Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-13T10:12:50.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamic Houses and Communities at Çatalhöyük: A Building Biography Approach to Prehistoric Social Structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2020

Kevin Kay Open the ORCID record for Kevin Kay [Opens in a new window]
Kevin Kay*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, CambridgeCB2 3DZ, UK Email: kk510@cantab.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Houses are rich resources for understanding prehistoric social structure. However, conventional working methods often handle houses as stable entities that reflect the nature of households and other social units. Social groups may be inadvertently rendered static in the process. A biographical understanding, in which the on-going transformation of built space is part of different kinds of human collaboration, allows us to explore the dynamic qualities of past communities. I examine detailed life-histories of four contemporary houses at Çatalhöyük in Central Turkey, using the site's fine stratigraphy to interrogate how furnishings, elaborations and rhythms of burial varied through each building's use-life. These trace shifting practice and performance in relation to built space. Çatalhöyük buildings’ social roles changed dramatically over their lives. The spatial dynamics observed suggest that commensal groups were less stable and less bound to specific houses than in more conventional views of the site, and interacted in unpredictable ways with larger forms of social collaboration. Ultimately, this suggests a more dynamic approach to both houses and social units in the Near East and the archaeology of houses generally.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Archaeological Journal , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , August 2020 , pp. 451 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, D., 2018. Breaking the Surface: An art/archaeology of prehistoric architecture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, D. & McFadyen, L., 2010. Built objects, in The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies, eds Hicks, D. & Beaudry, M.C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 562–87.Google Scholar
Barański, M.Z., 2017. Building 52 and preceding structures and spaces, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2017, ed. Haddow, S.D., 36–47. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2017Google Scholar
Barański, M.Z., García-Suárez, A., Klimowicz, A., Love, S. & Pawłowska, K., 2015. The architecture of Neolithic Çatalhöyük as a process, in Assembling Çatalhöyük, eds Hodder, I. & Marciniak, A.. Leeds: European Association of Archaeologists, 111–26.Google Scholar
Bayliss, A., Brock, F., Farid, S., Hodder, I., Southon, J. & Taylor, R.E., 2015. Getting to the bottom of it all: a Bayesian approach to dating the start of Çatalhöyük. Journal of World Prehistory, 28(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayliss, A., Farid, S. & Higham, T., 2013. Time will tell: practicing Bayesian chronological modeling on the East Mound, in Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 53–90.Google Scholar
Beck, R.A. (ed.), 2007. The Durable House: House society models in archaeology. Carbondale (IL): Center for Archaeological Investigations.Google Scholar
Bogaard, A., Charles, M., Twiss, K.C., et al. ., 2009. Private pantries and celebrated surplus: storing and sharing food at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Central Anatolia. Antiquity 83, 649–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogaard, A., Charles, M. & Twiss, K.C., 2010. Food storage and sharing at Çatalhöyük: the botanical and faunal evidence, in The Principle of Sharing. Segregation and construction of social identities at the transition from foraging to farming, ed. Benz, M.. Berlin: ex oriente, 313–29.Google Scholar
Bogaard, A., Fochesato, M. & Bowles, S., 2019. The farming-inequality nexus: new insights from ancient Western Eurasia. Antiquity 93, 1129–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P., 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boz, B. & Hager, L.D., 2013. Living above the dead: intramural burial practices at Çatalhöyük, in Humans and Landscapes of Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 413–40.Google Scholar
Buchli, V., 2014. Material register, surface, and form at Çatalhöyük, in Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society: Vital matters, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 280–303.Google Scholar
Carsten, J., 2018. House lives as ethnography/biography. Social Anthropology 26(1), 103–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, T., Haddow, S.D., Russell, N., Bogaard, A. & Tsoraki, C., 2015. Laying the foundations: creating households at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, in Assembling Çatalhöyük, eds Hodder, I. & Marciniak, A.. Leeds: European Association of Archaeologists, 97–110.Google Scholar
Cessford, C., 2005a. Absolute dating at Çatalhöyük, in Changing Materialities at Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 1995–99 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 65–99.Google Scholar
Cessford, C., 2005b. Overall discussion of Buildings 1 and 5, in Excavating Çatalhöyük: South, North and KOPAL Area reports from the 1995–99 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 531–49.Google Scholar
Chadwick, A., 2003. Post-processualism, professionalization and archaeological methodologies. Towards reflective and radical practice. Archaeological Dialogues 10(1), 97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeMarrais, E., 2016. Making pacts and cooperative acts: the archaeology of coalition and consensus. World Archaeology 48(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirergi, G.A., Twiss, K.C., Bogaard, A., Green, L., Ryan, P. & Farid, S., 2014. Of bins, basins and banquets: storing, handling and sharing at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, in Integrating Çatalhöyük: Themes from the 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 91–108.Google Scholar
Düring, B.S., 2006. Constructing Communities: Clustered Neighbourhood Settlements of the Central Anatolian Neolithic ca. 8500–5500 Cal. BC. Doctoral thesis, Leiden University.Google Scholar
Eddisford, D., 2011. Building 77, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2011, ed. Farid, S., 32–8. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2011Google Scholar
Eddisford, D., 2013. Building 49, in Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 313–56.Google Scholar
Eriksen, M.H., 2016. Commemorating dwelling: the death and burial of houses in Iron and Viking Age Scandinavia. European Journal of Archaeology 19(3), 477–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, M.H., 2019. Architecture, Society, and Ritual in Viking Age Scandinavia: Doors, dwellings, and domestic space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farid, S. 2005. Level X relative heights, Buildings 23 & 18 and Building 9, in Excavating Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 1995–1999 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 103–37.Google Scholar
Farid, S., 2013. Buildings 52/51, in Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 357–98.Google Scholar
Fokkens, H. & Arnoldussen, S., 2008. Towards new methods, in Bronze Age Settlement Sites in the Low Countries, eds Arnoldussen, S. & Fokkens, H.. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1–16.Google Scholar
Gosden, C., 1999. Anthropology and Archaeology: A changing relationship. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Haddow, S., Sadvari, J., Knüsel, C. & Hadad, R., 2016. A tale of two platforms: commingled remains and the life-course of houses at Neolithic Çatalhöyük, in Theoretical Approaches to Analysis and Interpretation of Commingled Human Remains, ed. Osterholtz, A.J.. New York (NY): Springer, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, E.C., 1997. Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy (2nd edn). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hayden, B., 2018. The Power of Ritual in Prehistory: Secret societies and the origins of social complexity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinchcliffe, S., 2010. Working with multiples: a non-representational approach to environmental issues, in Taking-Place: Non-representational Theories and Geography, eds Anderson, B. & Harrison, P.. Farnham: Ashgate, 303–20.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 2012. Entangled: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Malden (MA): Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. (ed.) 2013. Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 2014a. Çatalhöyük: the leopard changes its spots. A summary of recent work. Anatolian Studies 64, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. 2014b. The vitalities of Çatalhöyük, in Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society: Vital matters, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–32.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 2018. Introduction: Two forms of history making in the Neolithic of the Middle East, in Religion, History, and Place in the Origin of Settled Life, ed. Hodder, I. Boulder (CO): University Press of Colorado, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. & Cessford, C., 2004. Daily practice and social memory at Çatalhöyük. American Antiquity 69(1), 17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I. & Pels, P., 2010. History houses: a new interpretation of architectural elaboration at Çatalhöyük, in Religion in the Emergence of Civilization: Çatalhöyük as a case study, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 163–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, D. & Smyth, J. (eds), 2013. Tracking the Neolithic House in Europe: Sedentism, architecture and practice. New York (NY): Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horne, L., 1982. The household in space: dispersed holdings in an Iranian village. The American Behavioral Scientist 25(6), 677–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horne, L., 1991. Reading village plans: architecture and social change in northeastern Iran. Expedition 33(1), 44–52.Google Scholar
House, M., 2013a. Building 77, in Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 485–504.Google Scholar
House, M., 2013b. The sequence of Buildings 59 and 60, in Çatalhöyük Excavations: The 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 441–74.Google Scholar
Joy, J., 2009. Reinvigorating object biography: reproducing the drama of object lives. World Archaeology 41(4), 540–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyce, R.A. & Gillespie, S.D. (eds), 2000. Beyond Kinship: Social and material reproduction in house societies. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, C., 1982. Village Ethnoarchaeology: Rural Iran in archaeological perspective. New York (NY): Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kuijt, I. (ed.), 2002. Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social organization, identity, and differentiation. New York (NY): Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuijt, I. 2018. Material geographies of house societies: reconsidering Neolithic Çatalhöyük, Turkey. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 28(4), 565–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, J. & Mol, A., 2008. Globalisation in practice: on the politics of boiling pigswill. Geoforum 39(1), 133–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marciniak, A., Asouti, E., Doherty, C. & Henton, E., 2015a. The nature of the household in the upper levels at Çatalhöyük, in Assembling Çatalhöyük, eds Hodder, I. & Marciniak, A.. Leeds: European Association of Archaeologists, 151–66.Google Scholar
Marciniak, A., Barański, M.Z., Bayliss, A., Czerniak, L., Goslar, T., Southon, J. & Taylor, R.E., 2015b. Fragmenting times: interpreting a Bayesian chronology for the Late Neolithic occupation of Çatalhöyük East, Turkey. Antiquity 89, 154–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, W., 2005a. Life-cycle and life-course of buildings, in Çatalhöyük Perspectives: Reports from the 1995–99 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 125–50.Google Scholar
Matthews, W., 2005b. Micromorphological and microstratigraphic traces of uses and concepts of space, in Inhabiting Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 1995–1999 seasons, ed. IHodder, .. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 355–98.Google Scholar
Matthews, W., 2012. Household life histories and boundaries: microstratigraphy and micromorphology of architectural surfaces in Building 3, in Last House on the Hill: BACH Area reports from Çatalhöyük, Turkey, eds Tringham, R. & Stevanović, M.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 205–22.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Á.E. & Oliver, J., 2017. On decentring ethnicity in buildings research: the settler homestead as assemblage. Journal of Social Archaeology 17(1), 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzucato, C., 2013. Sampling and mapping Çatalhöyük, in Humans and Landscapes of Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 seasons. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 31–64.Google Scholar
Mellaart, J., 1967. Çatal Hüyük: A Neolithic town in Anatolia. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Meskell, L., 2008. The nature of the beast: curating animals and ancestors at Çatalhöyük. World Archaeology 40(3), 373-89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milek, K., 2012. Floor formation processes and the interpretation of site activity areas: an ethnoarchaeological study of turf buildings at Thverá, northeast Iceland. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 31(2), 119–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, B.J., 2014. Relational networks and religious sodalities at Çatalhöyük, in Religion at Work in a Neolithic Society, ed. Hodder, I.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 159–86.Google Scholar
Nakamura, C. & Meskell, L., 2009. Articulate bodies: forms and figures at Çatalhöyük. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 16(3), 205–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nevett, L.C. 1999. House and Society in the Ancient Greek World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Noble, G., 2017. Woodland in the Neolithic of Northern Europe: The forest as ancestor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilloud, M.A., 2009. Community Structure at Neolithic Çatalhöyük: Biological Distance Analysis of Household, Neighborhood, and Settlement. Doctoral thesis, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Russell, M. 1993. Are households universal? On misunderstanding domestic groups in Swaziland. Development and Change 24(4), 755–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, N., Martin, L. & Twiss, K.C., 2009. Building memories: commemorative deposits at Çatalhöyük. Anthropozoologica, 44(1), 103–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevanović, M., 2012a. Building and caring for the house at Çatalhöyük, in Last House on the Hill: BACH Area reports from Çatalhöyük, Turkey, eds Tringham, R. & Stevanović, M.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 173–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevanović, M., 2012b. Summary of results from the excavation of the BACH Area (Building 3 and Spaces 87, 88, 89, in Last House on the Hill: BACH Area reports from Çatalhöyük, Turkey, eds Tringham, R. & Stevanović, M.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 81–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J., 2015. ‘Up in flames’: a visual exploration of a burnt building at Çatalhöyük in GIS, in Assembling Çatalhöyük, eds Hodder, I. & Marciniak, A.. Leeds: European Association of Archaeologists, 127–49.Google Scholar
Tringham, R., 1991. Households with faces: the challenge of gender in prehistoric architectural remains 1991, in Gero, J.M. & Conkey, M.W. (eds), Engendering Archaeology: Women and prehistory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 93–131.Google Scholar
Tringham, R., 1995. Archaeological houses, households, housework and the home, in The Home: Words, Interpretations, Meanings and Environments, eds Benjamin, D.N. & Stea, D.. Aldershot: Avebury, 79–107.Google Scholar
Tripković, J., 2017. Building 131, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2017, ed. Haddow, S.D., 36–47. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2017Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2012. Excavations in the North Area, 2012, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2012, ed. Tung, B., 9–34. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2012Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2013a. Building with mud: an analysis of architectural materials at Çatalhöyük, in Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 seasons, ed. Hodder, I.. Los Angeles (CA): Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 67–80.Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2013b. Excavations in the North Area, 2013, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2013, ed. Tung, B., 8–44. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2013Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2014. Excavations in the North Area, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2014, ed. Haddow, S.D., 13–42. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2014Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2015. Excavations in the North Area, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2015, ed. Haddow, S.D., 22–7. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2015Google Scholar
Tung, B., 2016. Building 131, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2016, ed. Haddow, S.D., 19–32. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2016Google Scholar
Tung, B. & Mickel, A., 2015. Building 131, in Çatalhöyük Archive Report 2015, ed. Haddow, S.D., 28–34. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/2016Google Scholar
Twiss, K., 2012. The complexities of home cooking: public feasts and private meals inside the Çatalhöyük house. eTopoi. Journal for Ancient Studies, Special Volume 2, 53–73.Google Scholar
Wilk, R.R., 1983 Little house in the jungle: the causes of variation in house size among modern Kekchi Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2(2), 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilk, R.R. & Rathje, W.L., 1982. Household archaeology. American Behavioral Scientist 25(6), 617–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, K.I., 2014. Domestication and inequality? Households, corporate groups and food processing tools at Neolithic Çatalhöyük. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 33, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar