Çatalhöyük Figurines.pdf

Çatalhöyük Figurines - Lynn Meskell (University of Stanford ) and Carolyn

Nakamura (Columbia University)

Abstract

Thisyeartheigurineteamfocusedonrecordingbasicinformationforallofthe1526

objectsintheminiatureshapedobjectcorpus.Asaresultwewereabletoperform

somepreliminaryspatialanalyses,whichallowedustobegindiscussingnotionsof

process,context,andcirculationofigurinesatthesite.Inadditiontoindingmore

ofthecommonabbreviatedandzoomorphictypes,excavatorsuncoveredsomeless

commonandnewforms.The4040andISTsurfacescrapeuncoveredtwovery

smallunsexedhumanclayigurineswithprotrudingstomachsandbuttocks(11324.

X3,11848.X1).Anotheranthropomorphicstoneigurinewasfoundinamidden

in4040(12102.x1),similarto10475.X2fromlastseason,butwiththeheadand

necksawedoff.Anothermiddenunit,(10396),inthe4040produced11igurines/

fragments(mostzoomorphic).Finally,theISTteamfoundaveryatypicalhuman

clayigurine(12401.X7)thatdepictsarobustfemaleonthefrontandaskeletonon

theback;theneckhasadowelholeandtheheadismissing.

Giventhediversityofthiscollection,weseektoexplorethevariousassemblages

andmaterialsasiguredlifeworlds.Anotionofigurineas process ,ratherthanobject

orendproductisthereforecentraltoourproject.Giventheirspeciicmateriality

(portable,three-dimensional,miniature),igurinescanrendermultiplelevelsof

representationandparticipatein,orevenanchor,storytellingactivitiesthatmediate

issuesofmemoryandidentity.Weindthewiderpracticesofembeddingmaterials,

and the circulation, plastering and defacement of body parts to be evocative

gesturesthatintersectwithmanyigurinepractices.Thesemayembodyandexpress

particularnotionsandrelationsoflifeanddeathcyclesandweplantoexplorethese

issuesandconnectionsmorefullyinfutureseasonsandpublications.

Özet

Buseneigürinekibi,1526adetufakbuluntununbasitverilerininkaydıüzerinde

yoğunlaştı. Bu çalışmanın sonucu olarak, Çatalhöyük’deki igürin dağılımı,

kavramsalmethodlarvekontextgibiilkanalizlerinsonucuolanverileritartışma

imkanıbulduk.Geneldebulunandahakısaltılmış,hayvanabenzerörneklereek

olarak,busenedahafarklı,yenişekillerbulundu.4040veİSTalanlarındakiyüzey

kazımalarısonucundaikiadet,çokküçükboyutta,seksibelliolmayançıkık,göbekli

vekalçalıinsanigürinleribulundu(11324.X3,11848.X1).Geçensenebulunan

igürinebenzeyen10475.X2ve4040’dakibirçöplükdebulunanbirbaşkainsan

betimlitaşigürininbaşıveboynukırıktır.4040alanındakidiğerbirçöplükde,

10396,11adetigürinveparçalarıbulundu(Çoğuhayvanbetimli).AyrıcaİST

ekibi,öntarafıkadın,arkatarafıiskeletolarakbetimlenmiş,boyunkısmıdeliklive

başıolmayan,olağandışıbirkiligürinortayaçıkarıldı.

Introduction

Thisyearwecontinuedtobuildupthedatabasearchiveandreinethesystemimplementedlastyearin2004.

Althoughmuchworkremainstobedone,wewereabletocompilebasicdata(materialandform)fornearlyall

objectsandfragmentsinthecollectionintermsofmaterialandform,enablingustoperformsomepreliminary

spatialanalyses.Theindingsfromtheseanalysesnowallowustodiscussnotionsofcontextandcirculation

ofigurinematerialsatthesiteandthusaddressandchallengesomepopularconceptionsabouttheÇatalhöyük

igurinesofferedbyMellaartandotherswhohavestudiedthematerialspreviously.Weaimtopresentamore

comprehensiveandrepresentativerangeofigurinesfromthesite,balancingoutthesensationalizedindsof

theso-called‘MotherGoddess’imageswiththeubiquitousabbreviatediguralandanimalformsinclay.Our

initialindingsposeachallengetothespecialstatusgiventothecategoryofigurineanditscommonlyassumed

associationswithart,womenandreligion.ThediversityoftheÇatalhöyükcorpusalonedemandsthatweexamine

anumberofvariablesandinterpretationsbeyondthosespeciied,implicitlyandexplicitly,bythesimplecategory

ofigurine.

Anoverarchinggoalofthisresearch,then,seekstomakeadecisivemoveawayfromthenotionofigurineas

thing;rather,weproposetoviewtheigurine as process. Asweemphasizedlastyear, ourdatabasedesignprocess

didnotsimplyinvolvearchivingthecollection,butengagedacriticalrethinkingofanalyticalandinterpretive

categoriesorientedtowardsamoreintegrativeapproachtoigurinestudies.Wesuspectthatcertaintypesof

igurineswillindclosertiestowallart,representationalarchitecturalfeatures,andtoplasteringactivitiesin

generalthanperhapstoothertypesofigurines.Refocusingigurineresearchtowardssuchareasofoverlap

promptsaproductiverethinkingofourtaxonomicframeworkintermsofprocessesofresourceacquisition,

technologicalandgenderedproduction,anduseratherthanintermsoftheendproduct.Thisapproachbroadly

embracestheideathattechnologyissocialbeforeitistechnical(Foucault),thusallowingustoconsiderthesocial

processesinvolvedmaterialselection,preparation,fabrication,use,circulationanddiscard.

Bydevelopingtheseaims,thelargerinterpretativeissuesofself-representation—thenegotiationofselfand

sexuality,andrelationsbetweenhumanandanimalworlds—mightthuscomeintosharperanalyticalfocus.We

seektomoveawayfromsterileattemptstodeducefunctionandmeaningfromavisualreading—the‘isitadeity

ornot’typeofequation?Insteadweseektolookandmaneuveraroundtheobjects,weavingtogetherpatterns

ofigurinemaking,technology,use,mobilityanddiscard,coupledwiththetraversingofcategoriesfromigures

toplasteredfeaturestowallpaintings.InthiswaywehopetobuildupmoreofalifeworldfortheNeolithic

community,takingintoaccounttheinherentvisualityandmaterialityofaiguredcorpus.

GivenourknowledgeofrepresentationalspheresatÇatalhöyük,thispromptsustoaskwastheresomething

specialaboutsettlingdownintightlypackedcommunitiesintheNeolithicthatmakeitsinhabitantsmoreattentive

tothecontoursofpersonhoodandsexualidentity,aretheyplayingwithclassiicationsandcategoriesthatwe

mightindunfamiliar?Butirstofallwehavetobalancethescalesintermsofreadilyidentiiablegendersasthe

numbersofmale,androgynous,phallicandambiguouslysexediguresneedstoberecalculated.Thisisataskwe

havetakenseriouslyoverourirsttwoseasonsandareclosetoachievingafullerpictureoftheentirerangeof

material.Anotionof becoming atthissitemightthenhaveencompassedexperimentalimagerythatincorporates

varioussexualsymbolism,orcombinesinnovativewaysofviewingattributesdependingonviewpoint,movement

andcirculation.

Thefollowingreportwillprovideabriefdiscussionofthecurrentstatusofourwork,includingtheidentiication

ofsomekeyissues,workcompleted,newinds,thepresentationofsomepreliminaryanalysesandinterpretive

directions,andplansforfuturework.

Issuesaddressedandworkcompleted

1.The Archive

Atafundamentallevelweneedsomedialoguebetweenthetwoperiodsofexcavationintermsofmaterialculture

—evenifnotthestatedcontexts,giventhelevelsofspeciicityinrecordingduringthe1960s(Todd1976).The

scaleandspeedoftheearlyworkuncoveredadazzlingarrayofmaterials,yetlackedthebeneitofthepresent

project’scareful,contextualmethodologies.Thisisevincedveryclearlywiththeigurinecorpus.Ifonewereto

taketheMellaartindsatfacevalue,speciicallythepublishedpiecesandthusignorethewidevariationinigurine

types,thenonemightpositthattworatherdifferentsiteshadbeendug(seeMellaart1962;see1964;1965;

1966;1967;1975).Mellaartwouldhaveuncoveredalargenumberofimpressivestoneandclaypieces,whereas

converselyourprojectwouldhavefoundmoremundaneclayexamplesofquadrupeds,bucrania,abbreviated

humanformsandsoon.Thoughwehavefoundimpressiveexamples,themundanedominatesnumerically.One

waytochallengethispictureistore-excavateMellaart,toliterallyworkinhisareasandthroughhisspoil.A

trainingandeducationalexcavation(TEMPER)undertheaegisofthewiderprojectcarriedoutthelatterandwe

nowhaveaverygoodideaofwhatMellaartmissed,overlookedorevendiscarded.Ournumbersindicatethathe

missedsigniicantnumbersofigurines(anthropomorphicandzoomorphic)alongwithfragmentsofthem,non-

diagnosticpieces,shapedclaypiecesandscrapthatisprobablyceramicdebitage.

Oneofourirsttasksthenwastoinvestigatewhetherthisdiscrepancylargelycanbeexplainedawaybydifferences

inexcavationmethodologiesandgoalsorwhetherit,infact,doespresentsomekindofmeaningfulpatterning.

Othershavepreviouslymadeassertionsconcerningigurinepatterningatthesite(Hamilton1996,inpress;Voigt

2000),however,weremainhighlyskepticalofsuchanalysesgiventhattheyhaveassumedacertainequivalence

betweenthe1960’sandcurrentexcavationcollectionsandnottakendifferencesinexcavationmethodologiesinto

account.Inordertomakeanymeaningfulcomparisons,someattemptatbalancingMellaart’spicturemustbe

undertaken.Fortunately,wewereabletoaddressthisissuesomewhatbyincludingmaterialsfromMellaart’sstudy

(etutluk)collection(TheprojectbecameawareofthesematerialslastyearwhentheKonyamuseumturnedthem

overtotheprojecttostoreonsiteaftertheyweredeaccessionedfromtheAnkaracollection.Toourknowledge

thesematerialshavenotbeenstudiedpreviously),andmaterialsfoundinhisspoilheapdugbytheTEMPER

project(seearchivereports2000-2004).MaterialsfromthecurrentexcavationsinMellaart’sarea(nowcalled

theSouthArea)alsocontributetobalancingouttheMellaartproile.Theemergingigurinedatabasewillinclude

thesematerialsrecordedinappropriatedetail.Giventhatcontextualinformationismissingormimimalformost

ofthesematerials,theycannotbeusedinanalysesthatlookatpatterningovertimeandspace.

2. The Database

Initially,wedesignedanextensivedatabasetoaccommodateabroadrangeofshapedobjectstoensurethatwedid

notovervaluethecategoryofigurine.Thisdecisionhasresultedinadatabaserecordofover1500objects,many

ofwhicharenon-diagnosticfragmentsandscrap.Afterhavingbecomemorefamiliarwiththeigurinematerials

wehavedecidedtoemployatieredrecordingmethodology.Althoughwehavenotyetworkedoutthespeciics

forthissystem,mostlikelyitwillinvolvefullyrecordingalldiagnosticigurinesandigurinefragments,while

recordingonlyfabricandweightofthenon-diagnosticpieces.Basicdescriptiveandcontextualinformationfor

allobjectswillberecordedwherepossible.Thisseasonweaccomplishedenteringthisdataforallobjectspresent

onsiteandallknownobjectsfromtheKonyaandAnkaramuseumcollections.Wefocusedonenteringbasic

informationthatwouldallowustoperformsomepreliminaryanalysesofbasicpatterningacrossthesiteandover

time:

IDnumber

Inventorynumber

Unit

Year

Area

Space

Building

Feature

Level

Location

ObjectType

Material

Form(representational)

Type(representational).

ThesebasicdataalsoallowedustoinvestigatesomeofNaomiHamilton’sassertions(2005),andconclusions

fromtheheavyresiduereportinVolume6(seediscussionbelow).Asmentionedlastyear,wehavestructured

thedatabaseinsuchawaythatallowsfortherecordingofobjectsfromthemostgeneral,descriptivetermsto

morespeciic,interpretivecategories.Webelievethatthisprovidesthemostlexibilityforavarietyofanalyses.

Giventhisconsideration,weareeagertodispensewithpreviousterminologiesusedbyMellaartandHamilton

suchashumanoid,exvoto,schematic,mothergoddess,fatlady,astheycannotbedisassociatedfromproblematic

narrativesfromartandreligion.Ourprocess-focusedapproachchallengestheideaofigurinesasstatic,stationary

objectstobeviewedandkeptinspecialareas.Hamiltonherselfpresentedalternativeinterpretationsforsomeof

theÇatalhöyükigurines,possiblyastoys,orjewelryandadornment.Whilethereislittleevidenceforsuchuse,it

islikelythatigurinescirculatedthroughoutthesiteandwewillputforthafewalternativepossibilities.

3. Clay technologies

Wecontinuedtoworkwithotherclaymaterialspecialists,MirjanaStevanović(buildingmaterials),NurcanYalman

(pottery),anddatabasespecialist,MiaRidge,toagreeuponacommonclayterminologythatwouldenablebetter

functionalityofdatabasequeries.Althoughtherearesomebasiccommonalitiesbetweenceramics,igurines,

buildingmaterialsandclayballs,thefabricandiringtechnologiesforeacharequitespecializedandsubstantially

different.Abroadaimoftheprojectseekstobetterunderstandtherangeofclaytechnologiesemployedatthe

site.Theclayigurinefabricsarenotuniform,althoughtheydoappeartoclusterintoafewdifferenttypegroups

rangingfromcoarse‘dirty’claytoveryinecleanmarlandplaster.Somefabricsdoappeartobesimilarto

miniatureclayballs(seereportsbyAtalay)andpossiblysomeceramicfabrics(Yalman,pers.comm.)Nextseason,

weplantobeginworkingoutamethodologyforthesystematicrecordingfabrictypeanddegreeofheatexposure.

Giventhatigurinesarepredominantlyfoundinsecondarycontextssuchasmiddenandill,suchworkandthe

eventualcomparisonoffabricsacrossobjecttypes,willbeimportantforgettingataspectsofigurineproduction

andfabrication,evenifonlyobliquely.

4. Experimental Methods

Video and Multiple Perspectives. Givenour

interestinexploringembodiedprocessesof

crafting,decisionmaking,materialagency,

andcirculationinvolvedinigurinepractice

(see2004ArchiveReport),wecontinuedto

documentsomeoftheigurinesonvideoin

order emphasize the experience of these

three-dimensional,portableobjectsaslikely

viewed from multiple perspectives. The

themeofambiguity,bothintermsofform

andsex,needstobeaddressedwithinthe

Çataligurineassemblage.Aswereported

lastyear,mostoftheigurinesareunsexed

and often cannot not be assigned to any

clear cut traditional category of male or

female. This kind of ambiguity often

exploits the three-dimensionality of a

igurine, a form that can support multi-

leveledandhybridrepresentationslikethe

anthropomorphicandphallomorphicforms

in Fig. 80. This speciic materiality of a

igurinealsoinvitesonetohandleandmanipulateitandviewitfromdifferentperspectives.Giventhiscapacity,

igurinesmightlikelyhavebeenengagedininteractiveactivitiessuchasstorytelling,wishfulillment,didactic

devicesconcerningtransformation,and/orexplorationofpersonhoodandsexuality.Again,itisimportantto

entertainthepossibilitythatigurinesoperatedoutsideofculticandreligiouscontexts,thatitwasnotnecessarily

theobjectitselfthatwasmeaningfulbutthesocialactivitiestheirmaterialityanchoredandsupported.

Replications. Wealsobroughtsomeclaymodelingmaterialtoexperimentwithre-creatingsomeofthemost

ubiquitousformsfoundatÇatalhöyük(Weacknowledgethattherearedifferencesbetweenworkingwithclay

andworkingwithoven-bakeclaymodelingpaste,butgiventhesensitiveissueofforgeries,wedecidedtouse

Figure 80. Anthopomorphic/phallomorphic forms. Left: 10474.X,

Right: 79-799-65 (Ankara Museum).

amodernmodelingcompound.Allcopiesweredestroyedaftertheexperiment).Weallencounteredvarious

levelsofdificultyinthistask(Participantsincludedourselves,JohnSwogger,MiraStevanovicandMarina

Lizzaralde).Weimaginedthatthesimplestabbreviatedformswouldtakeonlyiveorsixmovestomake.But

wefoundthatdespitetheirapparentsimplicity,thezoomorphicandabbreviatedigurinesareofaparticular

culturalstyle(althoughthereisnostandardizationofform,thereisacertainlevelofstylisticconsistencyvisible

withinthevarioustypes).Theformsweresurprisinglyforeigntouseventhoughwewereconstantlyhandling

andexaminingthem.Attheoutset,eventhemostexperiencedperson(JohnSwogger)tooksome15movesto

makeanabbreviatedformbutwithpracticequicklypairedtheprocessdownto6moves.Fortheanimaligurines,

fashioningtheentireheadandbodyfromasinglepieceofclayprovedtobedificultforus,butcouldbedone

withacertainamountofpractice.

Fingerprints. Afterreviewingtheliteratureoningerprintanalysesonancientmaterials,wedecidedthatcorrelating

ingerprintridgebreadthwithheightandagewouldprovidethemostfruitfulavenueforsuchresearch(Kamp,et

al.1999).Determininganystatisticallysigniicantdifferencesinridgebreadthduetosexrequiresa“genetically

close”samplegroupforcomparison(Cummins1941;JantzandParham1978;Malvalwala,etal.1990;Stinson

2002).Weinddonotbelievethatanymodernpopulationcanprovidesuchasampleandindstudiesthatassume

geneticproximitybasedonlyongeographicproximityproblematic.Althoughcountsofigurineswithingerprint

impressionshavenotbeeninalized,wetookasampleof34printimpressionsfromhorn,quadruped,abbreviated

andnon-diagnosticforms.Toavoidleavingaresiduefromthevinylpolysiloxanedentalcompound(Patterson

DentalSupplies)ontheigurinesurface,wetookimpressionsoftheingerprintsusingmodelingclayandthen

liftedtheprintimagesfromthemodelingclay.Infutureseasonsweplantocollectprintsfromallieldsamplesthat

havesuchimpressionsaswellasobtainpermissiontolifeimagesfromtheiguresintheKonyaArchaeological

Museum.

2005 Finds

Thisyeartheprojectrecovered47objectsfromexcavationand26igurinesfromMellaart’sspoilheap.Basic

countsfortheexcavationindsarepresentedinTables1a-1cbelow.

Object Form

Count

igural

igural, non-diagnostic

geometric

geometric, non-diagnostic

non-diagnostic

TOTAL

Table 1a. 2005 Shape Objects

Figural objects

total

non-diagnostic

Secure

anthopomorphic

zoomorphic

indeterminate

Table 1b. Form Distribution of 2005 Figural Shaped Objects

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: