeds and horns), abbreviated
(generic forms with head, torso and base) (see Nakamura General trends (figures 5.1–5.5). In terms of the distri-
and Meskell 2008: 202 for detailed discussion of figural bution between internal and external areas, anthropo-
categories). morphic forms occupy the largest percentage in buildings
by a very slight amount, while quadrupeds comprise the
Preservation and fragmentation (table 5.1) largest percentage in external areas (table 5.2). Horn
Fragments of figurines comprise the bulk of the corpus fragments are the dominant form in almost all contexts
and are three times more common than complete or due to their ubiquity, small size and identifiable shape
nearly complete figurines. Anthropomorphic (46% (see Chapter 6). They are particularly dominant in
complete) and abbreviated (44% complete) forms are contexts of disposal (midden), infilling (building and
much more likely to be found mostly intact compared feature infill, burial fill) or activity (fire installation, wall
to zoomorphic forms, which largely occur as fragments or platform construction).
(87% fragments). As before, fragmentation patterning Abbreviated forms, like horns, occur in every context in
generally suggests that figurines break at their weakest terms of overall use, but in fewer numbers (figs 5.1 and
points, such as the neck, limbs, horns, ears etc. Very 5.2). In this way, horns are more comparable to abbreviated
few (n=13) show some indication of intentional forms than quadrupeds, as quadrupeds and anthropo-
breakage or damage (ten quadruped, two abbreviated, morphic figurines (as the more elaborated forms) are found
one anthropomorphic). in a more limited range of contexts. It might, therefore, be
Anthropomorphic Zoomorphic Abbreviated Total

Complete 61 75 124 260
Possibly complete 10 5 4 19
Nearly complete 37 122 165 324
Fragment > 50% 58 173 182 413
Fragment < 50% 53 832 144 1,029
Fragment 17 342 43 402
Table 5.1. Figurine preservation.
Anthropomorphic Abbreviated Quadruped Horn Total

Building 25 25% 68 22% 50 19% 128 23% 271 22%
External 77 75% 235 78% 216 81% 435 77% 963 78%
Total 102 303 266 563 1,234
Table 5.2. Figurine forms: external spaces vs buildings.
2
Chapter 5: Nakamura. Figuring diversity: the Neolithic Çatalhöyük figurines
Buildings External Spaces

Period Density No. of Dry sieve Total Density No. of Dry sieve Total
figurines volume (kL) volume (kL) figurines volume (kL) volume (kL)
Early 0.309 74 239.37 352.20 0.443 18 40.67 53.14
Middle 2.440 471 193.03 675.79 3.530 349 98.86 142.03
Late 0.575 81 140.80 216.29 3.667 333 90.80 132.40
Final 0.491 19 38.70 600.18 0.419 8 19.10 32.44
Table 5.3. Figurine densities and counts 2009–2017: external spaces vs buildings. These figures do not include the
latest information from the final cleaning of the database, but should be close estimates. Volumes by level were calcu-
lated from the Çatalhöyük Project Database by Dominik Lukas on 25 October 2017.
Figure 5.1. Figurine forms by excavation data category.
advisable to consider if figurine practices were organised metonymic relationship to the human body like a horn to an
by formal as well as representational considerations. animal, the generic form of two limbs (legs or feet), a torso
Beyond the iconic and indexical relationship horns have to and head does the job of evoking a bipedal human. Of
horned animals, they may also serve a metonymic function. course, there are several examples (although a minority) of
Similar to how abbreviated forms, in many cases, served as horns and abbreviated figurines that do not fit this gener-
expedient depictions of humans, some horns may have also alised scheme. However, it is worth considering the
been expedient representations of different animals. Since possible reasons for depicting more elaborated and abbre-
there is no gender-neutral body part that easily sustains a viated forms of both humans and animals.
3
Figure 5.2. Figurine forms in features.
One possibility is that more generic forms were disposal and infilling practices at the site, such practices
suitable for multiple and general purposes. The feature remain under-theorised and observed and noted rather
types associated with all figurine forms – pits/scoops, than seriously analysed (Nakamura, Meskell 2013b). It is
burial fill, bins, platforms, walls and fire installations possible that figurine types may be correlated with
(fig. 5.2) – comprise either construction or house- specific features, activities and materials, evoking a more
sustaining activities. In a way, these features provide a intentional kind of action (see discussion below).
map of the activities and structures of social life: pits
encompass activities of retrieving or emplacing, burials Figurines and funerary practices (fig. 5.1, table 5.4).
incorporate the dead within the house and mediate While we have discussed the various contexts noted above
relations between the living and the dead, bins contain in previous publications (Meskell et al. 2008; Nakamura,
and store materials and thus articulate a future-oriented Meskell 2013b), we have not considered one context in
gesture, platforms mark and structure internal space, particular: burial fill. We had previously observed that
walls support and divide internal space, and fire installa- figurines were remarkably absent from burial contexts.
tions sustain human life by providing heat to live, cook While this pattern does hold true for the materials directly
and work. Given that the house anchored the social world associated with skeletons, 100 figurines (mostly
in Neolithic Çatalhöyük, it is not surprising that struc- fragments) have been found in burial fill. All figurine
tures and activities that support and sustain the house types are represented, with horns and horn fragments
would attract a variety of figural forms, both generic and being notably overrepresented at 73% (fig. 5.1).
elaborated. As we have noted before, there does not seem Compared to other fill and midden contexts, in which horn
to be a correlation between house elaboration, number of forms comprise around 45% of the corpus, this high figure
burials and the presence of figurines (but see below). in burials is quite striking; in fact, the overall figurine
However, the features in which only some figurine types distribution in burial fill is more similar to those found on
appear also provisionally suggest a more ‘active’ or floor use and fire activity areas, where horns comprise
meaningful function for certain filling practices. And more than 50% of the figurines. Burial features are, of
while excavators have long observed a diverse range of course, activity areas that involve a sequence of events and
4
Figure 5.3. Number of figurines in buildings vs building Elaboration index (Ei).
Figure 5.4. Density of figurines in buildings vs building Elaboration index (Ei).
actions, and the infilling of burials likely had its own pushes us to reconsider the relationship between burial and
associated practices or rituals, given the variety of objects figurine practices. Rather than being ‘background noise’,
found in otherwise clean soil. While figurines are hardly figurines and figurine fragments in burial fill may have
ubiquitous in burials, their presence in 10% of burials been part of a specific, even if informal, funerary practice.
5
Figure 5.5. Number of figurines vs number of individuals buried by building.
For instance, the relatively high occurrence of horn the site, abbreviated forms show a pattern distinct from
figurines in particular may suggest that horn figurines anthropomorphic and zoomorphic forms: they peak
provided a kind of apotropaic function or symbolic during the Middle period of occupation and decrease in
‘offering’, perhaps invoking the power or presence of the the Late period (and all but disappear in the Final period),
wild or even a specific animal (see Hodder, Meskell 2011; while anthropomorphic and zoomorphic forms increase
Nakamura, Pels 2014). Alternatively, given that they are from the Middle to the Late period (fig. 5.6). The
most prevalent in floor and activity areas, horns in burials zoomorphic forms appear to follow a consistent increase
may represent floor sweepings deposited intentionally or in density from the Early to Late periods, while human
expediently in burial fill. and abbreviated figures show an inverse relation; this
There also may be a weak correlation between the may suggest a particular relationship between these two
presence of figurines in burials and building elaboration. forms. Initially, we had categorised the abbreviated
Thirty-one per cent of buildings with an Elaboration forms as a subtype of anthropomorphic forms, but after
index (Ei – see Chapter 1) of 10 or less (5/16) have observing some abbreviated forms that were more
figurines in burials, while 50 per cent of buildings with animal-like (and their generally phallic form), we placed
an Ei of 11 or greater (8/16) have figurines in burials them in a separate category. Possible linkages between
(table 5.4). This number goes up to 78 per cent for abbreviated and anthropomorphic forms will be
buildings with an Ei of 15 or greater (7/9). So figurines discussed further below.
occur somewhat more frequently in the burial fill of more The density and number of figurines across all
elaborate buildings, although not necessarily in those categories dramatically fall in the Final period of
buildings with the most burials. occupation. However, we should stress that this drop in
figurine activity is likely, in part, due to differences in
From figurine form to figuring the human (tables 5.5 and excavation priorities that focused on the Final period.
5.6, figs 5.6–5.9) Proportionally less soil was sieved compared to excava-
The new figurine data from this last phase of excavations tions of the earlier periods, especially for building
do not drastically deviate from the site-wide patterning contexts (see table 5.3). This practice may have also
seen at the end of 2008: zoomorphic forms still dominate influenced the observable increase in anthropomorphic
the corpus (54%: horns 35%, quads 19%), followed by forms in proportion to other forms in the Final period
abbreviated forms (24%) and anthropomorphic forms (fig. 5.7), since many fragments, horns and abbreviated
(8%) (table 5.5). However, over the entire occupation of forms have been collected through sieving.
6
Building Ei No. of figurines No. of individuals Known rebuilds

buried
64 2 1 0 no known rebuilds
18 3 0 1 5 (S.VI.8-B.20-B.7-B.16-B.18)
160 5 1 4 4 (B.43-B.160-B.161-B.162)
22 5 0 0 5 (S.VI.1-B.8- B.21-B.22-B.23)
23 6 0 2 5 (S.VI.1-B.8- B.21-B.22-B.23)
48 6 0 1 2 (B.46-B.48)
56 7 0 4 4 (B.10-B.44-B.56-B.65)
6 9 2 10 4 (S.VI.10-B.24-B.6-B.17)
5 10 0 4 2 (B1-B.5)
44 10 0 16 4 (B.10-B.44-B.56-B.65)
65 10 7 16 4 (B.10-B.44-B.56-B.65)
Table 5.4. Number of figurines vs building Elaboration index (Ei) and number of individuals buried.
Figural Indeterminate Total % of corpus

Anthropomorphic 221 26 247 8.0
Abbreviated 636 64 700 22.8
Zoo-quadrupeds 565 26 591 19.2
Zoo-horns 1,107 64 1,081 35.2
Non-diagnostic - - 450 14.6
Other (phallomorphic) 6 0 6 0.2
Total 2,445 180 3,075
Table 5.5. Figurine forms.
Form related to function? Reassessing horn figurines. and 9). Arguing that clay horns may have become
However, in light of recent research by Lindsay Der analogous to skeletal horns, which were most often from
(2016; see also Chapter 6), the persistence (and, in fact, wild, male animals during this period (Twiss, Russell
increase in density) of horn figurines in particular from 2009), Der suggests that clay figural horns, among other
the Middle to the Late levels may suggest a more practices such as hunting, feasting and horn deposition,
meaningful practice. Der finds a surge in the densities of provided stabilising practices that recalled or preserved
both faunal and figurine horn assemblages in the Middle in some way the role of wild animals in the social order
levels (2016: 118). Intriguingly, this correlation occurs (Der 2016: 178–79).
most strongly in unburned buildings in the North, The clay horn density patterns over time could indeed
whereas in the South the correlation is more convincing support this idea. If figural horns mediated a stabilising
for burned buildings (ibid. 165–67). She suggests that link to wild animals, especially throughout a period in
this idiosyncratic result may be related to different which human relationships to these species were
strategies for dealing with – that is, resisting – substantial changing, we would expect these forms to flourish in the
social changes in the Middle levels: the reluctant turn Middle period and persist or even increase after this
towards cattle management (see Volume 13, Chapters 8 period of social transformation. In fact, we find that the
7
Figure 5.6. Densities of figurine types by period (figurines/kL). Densities were calculated from the dry sieve volume of
buildings and spaces in which figurines were found. Volumes provided by Çatalhöyük Project Database, calculated by
Dominik Lukas on 25 October 2017.
clay horn densities dramatically increase from the Early instance, clay horns could have functioned as material
to Middle period and again increase from the Middle to mnemonics that created bonds and occasions for ‘remem-
the Late period (fig. 5.6). Perhaps also significant is the bering’ a past and particular power. The shorthand form
density of horns from the Early to Final period progres- of the horn (as opposed to the more specific animal body)
sively constituting a larger proportion of the figurine might also materially convey an aura of distance, not only
corpus, even when figurine numbers drastically fall off the distance of animals in the wild, but also the distance
(fig. 5.7). Although very speculative, this pattern could of a past related to the hunt and the stories and myths that
support the idea that clay horns functioned as a stabil- would have accompanied it. In this capacity, they may
ising practice that recalled an earlier relationship to or have mediated apotropaic or commemorative gestures,
value of wild animals. perhaps during the interment of individuals (see above).
During the transition to increasing management of If we entertain this possible interpretation of horn
cattle, the social power or meaning of wild animals, and figurines in human burial fill, then the relatively infre-
practices related to them, may not have diminished for quent occurrence of these objects suggests that such
the community. Rather, these values may have been gestures were not a standard funerary practice (see
shifted to the sphere of genealogy-, memory- and discussion above). Instead, they may have reflected a
tradition-making, and therefore may have been more personalised choice or affiliation of someone (or
maintained or even intensified in different ways. For some group) present during the interment of the body.
8
Figure 5.7. Proportion of figurine types by period.
Figuring the human: a shift in concerns? Another while maintaining a somewhat standardised form, in the
suggestive pattern that has emerged is the elaboration of later levels also see some elaboration in detail. Many
anthropomorphic forms over time. As we note above, examples depict folded head elements from the Middle
there does appear to be a loose inverse correlation to the period onward, and there are a few instances of indicated
proportion of abbreviated and anthropomorphic figurines facial features in the Late period.
over time; this pattern could lend support to the suggestion Taking the figurine corpus as a whole over time, all
that in a general sense, abbreviated forms could be placed forms, in fact, suggest an increasing attention to elabo-
on a spectrum of anthropomorphic forms (but see ration and variety in form. In the Middle levels (and
Nakamura and Meskell 2009 for more discussion) as more intensifying in Late levels), we see the introduction of
shorthand, expedient representations of humans. Abbre- horses, deer, boars (although there is one example of a
viated forms are comparatively well represented in the possible boar from early level South H, with a long
Early period and peak in the Middle period, while anthro- trunk-like snout that turns up at the end and a ridged back
pomorphic forms maintain their modest number across the – although unusual, it is likely that this depicts a boar and
Early and Middle periods. But after the Middle period, if so marks a singular, early example) and a long, large-
abbreviated forms begin to contract in density and relative tailed species (fox or reptile?) in addition to the standard
proportion, while anthropomorphic forms increase in both cattle and sheep/goat quadrupeds we find in the Early
metrics and eventually overtake abbreviated forms in the levels (table 5.6). Although cattle and sheep/goat forms
Final period. If we place abbreviated and anthropo- remain the majority of figurine quadrupeds throughout,
morphic forms on a spectrum, one possible interpretation this diversification may track with the changing status of
of this trend is that it appears to show an increasing wild animals, particularly cattle, in the Çatalhöyük
concern for elaborating the human form. However, we lifeworld. Perhaps receding into communal memory,
would still suggest that the two forms likely mobilised history or even myth, wild bulls in the transition to
different activities and concerns, since abbreviated forms, animal domestication are joined (or even replaced) by
9
Form Levels No. of 2014e: 181). For instance, all of the stone figurines from
figurines the Middle to Late levels are found in houses, and the
latter appear to be more deliberately deposited, which
Horse (equid) South P/N,P, North G-I 9 would seem to indicate an intense or particular focus on
Deer (cervid) South N, P, North F, G, I 6 the house. The association of stone human figurines with
Boar (sus) South P, North G, ?H, I 12 certain houses, then, at least in one instance, could even
constitute a repetitive (or ‘history-making’ in Hodder’s
Long-tailed species North ?G, North I 5
terminology) practice: B.150 not only had five stone
(unidentified)
figurines deposited within its walls, the building directly
Table 5.6. Quadruped species introduced in Middle period. succeeding and on top of it also produced a stone human
figurine of a similar form. Even if these figurines circu-
lated during their lives before deposition, in the final
new species (domesticated and wild) in certain areas of gesture they are associated with a house. Certainly, the
social life. Figurines here may have located a site of play, flexibility of clay figurine practices – their relative
one that mediated a shifting lifeworld that the inhabitants expediency and ease of manufacture – easily enabled
of the site were embedded in and co-creating. more personalised forms of expression, whether in
Diversification in the figurine quadrupeds may reflect gestures of memory, commemoration or more formal
not only a changing human relationship to animals more practices of history-making. It is worth noting, however,
generally; it also may reflect a shift away from a more that portable media have been present throughout all
animal-focused world to a more human-focused world. levels, so the transfer of certain practices to more mobile
The project team has documented a number of changes in forms was perhaps intensified, but not necessarily
the Late and Final levels that suggest an increase in innovative in the Late and Final levels.
household independence, commensalism and social Human and animal isotope, chipped stone and
exchanges, and a concomitant decrease in ritual cohesion material culture analyses have provided compelling
and house-based history-making (for summary, see evidence for increased contact with other communities,
Hodder 2014d). Hodder further argues that by the later landscapes and materialities (see chapters in Hodder
levels, more cohesive community bonds and concerns for 2014b). While these data suggest an increase in diversi-
continuity centred on the house gave way to a greater fying and networking tendencies away from the house,
focus on movement, exchange of goods, and individuals; they do not necessarily provide ‘evidence for distinctive
certain wild animals, especially wild bulls appeared to traits associated with individuals’ (Hodder 2014e: 181).
decline in ritual and social importance (ibid. 181). While it might be tempting to interpret the more elabo-
Given Hodder’s suggestion that these changes could rated renderings and forms of human figurines in the
relate to an increased focus on individuals in the Late Late levels as supporting an argument for an increased
levels, many researchers have been exploring their data focus on individuals, a more long-term, contextual view
for additional evidence for such a shift. Figurines in of anthropomorphic figurine practices and formal
particular have often been mobilised in such arguments analysis of their representational conventions suggests a
(Bailey 1994; Knapp, Van Dommelen 2008), despite the rather different story.
problematic application of liberal Western concepts such We would argue that the temporal patterning of
as ‘individual’ in ancient and prehistoric contexts (see figurine practice indicates an increased concern not with
Meskell 1999). At Çatalhöyük, we find no evidence from individuals, but with humans within the context of a
the figurine corpus that supports the idea of an increased historically animal-focused lifeworld. While a human-
concern with individuals over time, even with the most centred worldview is perhaps taken for granted by many
recent impressive stone additions. Instead, there is contemporary researchers schooled in a Western liberal
perhaps a greater concern for rendering the human body tradition, such a construction is far from given or
in particular ways. As we will argue below, such bodies inevitable. Many contemporary Indigenous peoples and
(which were most likely idealised, see Nakamura, some rural agricultural communities across the
Meskell 2009) more likely served to articulate specific Americas, Oceania and Asia, for instance, maintain
notions about the group or community rather than about notions of the human that eschew human exceptionalism:
certain individuals. Moreover, while the figurine data not all human groups understand humans as radically
may also track with some of the site-wide changes in the apart from animals (or plants, soil, water etc.), nor have
Late levels, they do not necessarily support Hodder’s they understood personhood as something exclusive to
conclusions that ‘history-making through the use of humans, articulated through individual identity and
houses became less possible or prevalent’ (Hodder status (cf. Viveiros de Castro 1998; Kimmerer 2013;
10
Watts 2013; Todd 2014; Lyons 2020). Moreover, scien- consciousness; rather, as we will suggest in the next
tific understandings and categories of animals often fail section, it more likely signalled a (contested) turn
to capture the complex and nuanced relationships that towards the human and away from the (wild) animal, and
humans share with animals in daily life (see Feldman and perhaps an incipient human-focused worldview, explored
Norton 1998). We should therefore critically question through specific conceptions of the human body. Hodder
rather than assume how Neolithic humans at Çatalhöyük has pointed to the evidence for an increase in the size and
understood their world and their place in it. diversity of beads and types of decoration in the Late
Turning to the figural forms, when considered levels as supporting a greater concern for differentiating
alongside other data from the site, they do appear to track the self and individual. However, these trends, while
a shift in the focus on and depiction of the human form indicating a broadened network of human interaction that
over time. Human figural forms increase in the Middle supported an increased mobility of various materials,
and Late levels while animal forms recede. While the images and ideas, might simply reflect a turn towards
densities of all figurine forms except abbreviated surge in human-mediated or human-made social capital. Status
the Late levels, anthropomorphic forms see the most and success could increasingly be pursued and attained
dramatic increase (more than 600%, compared to the through trade, control of managed resources and inten-
next highest increase, for horns, at less than 25%, see fig. sified contact with other human groups, not only through
5.6). Suggestively, in the Final levels, when the figurines the economic and symbolic control of powerful wild
see a dramatic drop in number and density across the site, animals. There is scant evidence to indicate that
both anthropomorphic and horn forms constitute a larger possession or display of unique, different or ‘status’
percentage of the figurine corpus than they did in the objects would be associated with a particular individual
Late levels, while quadrupeds and abbreviated figurines as opposed to a group.
contract. Again, we should note that this result may in Perhaps indirectly supporting this intensified interest
part be due to underrepresentation of certain figural in the human form, figurine trends over time also suggest
forms due to excavation strategies employed in the last a changing kind of attention to the animal world. Within
weeks of excavation. However, if less soil was sieved, it the figurine corpus animals become increasingly
is odd that horn fragments, which are generally the abstracted in form over time, as practices seem to shift
smallest figural form, would be overrepresented. Over away from quadruped and towards horn forms. In terms
this time period, the density of the more elaborated of relative densities, quadrupeds progressively decrease
animal forms – the quadrupeds – contracts the most, as horns progressively increase from Early to Final levels
while the overall density of elaborated human forms (fig. 5.8), suggesting that not all horns were part of
contracts the least. If we consider some horns as possible quadrupeds. Louise Martin and Lynn Meskell have noted
‘abbreviated’ forms of animals, one could read these at least two different cattle types represented in the
overall trends as human representations becoming more zoomorphic quadrupeds (2012: 408–10). The most
elaborated (abbreviated to anthropomorphic), while common type they interpret as wild aurochs, but
animal forms are becoming more abstracted (quadruped examples from the later levels suggest a different type,
to horns). In figurine terms, the human was beginning to possibly related to domesticates (see Twiss, Russell
demand more attention. 2009). Some horns were made as stand-alone objects
While this increased concern for human forms in (not to be attached to a quadruped form), and the variety
figural practices seems hard to ignore (also given what of horn forms we find demonstrate that the Neolithic
we know of the Chalcolithic figural practices that makers were quite capable of accurately rendering the
follow), the premature impulse to focus on the horns of different species. Therefore, further research on
emergence of individuals seems to have largely eclipsed horn morphology over time could provide more insight
this more fundamental shift of attention from animal to into the relationship between wild and domestic animals
human bodies. Given that much of what we have found and figurine practices. If clay animal horns came to
in the Early to Middle (and even much of the Late) levels evoke the power of wild aurochsen or other animals, this
at Çatalhöyük suggests a notion of the human as might suggest not a decrease in social importance of the
thoroughly embedded in if not beholden to the animal wild, but rather its shift into the realm of history, memory
world (and particularly aligned with the power of certain and myth. By condensing the power of the wild and a
wild animals), a shift towards a more human-centred and ‘mythological’ past into a metonymic, miniature form
human-dominated social imaginary would likely have (see Nakamura 2004; 2019; Nakamura, Pels 2014),
accompanied a significant social transformation and figurines may have figured power that could be
consequent tensions. Such upheaval, however, may not redirected in a multitude of ways. Alternatively if, in the
have immediately precipitated a more individual-focused later levels, clay horns were linked to actual animals
11
within the domesticating process, they may have forms. If we consider B.139 and its interface with
signalled a shift in certain ontological commitments; B.131, middens within buildings may have had a
horn figurines could have performed a more expedient different kind of status than those in external spaces; in
commemorative function as animals circulated within a a technical sense, they are part of discrete depositional
more human-centred economy of networking and events within building fill (even if after building
exchange. Perhaps most likely, given the non-standardis- ‘closure’). More generally, it is also notable that the
ation of many practices, horn figurines brokered in only excavation category for which abbreviated forms
power in a variety of social spheres. begin to approach the number of horns is fill (fig. 5.1).
Abbreviated figurines also occur in the fill of bins,
Building correlations (tables 5.7–5.9, figures 5.10–5.12) obsidian caches/hoards and wall openings (however, the
This diversity in figurine practice seems especially to sample size is quite small); horns also occur in the first
bear out when we look more closely at specific building two contexts. Buildings, bins and caches can all be
assemblages. Overall, there is a wide variance of figurine considered discrete spaces of containment (different
numbers and densities within buildings. But five from burials, which are sometimes discrete deposits, but
buildings reveal relatively high figurine densities: B.3, are frequently intentionally intercut and disturbed, and
B.49, B.65, B.131 and B.139 (buildings with >1.0 sometimes rearranged). Figurines in these spaces
figurines/kL and more than 75% excavated, see table therefore draw attention to containment – more
5.7). All of these buildings except for B.65 are located in precisely, the state of being contained rather than the
the North Area. While the figurine assemblages in each power to contain. Fill is different from features that are
building are somewhat idiosyncratic (see table 5.8), a structural or activity based, such as walls, platforms,
few general and suggestive patterns may be worth fire-installations, or pits dug to place or retrieve various
exploring. In buildings where figurines are found in a items. Fill occupies more than it structures space
variety of contexts, such as B.3 and B.131, figurine (although it does often serve a structural purpose); it
distributions unsurprisingly follow the general site-wide also provides a more passive form of support or action,
pattern of horns being the most ubiquitous, followed by as it inhabits, archives and preserves gestures made at
abbreviated, then quadrupeds and humans. In buildings transitional moments of or moments of concealment.
with figurines primarily from midden and redeposited fill Wall openings, while not containers, were likely filled
contexts, however, abbreviated forms slightly edge out during transitional moments of buildings’ closure. That
horns (B.139 and 131/139 interface). we find abbreviated forms in particular at these
Although it requires further exploration and support, moments (along with horns), might suggest a more
there is some suggestion – also by the overall patterning particular kind of apotropaic or commemorative
– that abbreviated figurines may be more particularly function for such forms. At the same time, it may mark
associated with certain filling practices than other fill or filling practices in a specific way.
Figure 5.8. Relative overall densities of zoomorphic forms over time.
12
Finally, B.49 and B.65 break from the overall figurine have been intentionally placed or discarded, with
distribution patterns but in different ways. Building 49 is 20736.x2 and x3 from platform F.3855 most certainly
the only building in which quadrupeds are the most being a primary depositional deposit. Only two clay
prevalent type, due to a figurine ‘cache’ of possibly ten to horns were found in this building, but again this could be
twelve animal figurines (most of which were ‘stabbed’) due to the expedient sieving strategy employed at the end
found within a dump or deposit, deliberately placed in of the project. This focus on human stone forms is a
the southwest corner and sealed by a platform. This notable shift compared to the buildings with substantial
cache is unique across the site and dates to Level North quantities of clay figurines (see above). As all the stone
G. As we have discussed previously, this building has a figurines from this building are described in detail
strong association with animals – not only those elsewhere (Meskell et al. 2015; 2016; Nakamura,
associated with the hunt and feasting, but various other Meskell 2017), we will describe them only briefly here
species as well (Nakamura, Meskell 2013b: 208–09). and instead focus more on the interpretive and contextual
The other figurines from B.49 derive from burial fill analyses of these deposits.
(horns and abbreviated forms) and platform make-up Taken as broad strokes, the figurine assemblage in
(horns). In contrast, the figurine practices in B.65, dating B.150 bears some resemblance to the one found in
to the Late period levels (South Q), focus more attention Mellaart’s ‘Leopard Shrine’ VIA.44. Seven stone
on human rather than animal forms. This building also figurines were found in this building, some of which bear
contained what appear to be deliberately placed notable similarity to those found in B.150.
figurines. One figurine of human form carved in plaster The figurines from (20736) were placed nearby each
was found in a possible foundation deposit with several other in very clean make-up of platform F.3855 (see
horse scapulae, worked stones, a human baby leg and a Meskell et al. 2016). Together they constitute a deliberate
pottery fragment, placed near a pottery vessel embedded deposit comprised of multiple artefacts: an obsidian
into the floor at the base of a ladder in the southeast blade was found next the left arm of x1, while x3 was
corner (Regan 2014: 146). Another figurine was a clay facing a piece of galena (x2) and nearby were two blue
human head found in a levelling deposit associated with beads (x4, x5). 20736.x1 is a large female figure carved
the closure of Building 65. While deliberate deposition is from re-crystallised limestone (fig. 5.9). This figurine
questionable in this case, the figurine was found in a was found lying face up with its head pointing to the
clean layer that had a number of intentionally placed northeast. There was an obsidian blade placed just under
objects including several horn cores, a cluster of tools (a and next to the left arm (fig. 5.10). The figure gives the
bone point and unused Nenezi Dağ prismatic blades: one impression of a body with an overabundance of flesh,
complete, four fragments), an antler, a blue bead, a showing rather corpulent limbs, stomach, buttocks and
scapula, a stone palette and a stone sharpener. Similar to breasts. The execution of this form suggests a good and
B.49, the horn figurines from B.65 all derive from burial pragmatic knowledge of the human body and also a
fill, and the one quadruped(?) figurine fragment (that penchant for displaying technical virtuosity. The choice
may also have been a horn) derives from a to deeply undercut the stone so as to display the stomach
construction/make-up context. Two things are notable flap or arms separated from the body seems to showcase
about the figurine assemblages from these two buildings: a kind of technical prowess that was more performative
one is that the earliest deliberate deposit found on site than formally necessary. 20736.x3 was found just north
consisted of animal quadrupeds; the other is that delib- of X1 in the same matrix (fig. 5.11). This piece was
erate deposits with figurines appear to become more carved and incised from pale yellow limestone with
common in the Late period, and they focus on human visible black inclusions. The figurine was found lying on
rather than animal forms. If we also include B.150, its left side with its head pointing north to northeast. It
which has a medium density (0.529 f/kl) but one that is was embedded in or placed on top of a lump of gypsum.
very high for the TP/TPC Area, the deliberate placement Directly to the left of the head, excavators found a piece
of human figurines becomes even more strongly stated of galena (fig. 5.12) and two ‘blue beads’ (noted in the
(see discussion about B.150 below). excavation notes but not locatable for examination).
Some red pigmentation, possibly ochre, is visible on the
Building 150. Over the final two seasons of the project, sole of the right foot and on one of the ears. On top of the
Building 150 (Level TPC M) in the TPC Area furnished head are two perforations that are connected diagonally,
five anthropomorphic figurines; this number increases to suggesting that at some time the object had a more
six if we include the one found just above this building in mobile existence. This figure is of a similar type to x1,
the first dwelling structure post-dating the use of B.150 but less corpulent while still giving the impression of
(Level TPC N; see table 5.9). All of the figurines may abundant flesh.
13
North Area South Area
% excavated
% excavated
Av. density
Figurines/
Figurines/
by phase
figurines
figurines
Vol. (kL)
Vol. (kL)
Building
Bulding
Period
No. of
No. of
Level
Level
kL
kL
H 118 25 0.443 5 11.29
162 50 0.050 2 39.91
18 25 0.826 5 6.05
J
23 50 0.067 1 14.92
161 50 0.081 2 24.74
Early ?J 9 0.000 0 2.35 0.195
2 75 0.580 18 31.04
16 25 2.496 2 0.80
K 17 75 0.139 10 71.95
22 0 0.000 0 0.10
160 100 0.095 5 52.79
5 50 0.251 10 39.84 4 50 0.000 0 7.83
84 - 0.000 0 1.02 6 25 0.048 5 103.57
F 119 - 0.203 13 64.18 7 0 0.000 0 1.64
L
132 75 0.339 13 38.37 21 0 0.000 0 0.01
139 - 1.053 47 44.65 43 75 0.175 6 34.31
1 100 0.281 19 67.62 130 25 0.000 0 5.70
3 100 2.005 72 35.91 ?L 93 - 0.000 0 0.04
46 0 5.952 11 1.85 8 0 5.083 2 0.39
48 25 0.000 0 13.11 20 0 0.000 0 0.35
49 100 1.331 18 13.52 24 25 0.000 0 34.71
51 100 0.000 0 8.67 M 40 <25 0.617 9 14.58
52 85 0.816 34 41.65 50 75 0.143 2 13.99
Middle 0.421
59 100 0.054 6 110.59 92 25 0.000 0 1.06
G 77 100 0.526 29 55.16 100 25 0.000 0 3.21
82 50 0.000 0 10.28 ?M 469 - 2.398 11 4.59
113 0 0.220 10 45.47 89 75 0.010 1 95.84
N
114 75 0.827 12 14.50 104 - 0.000 0 0.08
131 100 1.093 92 84.15 N-O 86 - 0.000 0 1.03
112 50 0.000 0 0.97 76 50 0.176 11 62.40
101 <25 1.138 8 7.03 79 25 0.482 8 16.58
102 50 0.074 1 13.54 80 75 0.466 26 55.77
O
128 50 0.358 3 8.37 87 - 0.175 2 11.42
?G 135 - 0.000 0 0.03 97 100 0.504 19 37.66
96 25 0.245 6 24.44
Table 5.7. Figurine densities and counts in buildings by occupation period. Densities were calculated from the total
volume of buildings and spaces in which figurines were found. Dry sieve volumes were not used for these calculations,
given that varying sieving strategies employed over 25 years makes meaningful comparison difficult. Volumes provided
by Catalhoyuk Project Database, calculated by Dominik Lukas on 25 October 2017. Includes only buildings with total
volumes recorded by 25 October 2017.
14
North Area South Area
% excavated
% excavated
Av. density
Figurines/
Figurines/
by phase
figurines
figurines
Vol. (kL)
Vol. (kL)
Building
Bulding
Period
No. of
No. of
Level
Level
kL
kL
?H 12 15 0.000 0 0.31 75 25 1.429 6 4.20
P
13 15 0.000 0 1.59 85 - 0.000 0 0.49
45 25 0.000 0 21.57 53 50 0.981 9 9.18
55 25 0.039 1 25.42 Q 65 100 1.104 10 9.06
57 25 0.131 2 15.24 68 - 0.265 2 7.55
58 25 0.074 2 26.96 42 50 0.283 8 28.26
R
H 60 25 0.955 5 5.24 69 - 0.000 0 1.11
64 25 0.121 2 16.50 56 100 0.545 6 11.01
S
Late 67 25 0.232 1 4.31 44 100 0.063 4 63.45 0.207
88 25 0.000 0 5.42 T 10 75 0.878 1 1.14
108 25 0.169 3 17.79 TP M 81 - 0.036 2 56.23
129 25 0.049 5 102.11 150 - 0.529 8 1.89
TPC M
54 25 0.000 0 7.04 121 - 3 nr
I 70 0 0.000 0 0.45 TP N 103 - 0.000 0 0.36
71 25 0.000 0 0.21 TPC N 110 - 2 nr
J 47 25 0.406 1 2.46 TP N-O 74 - 0.034 9 261.60
IST 63 - 0.196 3 15.33
TP O 72 - 0.059 11 185.05
TP P 73 - 0.085 7 82.62
TP Q 62 - 0.000 0 223.17
33 - 0.000 0 0.12
TP R 34 - 1.601 1 0.62
Final 61 - 0.000 0 108.59 0.039
sp.
637
sp.
TPC.? - 0.526 5 9.512
639
sp.
594
All North 0.428 423 988 South + TP/C 0.130 240 1852
South - TP/C 0.221 204 922
Table 5.7 (continued). Figurine densities and counts in buildings by occupation period. Densities were calculated from
the total volume of buildings and spaces in which figurines were found. Dry sieve volumes were not used for these
calculations, given that varying sieving strategies employed over 25 years makes meaningful comparison difficult.
Volumes provided by Catalhoyuk Project Database, calculated by Dominik Lukas on 25 October 2017. Includes only
buildings with total volumes recorded by 25 October 2017.
15
Building Level Description of Figurines Total no. of Context

figurals
131 North G horns (45), abbreviated (24), 85 mixed: burial fill, construction/packing,
quads (16) redeposited midden/mixed dumps, pit fill,
fire spot
131/139 North F-G abbreviated (9), horns (7), 20 redeposited fill or midden
quadrupeds (4)
139 North F abbreviated (22), horns (20), 47 predominantly from midden/abandoned
quadrupeds (5) building
3 North G horns (38), abbreviated (22), 69 mixed: construction/make-up/collapse, fill,
quadrupeds (8), anthro (1) floors, oven/ash, burial fill
49 North G quadrupeds (10), horns (5), 16 predominantly from cluster deposit, room
abbreviated (1) and bin fill, burial fill, platform surfaces
65 South Q horns (6), anthro (2) and 9 predominantly from burial fill, also
quadruped? (1) construction and scapula deposit
Table 5.8. Buildings with high figurine densities (>1.0 figs/kL).
Formally, the two figurines share certain general The (20736) deposit echoes certain practices
features. Their legs are extended, but they are unable to associated with the burial of humans in platforms: many
stand. Their arms are bent with hands resting on the bodies interned in buildings are placed in platforms; in
breasts. And the hands and feet are disproportionately general, most are placed on their sides, but other
small compared to the rest of the body with the feet positions are common, and there some rare instances of
appearing peg-like rather than being naturalistically supine placements (for example, sk.4593, F.492); ochre
rendered. Despite these similarities, the two figurines are and pigment appear in burials in lumps and in scatters but
rather different in terms of size, colour and overall few other contexts (only in wall paintings and a few
rendering. x1 is larger, whiter in colour and has much cluster units); and many burials include burial goods
more exaggerated and rounded features than x3. such as chipped stone objects and beads. Notably, we
Christina Tsoraki (in Meskell et al. 2016) has suggested have never found a human figurine in direct association
that x1 was manufactured with considerable technical with a skeleton, and these figurines are the first to be
expertise. She notes that some stone objects have found in association with a platform for the Hodder
multiple grooves, but this figurine does not; its excavations.
remarkable symmetry and lack of manufacturing errors Mellaart, however, did report finding figurines
or inconsistencies attests to highly proficient technical associated with platforms; in VIA.44 he also reported
execution with very fine and controlled movements. x3, finding two human figurines, ‘two standing figures made
on the other hand, reveals a less skilled hand, at least in of black volcanic stone’ (Mellaart 1964: 75). He theatri-
the rendering of the body, which shows a number of cally interpreted the two as older and younger represen-
manufacturing errors and a lack of symmetry and tations of the ‘Great Goddess’, with the ‘mother’ figure
precision in some areas. The face and head of x3, being larger, more detailed and carefully rendered
however, are strikingly more expertly modelled than the (Ankara 79-452-65), and the ‘daughter’ being somewhat
body. The eyes, nose, mouth and ears are rendered in a smaller and more schematised, perhaps wearing a shawl
realistic way, with the eyes appearing rounded, slightly (Ankara 79-454-65). The former was found on a platform
bulging (possibly lidded or closed?) with the suggestion covered in carbonised grain just in front of the left-hand
of a brow and cheekbones. The head is elongated and the leopard relief, while the latter was found in the space
top/back of the head projects diagonally backwards. between this and another platform with a collection of
Given the incongruity of technical expertise displayed on other figures, concretions and stalactites. While we have
the head and the body, Tsoraki has suggested that x3 may always argued that contextual and site-wide analyses do
have been a multi-authored project, with a more experi- not support an interpretation of these figures as
enced hand rendering the head and face (ibid.). goddesses or deities, it is interesting to note certain
16
GID Material Description Level Context (C) and

associated materials (AM)
20736.x1 Recrystallised limestone; TPC M C: platform make-up (F.3855)
1041.63g, 10.96cm (h),
8.74cm (w), 17.20cm (th) AM: obsidian blade, stone figurine
20736.x3
20736.x3 Pale yellow limestone; TPC M C: platform make-up (F.3855)

54.40g, 6.93cm (h),
3.74cm (w), 2.36cm (th) AM: galena, two blue beads, stone
figurine 20736.x1
32806.x1 Soft limestone; TPC M C: deposit in southwest corner

566g, 9.83cm (h),
8.46cm (w), 8.46cm (th) AM: stone figurine 32806.x2, blue
bead, bird wing bones, stone pounder
polisher fragment, unworked clay,
schist abrading tool, organic
material, bright green material
(malachite?) and burnt shell
32806.x2 Marble; 2725g, 24.70cm (h), TPC M C: deposit in southwest corner

12.00cm (w), 6.46cm (th)
AM: stone 328076.x2, blue bead,
bird wing bones, stone pounder
polisher fragment, unworked clay,
schist abrading tool, organic
material, bright green material
(malachite?) and burnt shell
23704.x7 Plastered or slipped clay; TPC M C: northeast platform (F.3893),

9.19g, 2.50cm (h), occupational layer, rich in materials
1.72cm (w), 2.58cm (th)
AM (possible): astralagus, bone
point, flint perforator/scraper,
obsidan flake, worked greenstone,
speleothem, polishing stone
31852.x3 Limestone TPC N C: in room rubble of first structure

post-dating B.150, in association
with fire spot
AM (possible): cluster of worked

bones and stones, flint and obsidian
tools, a fragment of a horn core and
two wings from a large bird
Table 5.9. Figurines from B.150 (and post-structure).
17
18
Figure 5.9. 20736.x1: (L) front view, (C) side view, (R) back view (photographs by Jason Quinlan).
Figure 5.10. 20736.x1 in situ (photograph by Jason Quinlan).
similarities between Mellaart’s deposit and the one in resemble the head of stone figurine 20736.x3 with eyes
(20736): the standing or extended postures, the differen- (possibly closed or lidded), nose, mouth, ears and a
tials in size and technical skill or effort in rendering form, pointed (delicate) chin. A hairline is also visible on the
and the association with platforms. Mellaart’s obser- right side and back, extending across the forehead to
vation of finding speleothems with human figurines, above the ear and then behind the ear to the back of the
while not corroborated by the (20736) deposit, is also neck. The head appears to have been attached to a body
interesting, given that speleothems have been found in by a dowel as there is a dowel hole in the base. The
B.150 (23765, 23993) and are also generally concen- function of this appears to be ‘structural’ or part of the
trated in the TP and TPC Areas (late to final occupation production process, since the break with a clear line of
levels). Speleothems at Çatalhöyük appear in the form of where the slip ends suggests that it was permanently
stalactites, dog tooth spar, flowstones and calcitic attached to a body rather than made as a piece that could
concretions and only appear from North G levels circulate independently. This piece vaguely evokes the
onward. And it is perhaps significant that at least one alabaster head found in VIA.44, which also sports a
anthropomorphic figurine excavated by the Hodder team ‘socket hole’ at the base of the head. While this piece is
is made from speleothem (10475.x2, see also a similar made from stone and is quite large (5.4cm), it also
one found by Mellaart, CHC21). Erdoğu et al. (2013) suggests a tradition of making separate heads for human
have suggested that these materials likely derive from bodies. Notably, Mellaart noted that this alabaster head
caves about 100km away (Incikini and Hatçenini caves). was found in the midst of a collection of pink, yellow and
This association of human forms with speleothems, as white stalactites and limestone concretions in the centre
well as other materials, may have had specific signifi- of the room.
cance, a topic that we will return to below. Finally, (32806) in the southwest corner of B.150
The northeast platform of B.150 also produced a consisted of an artefact-rich deposit that included two
remarkable clay figurine head (23704.x7, fig. 5.13). The stone figurines (32806.x1 and x2, figs 5.15 left and 5.16
head is very finely modelled, and its surface appears to left). As these figurines were found in a cluster with many
have been plastered or slipped. The facial features other materials (fig. 5.16), their find context is similar to
19
20
Figure 5.11. 20736.x3: (L) front view, (C) right side, (R) left side (photograph by Jason Quinlan).
Figure 5.12. 20736.x3 in situ (photograph by Jason Quinlan).
Figure 5.13. 23705.x1. Clay figurine head.
21
31852.x3, found in the rubble of a dwelling just above sequence and the artefact-rich make-up deposits sealed
B.150. The larger ‘statuette’ (x2), placed on its back, was under a platform in the southwest corner of B.49 (see
the focal point of the assemblage (fig. 5.14): a broken above and Nakamura, Meskell 2013b: 212–14). But what
stone pounder/polisher (x5) was found broken side down is striking about the figurine deposit in this corner are the
just above the body within the lens of burnt material that associated materials. In some sense they provide a kind
sealed the entire assemblage; a palette/abrader (x7) was of ‘snapshot’ of a world, not only referencing various
found northeast of the feet; a light blue-green bead (x3) activities such as processing and fabricating
was found underneath the buttock area; bones from a bird (pounder/polisher, palette/abrader, textile or leather),
wing (x4, carpo-metatarsus) were found next to the left animals (bird wing), materials, colours and places (bead,
shoulder; an unidentified organic material, possibly hide malachite, shell), but perhaps associated/symbolic capac-
or leather (32806.s4) was found under the body and ities and powers – the human power of forming, creating
appeared to wrap up around its right side; under this layer, and decorating, and access to certain materials, groups
a cluster of bright green malachite(?) was found under the and locations in the landscape. While there are no
torso and a burnt shell under the head area (not collected, speleothems in this assemblage, such materials sourced
but see fig. 5.17). 32806.x1 was found face down, about from distant (and perhaps powerful) places may have
10cm north of x2. also served a similar associative or presencing purpose in
This arrangement of materials in this deposit suggests Mellaart’s assemblage.
intentional placement, and the two figures vaguely
resemble others found in Mellaart’s ‘Leopard Shrine’. Emergent themes from the figurine corpus and future
32806.x2 evokes CHC461/79-452-65 in Ankara (fig. directions
5.14, right). One notable difference between the Mellaart The Çatalhöyük figurine corpus suggests a number of
figure and 32806.x2 is that the latter is quite flattened on themes or questions that could be explored in future
the back. While the overall body shape and features like studies. Throughout our involvement in the project, most
the back of the ears and cap are skilfully depicted, back of our attention has been focused on the humble but
details are quite subtle or absent, and features such as the ubiquitous finds of the figurine corpus: namely the clay
buttocks and head are very flattened compared to other materials, predominantly zoomorphic in form. As we
figurines, as if it was meant to lie on its back or perhaps have explored various themes and future directions of
up against a wall. Also, like 20736.x3 above, 32806.x2 Neolithic clay figurine practice elsewhere (for
displays uneven manufacturing attention and/or skill. summaries see Meskell et al. 2008; Nakamura, Meskell
Again the head seems to have received more attention, as 2013b), now at the end of the project (which quite fortu-
it is more finely rendered and smoothed. The head and itously produced several new examples), the stone
face, depicting only the nose and ears carved explicitly, figurines practices demand some attention. Excavations
with only the suggestion of eyes and mouth, is very well in the Late period levels doubled the number of stone
executed and exceptionally smoothed with an off-white figurines. One building in particular is responsible for
colour, showing minimal environmental wear. In this surge: B.150 (Level TPC M) and its afterlife
contrast, the body and back of the head shows significant produced five human figures rendered in stone. A cluster
staining and erosion and unevenness in planning and care of other unusual objects, including a female figurine with
in execution. The lower body sports areas of damage and its head intentionally removed (31852.x3), was found
remnants of plaster and staining from the organic just above its southwest room in Sp.585 (Marciniak et al.
material upon which it was placed. 32806.x1 likewise 2015). Only burned Building 79 (Level South O)
vaguely evokes the form of CHC459/79-450-65 from contained more than one anthropomorphic stone figurine
VIA.44 (fig. 5.15 right). Both give the impression that (18523.x1, 18545.x1), while B.58 (Level North H)
the figure is seated, perhaps with the legs going under- contained one (10264.x1), and a burial under B.42 (Level
neath the body, although 32806.x1 is much more rounded South R) contained another (10475.x2). The others were
with an elongated neck and upturned face. found in Late or Final period non-building contexts
The southwest corner of the building was excep- (7814.x1/TP R, 12102.x1/ North I, and 15839.x10/TP O).
tionally rich in artefacts, many of which seem to have While the sample size remains small, a few incipient
been placed (intentionally?) in groups with other or suggestive patterns deserve some consideration. In the
materials (see Marciniak et al. 2017). Excavators have Late period, the number of human figurines rendered in
suggested that deposits in this corner of the building may stone increases and their deposition begins to appear
have been part of a ritual related to the closure or more considered, as they appear not as single items, but
transition of a building phase or feature. There are indeed in association with a mix of other materials. In particular,
similarities to practices seen in the Building 65-56-44 there may be some association between these figurines
22
Figure 5.14. Left: 32806.x2 (photograph by Jason Quinlan). Right: CHC461/79-452-65 (photograph by Belma Kulaçoğlu).
Figure 5.15. Left: 32806.x1 (front and back) (photograph by Jason Quinlan). Right: CHC459/79-450-65. 5.50cm (h)
3.00cm (w).
and materials that evoke broader networks and associa- Late period and then miniaturised by the Final period
tions (speleothems, chipped stone, greenstone, bird (fig. 5.19). Finally, when one considers all the stone
wings etc.). The stone forms depict four main types human figural forms that have emerged from the
(these become even more apparent when we consider Neolithic occupation levels of the site excavated by the
Mellaart’s finds) including backward-leaning figures, Hodder team, there appears to be a decrease in the
riding figures, abstracted (possibly seated) forms, and diversity of ‘types’ over time, settling around the
extended human bodies with a detailed abundance of fat corpulent, extended body form (fig. 5.18d).
and flesh (fig. 5.18). Strikingly, the Hodder excavations While the diversity and occasionally idiosyncratic
have only found the first two types in the Middle period nature of the clay figurine corpus have prompted us in the
(a and b), while the Late and Final periods give way to past to eschew more iconographic accounts and focus
the latter two (c and d). In fact, by the Final period, only more on the more fluid, ambiguous, metonymic and
the last type (d) is found. In addition, there is a notable indexical aspects of figurine practice, the stone figurines
size differential – from miniature to statuette – amongst draw attention to the whole body, particular forms and
the stone figurines that may vaguely follow a temporal their expressive symbolic capacities. At the end of this
trend. The stone figurines begin palm- to hand-sized in project, it is perhaps time to speculate on what ideas and
the Middle period, with some becoming quite large in the values some figurines might have expressed in the context
23
Figure 5.16. Group photo of (32604.x1–x7) (photograph by Jason Quinlan).
24
figurines in the Late period (B.150 mentioned above)

demonstrate a particular attention given to the head and
face. So in the figurine corpus, we find different kinds of
attention given to various forms, some more detailed and
elaborated, others more condensed or abbreviated. These
different forms of attention do not necessarily translate
into the retreat of animal power and the ascendance of
human power in a Çatalhöyük worldview. Rather, the
process was likely more complex. The increased visual
interest in corpulent human forms and concomitant
condensation of animals into horns could track with a
changing social world in which interaction with other
Figure 5.17. Green material and burnt shell (unrecorded) human groups and more distant places and materials was
found under 32604.x2. becoming more economically, politically and symboli-
cally important. But animals were not disappearing, nor
were they becoming less important (even if one argued
of Neolithic Çatalhöyük. The stone figurine assemblage, for a decline in their symbolic importance, this might be
when considered more broadly within Çatalhöyük figurine balanced by an increase in their economic importance).
practices, draws attention to three intersecting themes that Rather, human relationships to animals, and possibly
we will discuss below: (1) elaboration/exaggeration and ideas of the human itself, were undergoing a shift. Some
abbreviation as incipient formal conventions, (2) the figurine practices may have mediated changes in ideas
human body as an expressive medium of power, and (3) and social orders; wild animals and the activities and
stone figural practices as expressing a diversity of powers associated with them were likely becoming
Neolithic values and affiliations. recoded or renegotiated as their presence and status in
daily and/or ritual life was challenged by the introduction
Elaboration and abbreviation of new technologies and social arrangements.
First, large-scale patterns may suggest two different The basic difference in gestures of abbreviating and
‘poles’ of figural formal practice: abbreviated-abridged elaborating perhaps comes down to intensity and focus of
(horns and abbreviated bodies) on the one end and elabo- concern. The ubiquitous presence of animals, their flesh,
rated-exaggerated (animal and human bodies) on the remains, imagery and installations on site suggest an in-
other. While these are not strictly delimited conventions, depth knowledge and articulation of animals as symbolic
there is some suggestion that, at least in terms of and socioeconomic resources (see Meskell 2008; Twiss,
deposition, horns and abbreviated forms may have been Russell 2009; Meskell, Hodder 2011; Nakamura, Pels
mobilised in similar ways (see above). If this is the case, 2014). The importance and power of certain animals, for
abbreviated forms may raise interesting questions about instance wild bulls, was well established by the Late
metonymic, specific and generic invocations of subjects period and their invocation in the expedient form of a horn
and their relationship to power. The differential treatment (rather than as entire bodies) would still have been easily
of human and animal heads and bodies may also be understood and recognisable. Given such familiarity with
related to such questions. Practices at Çatalhöyük such animal power, more gestural invocations of these
demonstrate a particular attention to both animal and animals would be sufficient in many cases. While images
human heads: animal bucrania were plastered and of corpulent (or what many have interpreted as pregnant)
installed on walls, benches and pilasters, while human female bodies are known since Palaeolithic times, the
crania were removed from interred bodies and possibly particular focus at Çatalhöyük on what we have interpreted
circulated. However, over time, the human head and face as mature (even possibly ungendered) flesh rather than
become a site of greater attention and elaboration, while fertile female flesh, suggests a more specific concern for
the animal head (and possibly its associations) become longevity and economic, social and reproductive success.
visually condensed into horns. We have previously This idea is also supported by our work on the burial data,
written about the possible significance of headedness and where we found that some elderly women displayed some
body partability for both animal and human bodies (see of the most elaborate, even personalised, burial assem-
Meskell 2008; Nakamura, Meskell 2013b). In figurine blages (see Nakamura, Meskell 2013a). Unlike the
practices, we begin to find separate human heads and figurines, which lack specific markers or details that
bodies in Level South M/North G (n=3), which become would be associated with an individual, elaborate burial
more common in the Late period (n=16). And stone assemblages are quite specific, perhaps even biographical.
25
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 5.18a–c. Possible different anthropomorphic types including Mellaart examples: (a) riding figures: CHC160,
CHC168, CHC468, CHC466, 18545.x1; (b) seated/reclined with knees up: top row (left to right): CHC476, CHC465a,
18523.x1; bottom row: CHC281, CHC169, CHC162; (c) abridged forms: CHC463, CHC167, 10264.x1, 12102.x1,
32806.x1.
26
(d)
Figure 5.18d. Possible different anthropomorphic types including Mellaart examples: (d) fleshy bodies: top row (left to
right): CHC21, 10475.x2; middle row: 20736.x1, 20736.x3, 32806.x2, 15839.x1; bottom row: 31852.x3, CHC461,
CHC174.
While the human burial evidence may lend support to the Cultivating the human: flesh, nakedness and rest
differentiation of certain individuals, the fleshy figurine Previously, we have elaborated on how many anthropo-
bodies express a more general but particularly human morphic figure bodies convey a strong impression of
power and capacity. When rendered in stone, such figures abundance (even excess) and maturity (Nakamura,
might offer an impressive expression of the human in a Meskell 2009; Pearson, Meskell 2015); we now would
form similar to the visible and physically imposing like to push this idea further and examine how other
bucrania installations. Mobile rather than fixed to the aspects of these forms might articulate other emergent
house, entire body rather than body part, consuming rather ideas of status and changing ideas of the human and
than consumed, these human forms may have brokered or power. We have argued that most renderings of breasts
asserted another aspect, or even competing model, of and bellies give the impression of bodies that are quite
social and symbolic power. Moreover, in an expanding mature – possibly females who are not in but rather
landscape of social interaction and movement that beyond their peak reproductive years. While generically
afforded increased exchange and exposure to different evocative of the earlier female forms from the Palae-
materials and ideas, it is likely that questions of belonging olithic (‘Venus figurines’), these bodies display an
and of power, of what it meant to be human or a person, overabundance of flesh more consistent with marks of
would intensify. maturity, which could emphasise a particular status
27
Middle
Late
Final
Figure 5.19. Stone figurines from Hodder excavations, earliest to latest (approximated relative size).
28
acquired after reproductive success and through would have been a communal or collective effort.
longevity. The fat-bearing female body in particular, Moreover, the individual labour of body fat accumulation
would have provided a potent figure of high status and can be in service to the community. In her research on
success, as it could convey power and status on several Azawagh Arab communities, Rebecca Popenoe has
levels: reproductive, economic and social success. noted how through practices of fattening, the female
Fatness as rendered in these figurines thus suggests a body becomes a site of ‘anti-work’. While others produce
specific image of maturity, one that evokes endurance and process, consumption itself is also a form of labour:
and accumulation (both nutritional and social) writ large
in the flesh. Fattening is a sort of anti-work, but it is in a broader
While the figurines most likely embody an idealised sense of the term women’s main ‘work’ in life: their
or specific body kind rather than actual individuals, they active contribution to the production of value in the
demonstrate some knowledge of how actual bodies society by their own act of consumption. By
accumulate fat. For instance, there is an emphasis on controlling and literally embodying the flow of milk
fleshy parts of the body that take on extra fat. Not only … Azawagh Arab women express and safeguard their
the breasts, belly and buttocks (3Bs), but also the upper society’s vision of itself, as well as its continuation
legs and arms, as well as areas of the neck and back and increase (Popenoe 2012: 123).
prone to weight gain, are emphasised, even exaggerated,
compared to the hands and feet, which often appear The project of fattening therefore can articulate a
disproportionately tiny in comparison. In this regard, the connection between the construction and care of the
figurine bodies do make reference to real bodies – if not ‘social body’ through individual bodies. Similarly, in the
individuals who bear such an appearance, then bodies Fijian context, Anne Becker has studied how core
that accumulate fat in a physically accurate way. It is cultural values can become encoded in body shape and
possible that the community bore or came into contact where a ‘robust’ shape is particularly associated with
with individuals genetically predisposed towards obesity. collective care: here the body is not articulated as a
Yet an obese bodily form is still something that requires source of individual differentiation, but as a medium of
support by certain social and economic conditions. In the community participation and identification:
Neolithic context, this support would presuppose a group
or community agreement and effort. Pearson and In Fiji, the cultivation of bodies is legitimated as a
Meskell (2013) have drawn attention to the importance collective rather than a personal endeavour. Indeed,
of considering the physical or lived body and the repre- the community is embodied through its work on its
sentational body in tandem; specifically, they remind us members' bodies. ... Care, then, is concretized in
that flesh is made and modified through food anatomic space. The display of core cultural values
consumption, physical activity and health, which not through the medium of personal bodies is a primary
only produces a specific physical appearance, but also expression of the ethos of care within the social body
reflects a range of lived conditions. For instance, an (Becker 1995: 84).
abundance of body fat comes not only from the liberal
consumption of calorie-rich foods, but also from low While the social world of Çatalhöyük was no doubt quite
levels of activity: energy ingested exceeds energy different from those of Azawagh Arab and Fijian
expended (ibid. 464). This metabolic process then lends communities, these intersecting valences of fatness,
itself to the construction of social status though such bodily cultivation and communal care might resonate
behaviour, especially in contexts in which food sources with the Neolithic context more than liberal Western
and procurement require substantial amounts of labour. notions of the body as a vehicle for producing the self,
At Çatalhöyük a link between excess fat and status personal identity, individual differentiation, status or
could likely arise from a confluence of factors. Both achievement. Neither divine nor individual, robust
sharing and exchange economies could have, in theory, human figurines may have instead mediated ideas of the
sustained perhaps a few individuals who were given collective care or cultivation of the social group: the
good access to high-caloric food while maintaining low individual body as a socially rather than a personally
activity, and were thus able to cultivate fatness as a body managed resource and symbol of power.
project. Indeed, such individuals would likely have held It is also worth drawing attention to the ways in
a special status within the community and also provided which the stone (and many of the clay figurines Mellaart
an outwardly visible symbol of the group’s success. It is found) explicitly evoke images of rest and immobility,
important to emphasise, however, that in both sharing which might relate to an ideal or real cultivation of
and exchange economies, the project of fat-cultivation fatness. Almost all of the human figurine forms appear to
29
be unclothed. A few clay examples from Mellaart’s horns and quadrupeds, and abbreviated forms. While
excavation bear some decorative markings, but all of the various examples and trends reveal some elaboration or
stone figurines depict an unclothed and unadorned body diversification amongst these types (see discussion
(except in some cases a possible hat or cap on the head). above), such ‘innovations’ maintain rather than
The choice to depict the human body naked, although transform or reinvent these four formal idioms.
common since Paleolithic times, was certainly not the Furthermore, the differences in the distribution of clay
only option. Wall paintings at Çatalhöyük show human figurine types across the site and in various contexts are
figures in animal skins, and figurines elsewhere in the subtle and only suggest, rather than clearly indicate,
Anatolia Neolithic depict adornment and clothing (see certain shifts or associations. Prior to 2008, when the
examples in Hansen, Kuniholm 2014). The unadorned project had only recovered four stone examples, we
body draws attention to the particular form, features and argued that aside from form (all stone examples depicted
position of the body itself. In the case of Çatalhöyük, anthropomorphic bodies), there did not appear to be any
human figurines depict a form that is corpulent and clear differentiation between how stone and clay
robust, with certain exaggerated areas of fat accumu- figurines were treated. Now with a total of at least 12
lation and a bodily pose that evoke maturity, rest or even examples from the Hodder excavations, we would
immobility. suggest that stone figurines may have participated in a
In the Late period at Çatalhöyük, human figures are more specific set of practices than their more varied clay
depicted with their legs extended (although unable to counterparts. While the contexts for such figurines are
stand) or give the impression of being seated, even limited, the choice of material, emergence and devel-
slightly reclining (fig. 5.19). Such postures all evoke a opment of specific anthropomorphic types, and
dignified but restful and inactive body. Here, immobility increasing focus on exaggerated corpulent forms may
could be associated with both status and control. For have articulated a significant ontological and/or
instance, the more corpulent figures recall a social value symbolic shift in how members of the Neolithic
in Tonga where community constituted social power. We would like to
suggest that changes in how humans related to animals
a high-ranking girl symbolizes her status by her and the environment, under the turn towards animal
physical size, well-oiled skin, and associations with domestication and agriculture and increased interactions
stasis. A stylized sitting posture is intended to convey and trade with other groups, coincided with a new or
a powerful image of immobility (Shore 1998: 158; emergent worldview in which human power became
see also Gifford 1929: 129–30). more of a socio-symbolic focus.
The production of this female body is therefore the result From clay to stone. Perhaps the most obvious aspect of
of very specific social norms of beauty and collective figurine practice from which such a turn could be argued
care. Although in many ways incomparable to the egali- is in the choice of rendering certain human forms in stone
tarian social world of Çatalhöyük, the Saharan and from the Middle levels onward. Clay figurines evoked
Polynesian examples draw attention to how tropes of rather expedient practices. Even finely rendered
fatness and stasis can contribute to a symbolic lexicon of examples did not require a high investment of time for
communal status and identity that might be at work in the making such forms or developing the requisite skill set to
Neolithic community. The ability to support bodies that do so. Moreover, given the dominance of clay in the
materialise excess – of flesh and rest – during a period of Neolithic as the endlessly reusable material of daily life,
shifting alliances and economies would have provided a it is notable that, at first, human figures were rendered in
potent symbol of group success and status, one notably the same material that not only gave form to animal
more focused on collective human effort than animal figures, mudbricks, pottery and cooking balls, but could
power. easily be remixed, reformed, destroyed or repurposed.
While the choice to render human figures in clay may
Human, animals, materiality and social power have been for reasons of expedience, or lack of technical
While clay figurine practices resist any singular inter- expertise, it is also possible that such a choice reflected
pretive narrative (and seem to be somewhat formally an implicit or explicit notion of the human as part of,
conservative rather than innovative over time), the stone rather than apart from, this greater world of animals,
examples register a discernible shift in attention to and substances and landscapes. However, it is intriguing that,
development of the human form and its social signifi- just before we see evidence for a significant shift in
cance. Across the site and over time, we find the same circumstances and social organisation that likely
basic forms in clay: anthropomorphic forms, zoomorphic coincided with an intensification of animal domesti-
30
cation and agriculture, we find the first examples of decoration or clothing, but even in the skilful rendering
human figures rendered in limestone, marble and of the bodily form itself. Not only does stone offer a
speleothem – materials that are not the stuff of local, different set of material qualities and associations, it also
remixable daily life, but enduring, hard substances that requires a particular level of skill to effect its transfor-
come from more distant sources (at least 20–100 km mation. Stronger, more durable, with more varied
from site) and are comparatively rare on site (Bains et al qualities and properties than clay, and sourced from
2013, Erdoğu 2013). possibly mysterious or powerful places (for instance
The choice to render (or focus on) only certain figural caves), stone materials offer a broadened range of
forms in stone (while others remained in clay) was a qualities and associations and require a distinctly human
gesture of setting apart, of drawing attention to some hand to masterfully bring new form into being. As such,
symbolic or even ontological difference. Such choices stone is an ideal material for humans to announce their
likely drew upon specific qualities of stone materials, aspirations for a new world and their status within it.
including hardness, colour, capacity for smoothness and
luminosity, but also their sources and biographies. Competing allegiances or multiple ways of being
Mellaart was inclined to interpret all anthropomorphic human? But anthropomorphic forms still persisted in
figurines as either gods or goddesses regardless of clay. So if not as materialisations of divine power, then
material. Several scholars have offered convincing how might we interpret these stone figures? Preliminary
critiques of Mellaart’s ideas (Meskell 1995; Voigt 2000), findings from the most recent excavations have prompted
so we will not rehearse them presently. We remain Hodder to suggest that the ‘radically egalitarian’
unconvinced that stone figurines, much less all anthropo- Neolithic society may have started to show signs of
morphic figurines, embody divinities, not least because increasing specialisation and the emergence of
most are found discarded or dumped, even if done with individuals in later levels, possibly priming the way for
some consideration (for instance at transitional moments social stratification (see discussion above). While it
in the lives of buildings). However, we do suspect that might be tempting to interpret the newly excavated stone
the choice of rendering certain figural forms in stone was figures as evidence of high-status individuals and
significant, and perhaps signalled a shift in the therefore as providing support to such arguments, we
worldview (at least for some) in the Neolithic community resist this interpretation for a number of reasons. First,
of Çatalhöyük. It is almost assured that people during while such figurines do not show a high level of
Neolithic times were well aware of the various properties standardisation, they do conform to some general
and aspects (from sources to biographies) of different conventions of form and pose that appear to coalesce into
materials and mobilised these in their decisions to use four general stone types (see above, fig. 5.18);
and transform them. The choice to make or bring to site furthermore, visible idiosyncrasies of the different
specific human forms not only in a new material, but in examples do not evoke distinctive characteristics of
one that is rare, with distant origins, and requires consid- individuals (for example, ornamentation, details or
erable skill to transform, would appear to assert a features, or identifying markers), but instead likely
different status for what the rendered form represents, indicate the maker’s specific vision in negotiation with
namely the human. the raw form of the material. Second, attention to aspects
Previous studies of various aspects of Çatalhöyük of pose and bodily form over clearly sexed bodies
have pointed to the practical dominance of clay in suggests a more generic representation, one that is more
Neolithic life (Stevanovic 1997; Tringham 2000; appropriate for the representation of an ideal rather than
Doherty 2017), which likely inflected the symbolic realm an actual body. Third, the bodily forms may articulate
as well. Moreover, the house and wild animals dominate notions of social power, but not along the gendered axis
social and symbolic registers for most of the Neolithic of divinity that Mellaart proposed; we suggest that they
occupation; iconographically, humans share the stage might instead reveal transitional or competing ideas and
with, or are even eclipsed by, wild animals until the Late allegiances to different worldviews and ways of life.
period. It is therefore possible that the arrival of stone Although the sample size is admittedly small, the
figurines at the end of the Middle period announces an stone figurine assemblage suggests an intriguing scenario.
emergent focus on the human as something radically The earliest stone figurine examples (both from Building
different from the clay stuff of life. It is notable that 79, Level South O) produced two types only seen in the
figurines in stone display more bodily specificity even Mellaart assemblage: the riding figure (18545.x1) and a
when it is harder to achieve, whereas figurines in clay seated, reclining bearded figure (18523.x1). Mellaart has
tend not to exploit the full possibilities of this more interpreted both of these figures as male (see fig. 5.18a,
malleable material – not only in adding details such as b). However, like the corpulent ‘female’ forms, these two
31
examples lack explicit sex features (see Nakamura, In contrast, bodies evocative of economic power
Meskell 2009), although when viewed from different derived from herding, agriculture and accumulation of
perspectives they both evoke a phallic form. In the Late animal wealth and control of land would require a more
period, we see a distinct convergence around a kind of abstracted figure of such power. Thinking speculatively
robust or corpulent bodily form, some with stunning in this direction, one could argue that the fleshy corpulent
detail and execution and others more abstract and gestural figural forms we find in the Late period onward provide
of fat and excess flesh (figs 5.15, 5.16). All of these a rather apt expression of such power. Hunting and
figures are found in buildings, with B.150 alone herding capacities articulate different relationships
producing five examples (see discussion above). By the between humans and animals, but both evoke a similar
Final period, these corpulent forms further become minia- power in the ability to transform animal flesh into
turised and even stylised and are found in midden and economic and social power. While the riding figure
burial fill, outside of buildings. This assemblage reveals draws attention to the human appropriation of wild
two distinct idioms of social power: the riding figure animal power, the corpulent figure at rest embodies the
articulates power through an image of the human control incorporation (though consumption) of animal flesh and
of a wild animal, while the reclined and corpulent human other managed food resources into excessive human
figures suggest power as a capacity for rest and excessive flesh and fat. In the latter, the focus is entirely on the
consumption. Given the small sample size (and also given human capacity to accumulate by consuming, controlling
that Mellaart recorded finding all stone figurine types and managing animal and plant life.
together in the same building, see VIA.44) we are While further studies may spar over whether in time
reluctant to interpret the temporal arrangement of figures the ‘domestic’ model of social power supersedes the
as evidence for an evolution of social power in which the ‘hunting’ model at Çatalhöyük, it is worth considering
domestic comes to eclipse the wild, or the human eclipses these instead as competing and even complementary
the animal. But given this minimal suggestion of a shift, modes of Neolithic life, perhaps revealing an added layer
we do find it productive to consider how the specific of complexity rather than assuming a problematic linear
forms of stone figurines might embody different relation- narrative of human ‘progress’. It is possible, even likely,
ships between humans and animals and ideas of the that households mobilised different pathways to success.
humans in the world more generally. For instance, future studies might explore possible
In the examples of seated or riding average-bodied relationships between corpulent human figurines, history
individuals (fig. 5.18a, b), focus is drawn towards the houses, and control of land and animal wealth; they
body’s position or activity. The riding figures depict a could also explore the idea that some non-history houses,
human controlling a presumably wild animal and the such as B.49 or B.79, with strong associations with
reclined/seated figures evoke inactivity or even animals, may have been regarded as no less ‘successful’
immobility. Considering the former, even though the or powerful, but instead have pursued economic and
human is dominating the animal, the animal is present, social power through different strategies. Such questions
which suggests a significant relationship between the aside, it appears that stone figurines may have provided
two, and importantly the power not just of the human but one medium in which different ideas of power,
also of the animal. Here the human draws its power from community and being human were expressed and
the control of a powerful being. The site has produced negotiated. In this way, certain differences and tensions,
much evidence for hunting wild animals, particularly which likely animated a social world that supported
aurochs, as a focal point for social power. Furthermore, various lifeways (hunting, foraging, trade, agriculture
even as hunting (indicated by the presence of wild and animal management) and even worldviews, may
animals on site) became less common, hunting imagery have been figured through the body. The introduction of
and symbolism appear to intensify in the later levels (see stone human figures might suggest that with the gradual
Russell et al. 2014: 216). Hunting and wild bulls in adoption of agriculture, animal management and
particular appear to have maintained significant social increased trade and mobility, a more human-centred idea
prestige in the Late period, at least in the symbolic of the world had started to emerge or solidify.
sphere. Human bodies evocative of power associated Regardless, the enduring importance of wild animals and
with the hunt would likely have been active, strong and their associated activities and powers would have cast a
lean, perhaps not unlike the two figurines found in long shadow in the realms of human memory, myth, and
Building 79. for some, in daily life.
32
Supplementary material
For supplementary material related to this chapter, please visit https://doi.org/10.18866/BIAA/e-14. It comprises a
colour version of figure 5.17.
33

Figuring Diversity The Neolithic Catalho

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Figuring Diversity The Neolithic Catalho

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5.

Anthropomorphic Zoomorphic Abbreviated Total

Anthropomorphic Abbreviated Quadruped Horn Total

Buildings External Spaces

Figure 5.1. Figurine forms by excavation data category.

Figure 5.2. Figurine forms in features.

Figure 5.3. Number of figurines in buildings vs building Elaboration index (Ei).

Figure 5.4. Density of figurines in buildings vs building Elaboration index (Ei).

Figure 5.5. Number of figurines vs number of individuals buried by building.

Building Ei No. of figurines No. of individuals Known rebuilds

Figural Indeterminate Total % of corpus

Figure 5.7. Proportion of figurine types by period.

Figure 5.8. Relative overall densities of zoomorphic forms over time.

North Area South Area

North Area South Area

Building Level Description of Figurines Total no. of Context

Table 5.8. Buildings with high figurine densities (>1.0 figs/kL).

GID Material Description Level Context (C) and

20736.x3 Pale yellow limestone; TPC M C: platform make-up (F.3855)

32806.x1 Soft limestone; TPC M C: deposit in southwest corner

32806.x2 Marble; 2725g, 24.70cm (h), TPC M C: deposit in southwest corner

23704.x7 Plastered or slipped clay; TPC M C: northeast platform (F.3893),

31852.x3 Limestone TPC N C: in room rubble of first structure

AM (possible): cluster of worked

Table 5.9. Figurines from B.150 (and post-structure).

Figure 5.10. 20736.x1 in situ (photograph by Jason Quinlan).

Figure 5.12. 20736.x3 in situ (photograph by Jason Quinlan).

Figure 5.13. 23705.x1. Clay figurine head.

Figure 5.16. Group photo of (32604.x1–x7) (photograph by Jason Quinlan).

figurines in the Late period (B.150 mentioned above)

You might also like