A N AT O L I A T R A N S F O R M E D
Other crafts and technology
The large amount of sophisticated artefacts manufactured from a range of exotic raw materials is testimony to both to the skills of the craftspeople and to the extent of their procurement networks.93 While the nature of the exchange system remains uncertain—we do not know, for instance, whether the export of manufactured goods supplemented the subsistence economy—it is clear is that it involved long distances and was effective. At Çatalhöyük, for instance, the furthest point of contact, the Red Sea, some 1000 km to the south, provided cowrie shells that were set into the eye sockets of the dead before burial, recalling the plastered skulls from Jericho.
Dentalium and cockle shells were closer at hand—they were gathered from the Mediterranean along the south coast of Anatolia. And date palm phytoliths may suggest the use of carrying baskets manufactured in Syria, Mesopotamia, or the Levant. Raw copper ore was most likely mined from the Ergani mine in southeastern Anatolia, about 500 km away, whereas the lead was mined at the Cilician Gates to the east. Copper was fashioned into various items, including beads, pendants, tubes, and rings. The production of copper beads was simple. Native copper was hammered into sheets, cut into strips, and rolled into beads. Galena and cerussite, lead minerals, were also used to make beads.94 A comparable level of copper production, albeit on a smaller scale, is evident at Mersin, Hacılar, and in the Amuq Plain.95 Pale coloured tabular flint, rare though it was, came from further east still, in Syria. Obsidian, as we have seen, is a central Anatolian commodity in plentiful supply, and the Çatalhöyük samples derive from Cappadocian sources of Göllüdag˘ and Nenezi Dag˘ some 250 km to the north, not Hasan Dag˘ as was originally thought. Local materials included ochre, azurite, and white marble and basalt, which were worked into mortars and pestles. Even the transport of timber from the surrounding mountains would have required considerable organization given the quantity used in building construction.
On the whole, Late Neolithic sites of Anatolia did not produce sophisticated stone tools. This stands in sharp contrast to Pre-Pottery Neolithic cultures.96 In the seventh millennium BC, stone tools are limited typologically and reflect a more restricted technology of production. Bullet cores and microlithic features are absent. Instead, the basic tool type is the large blade. Projectile points are also distinct types, but only during the first half of the early Pottery Neolithic, up to the appearance of red-slipped ceramics of the Late Neolithic, when they disappear from the greater part of Anatolia to replace sling stones as the weapon of choice. Çatalhöyük, however, is somewhat of an exception. Up to seven stone industries have been identified at Çatalhöyük, ranging from expedient flakes to superbly crafted blades. As for figurines and pottery, the obsidian artefacts show changes in typology and production before and after Çatalhöyük VI. From Level V onwards the industry is characterized by pressure flaking, prismatic cores, and blades that may indicate a more intensive exploitation of domestic foods.97 Concentration of tools in certain rooms, and caches of quarry blanks that were buried near the hearth and accessed when tools needed to be knapped, reflect a specialized industry. Among the most famous obsidian objects from Çatalhöyük were polished mirrors that were valued enough to be
118
A N AT O L I A T R A N S F O R M E D
placed in burials as a gift. It is entirely possible that like red ochre, black obsidian was considered a highly symbolic material imbued with magical properties. The Hacılar chipped stone industry is poor and characterized by flint (never obsidian) blades and sickle blades, although some microliths were found clustered in Level VI.98 There is ample evidence of ground stone objects—querns and mortars, pounders, and highly polished greenstone axes. In the Marmara region, stone tool industries, like architecture, show that the coastal and inland sites represent contrasting traditions. The microliths, bullet cores and scrapers at Fikirtepe and Pendik reflect the continuation of the rich Epipalaeolthic technology known as the Ag˘ aclı tradition. Ilıpınar, by way of contrast, shares with central Anatolia the lack of any formal tool types.99
Nearly 50 clay stamp seals were found at Çatalhöyük, complementing a few more from other sites in the southwest; smaller and less detailed versions are found in the northwest (Figure 4.21: 1–10). These Neolithic stamp seals from Anatolia are generally large compared to Late Chalcolithic examples that were used to impress lumps of clay as a means of maintaining control over the storage and distribution of commodities. No clay sealings (discarded impressed lumps of clay) have been found at Çatalhöyük, suggesting that these stamps seals had other functions such as body or textile decoration. But like later seals, these early versions appear to have had an emblematic status and often accompanied their owners to their graves. Most seals have a geometric pattern, but two recent examples are noteworthy:100 A fragment portraying the spotted body of leopard, and a bear shown spreadeagle (Figure 4.7: 4), both recalling wall decorations.
Rich and varied assemblages of bone artefacts have been unearthed at a number of sites (Figure 4.21: 11–18). Sharp and round points, burnishers, gouges, hook and eye fasteners, pendants, and beads are among the many forms manufactured, primarily indoors, from a wide range of animal taxa. Spindle whorls point to clothes that were manufactured from woven textiles rather than animal skins and held together with bone toggles and belt hooks. Spatulae with decorated handles were also finely produced from bone and are sometimes ornamented with animal heads. Among the distinctive equipment of the Fikirtepe culture are bone spoons with grooved or twisted handles that come in a variety of shapes and sizes, and bone polishers. Bone spoons are rare in the rest of Anatolia, where they may have been carved from wood, but are a common feature in the southeastern European Neolithic and its white-on-red painted wares, after which they peter out. They are also noteworthy at Ilıpınar where there is evidence of a thriving bone and antler industry among the post structures, but not the mud brick village. Given their elaborateness, spoons might have been a type of status symbol in Thrace and southeastern Europe.
Economy
Çatalhöyük had a fully fledged agricultural economy. Among the crops, domestic wheat (emmer and bread wheat) that is not native to the region was important.101 In addition, farmers cultivated einkorn wheat and barley, bitter vetch and peas, and most likely irrigated their fields using
119
A N AT O L I A T R A N S F O R M E D
simple methods. Animals were also reared, but only the bones of sheep and goats indicate they were fully domesticated. They comprise about 70% of the animal bones found at Çatalhöyük. This is contrary to earlier views that suggested cattle were domesticated.102 Although wild cattle are considerably larger than their domesticated counterparts, new data indicate that their horn cores are, in fact, indistinguishable.103 Even though cattle contributed to a small proportion of food consumption, it is interesting that they are amply reflected in much of the symbolism, which was associated with wild and not domesticated animals. Significantly, there appear to be no changes through time in the number or types of animal that were kept and in the range of plants that were cultivated. But only future work will determine whether the way food was processed, stored and discarded was modified, possibly in line with new codes of social behavior. Although their farming practices were advanced, the residents of Çatalhöyük still engaged in hunting and foraging to balance their diet. They had a taste for pistachio nuts, almonds, and juniper berries, to name some of the plant foods, as well as wild boar, ass, horse, and various birds, mostly waterbirds such as geese and ducks. Interestingly, in view of the prominence of the leopard in wall art, only a single bone (a pierced claw) has been found. This has lead to the view that some sort of taboo or perhaps reverence surrounded the leopard.104
Hacılar was an agricultural settlement. Cultivated einkorn, emmer, bread wheat, barley, lentil, purple pea, and bitter vetch were recovered from Level VI. Only the dog appears to have been domesticated. The northwest region displays two modes of subsistence that reflect its varied environment. One (at Ilıpınar) is typically agropastoral, depending on domestic animals and cultivated plants with supplements provided by foraging and collecting wild resources; the other, represented at coastal sites, shows a heavy, but not exclusive dependence on fish, shellfish, and wild animals.
Concluding remarks on the Ceramic Neolithic
Looking at the Neolithic as a whole, villages north of the Taurus during the Pre-Pottery and Early Pottery Neolithic conform to the clustered plan. These are represented at As¸ıklı, Çatalhöyük XIII–VI, Can Hasan III, and Erbaba. By contrast, during the Late Pottery Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic, only one site (Can Hasan I) continues this tradition, the rest adopted the open settlement plan. The Early and Late Pottery Neolithic periods can also be broadly distinguished through imagery. The vivid symbolism of decorated walls and interiors so apparent at Çatalhöyük, gave way to ritual practices that focused on statuettes, pottery, and, presumably, textiles. It seems that the need for artistic expression found an outlet in pottery manufacture and other crafts rather than wall painting.
The period after 6500 BC represents a period of expansion and transformation. The impetus behind the establishment in the Lake District of a large number of small villages, such as Erbaba, which resembles Çatalhöyük in plan and ceramics, is seen as deriving from the Konya Plain.105 Yet the connections between these two regions diluted considerably as time progressed.
121