ÇATALHÖYÜK 1995 ARCHIVE REPORT

Çatalhöyük Investigations 1995 - Pottery Report

Jonathan Last

In the 1995 field season pottery derived from two areas of the east mound:

1. Surface Scraping

Following the major programmes of surface scraping conducted in 1993 and 1994, activity in 1995 was restricted to three 10x10m squares on the northern eminence, immediately to the south of the block of 16 squares investigated in the previous years. A total of 636 sherds were recovered (Fig. 1). Compared with the squares to the north, the pottery from the new squares (1030/1160; 1030/1150; 1020/1160) contained a slightly lower proportion of Neolithic sherds (49.5% cf. 57.3%), although this figure is rather higher than that from square 1040/1140 to the south-east. Hence the ratios of handmade and wheelmade ceramics fits the trend on this part of the site. Sherd density is also intermediate between the two adjacent areas (note that soil volumes for the new squares are estimated, so these figures are very approximate). However, the mean weight of both Neolithic and Classical sherds from the new squares is greater than the average for either of the old areas (although within the range of the individual squares to the north). Within the new squares, the proportion of Neolithic pottery and the mean weight of all sherds is slightly higher to the south (1030/1150), while density appears greatest to the west (1020/1160).

In terms of the relative date of the new pottery there are some interesting typological and metrical differences from the assemblage to the north. There is also much variation between the three squares, variability indicative of the very mixed nature of the surface assemblages, particularly in terms of the proportion of open and closed forms, mean rim diameter, and the proportion of light and dark coloured bodies. But overall the latter figure corresponds well with the values for the squares to the north, as does mean rim and base thickness. On the other hand, compared with the northern squares, the new area has many more holemouth forms, an absence of footed bases, and many more lugs, including a high proportion of Type 1 (straight profile) lugs. By comparison with the ceramic material from Mellaart's levels all these features indicate that the 1995 assemblage is typologically earlier than that from the squares immediately to the north, and is perhaps equivalent to level V.

The Neolithic assemblage from these squares lacked unusual or well-preserved pieces, with the exception of a vertically-placed lug in 904. This context also included an artificially rounded potdisc, as well as a fine Chalcolithic painted jar rim.

The Classical assemblage was predominantly coarse wares with few diagnostic sherds. Most of these appear to be relatively late, predominantly Byzantine with a scatter of later glazed wares continuing the pattern identified on this part of the site. Notable pieces include:

900 - large cream slip flanged bowl rim (Byzantine?).

901 - fineware body sherd in pinkish fabric painted with concentric red stripes (Hellenistic).

904 - cream slip bowl rim with finger impressed decoration on top of rim and roughly incised wavy line on exterior face (Byzantine).

906 - three fragments of straight-sided bowl with light blue glaze on internal face and partial yellow/green glaze externally (medieval).

2. Mellaart's Backfill

Preparations for continued excavation within a 20x20m square in the area of James Mellaart's trenches of the 1960's involved the removal of a considerable volume of backfill, which contained a large quantity of pottery. 1217 sherds were recovered, of which 46.3% are Neolithic. The wheelmade pieces are, however, much larger: an average of 39.3g per sherd compared with 14.5g for the Neolithic, so the spoil presumably derived from an area with a high density of Classical activity and from which little material was collected. The major deposits within the fill, 1006 and 1020, contained hardly any early Neolithic organic-tempered sherds which may have derived from the trenches underneath. Only 1014 and 1019, two small but entirely Neolithic assemblages, look like early material. Two of the five rims in 1014 and three of the seven body sherds in 1019 contain vegetable temper and all the rims from these contexts are relatively thick, which suggests a date around level VII. In addition they include a majority of open forms, which also indicates a date of level VII-VIII, while the other units - with the exception of the presumably late surface contexts 1000 to 1004 - have more holemouth forms. The majority of the assemblage is therefore redeposited and of no contextual significance, but some of the individual pieces are of interest:

Neolithic:

1006 - dark-faced holemouth rim with emerging basket handle and lug (Fig. 2:1).

1014 - an unusual slightly everted mottled grey holemouth rim of level VII type with organic temper (Fig. 2:2).

1020 - light yellowish-brown burnished rim sherd with emerging basket handle;

- base of small lugged vessel, burnished red-brown and uniquely decorated with horizontal incised lines (Fig. 2:3);

- a rare double-perforated lug.

Classical:

1006/1020 - several pieces of a large, handled storage vessel in a grey fabric with large mineral inclusions and rough surfaces as well as a grey/white deposit on the internal face.

1020 - large part of a cream/yellow slipped Hellenistic jar with bands of orange/red paint on rim and belly (Fig. 3:1).

1042 - small shallow bowl with severely inverted rim, in a fine buff fabric (Fig. 3:2).

3. Excavation

Excavation proceeded on a small scale within two adjacent rooms on the northern eminence, and the level VII "court" no. 15 in Mellaart's area. A total of 49 sherds were recovered by hand collection or dry sieving: 23 from the former and 25 from the latter area. In addition a single, very abraded sherd came from the midden deposit in building VII.2. These relatively small quantities probably reflect in the first case a general lack of pottery within building fills (there were no sherds on the floors of the rooms), and in the second the scarcity of ceramics from the earlier levels at Çatalhöyük (on the whole finds were plentiful from the midden deposits, with animal bone and clay balls particularly common).

a) Building 1 (north)

All the material was Neolithic with the exception of a single, small sherd from 1125 (a later scoop within the room fill) which is probably Classical (Fig. 4). The Building 1 assemblage consists of only two sherds from the larger room (71) and 21 from the smaller (70), of which two derived from the fire installation (no. 11) in the south-west corner of the room.

In general the assemblage was well-preserved, with a mean weight per sherd of 12.6g and very low abrasion. The pottery is mainly dark-faced (45%) or with dark mottles (32%). Fabrics are dark grey (39%), partly grey (30%) or reddish (17%). 85% of the sherds are at least lightly burnished. Five of the sherds are rims, four of these being holemouths (Fig. 5). Despite the small assemblage the predominance of dark-faced holemouths, as well as attributes of wall thickness and rim shape, suggest a rather early date for this building - probably equivalent to Mellaart's level V or VI.

The assemblage can be divided by depth and location within the room fill, but few differences are apparent. Sherds are distributed roughly equally between the northern and southern halves of room 70, although those from the south are slightly larger. Similarly, the sherds from the contexts nearer the floor are a little larger and less abraded than those higher up in the fill, but these differences may not be significant. More interesting are the two cases of sherd joins from different contexts: firstly between 1104, the uppermost level of building fill in the north of the room (the larger piece) and the underlying deposit 1126; secondly between 1126 again (the smaller fragment) and 1147 just to the south, above the partition wall. The joins indicate that the upper fill, at least in the north of room 70, should be considered as a single deposit. The presence within these units of a number of sherds of very similar fabric (but no direct joins), which could derive from the same vessel, strengthens this conclusion.

The two sherds from room 71 both came from the fill above the bench in the north-west corner. They are of similar fabrics and both had black, carbonised deposits on their internal surface, so these pieces may also be linked.

b) Court VII:15 (mell)

Compared with the Building 1 assemblage the sherds from the "court" deposit are somewhat more abraded and rather smaller (Fig. 6). However, mean weight is greater because the sherds are a good deal thicker. This typologically earlier material has more light coloured (64%) and grey surfaces, and fewer burnished sherds (24%). 73% of sherds have some vegetable temper, and 39% lack mineral inclusions entirely. There are seven rims (Fig. 7), all of straight bowls, and three bases, all with a rounded profile. There are no lugs. On the basis of sherd thickness, inclusions and vessel form the assemblage lies typologically somewhere between levels VII and VIII.

The area can be divided into two sets of contexts: the midden fill with discrete lumps of plaster and mudbrick as well as many ashy lenses; and a more homogeneous building fill into which the midden was apparently cut. Despite the probable stratigraphic relationship, however, the slightly more numerous finds from the midden deposit appear typologically earlier, being thicker and with a higher proportion of vegetable tempered pieces. Hence the midden appears to contain a level VIII assemblage, while the building fill is level VII. The formation processes represented by the two deposits are also rather different, with the sherds from the midden considerably larger on average (17.4g cf. 7.3g) but more abraded. The single, small, also vegetable tempered sherd from VII.2 was very abraded as well. This material may therefore have been exposed rather longer to weathering processes, perhaps indicating a relatively slow accumulation of the midden layers or that the sherds were redeposited from elsewhere. This may in turn explain the lack of fit between the two assemblages and the stratigraphic information. Alternatively, the transition from organic to mineral temper may not be a sudden or smooth one and these sherds may simply derive from contexts where different types of pottery were in use. Further investigation in 1996 should clarify the relationships here.

List of figures

Fig. 1 - Table: 1995 surface scaping quantitative information

Fig. 2 - Neolithic sherds from Mellaart's backfill

Fig. 3 - Classical sherds from Mellaart's backfill

Fig. 4 - Table: List of Ceramic finds from Building 1

Fig. 5 - Neolithic rim sherds from Building 1

Fig. 6 - Table: Ceramic finds from VII.15 and VII.2 (no. 24)

Fig. 7 - Neolithic rim sherds from "court" VII.15