ÇATALHÖYÜK 2000 ARCHIVE REPORT

Faunal Remains

Fauna Kalıntıları

Louise Martin, Nerissa Russell and Sheelagh Frame

Louise Martin, Nerissa Russell, Stephanie Meece, Lisa Yeomans, Banu Aydinoglugil, Amanda Erwin (North and South areas); Sheelagh Frame (BACH and West mound); Nerissa Russell and Kevin J. McGowan (bird bones); Emma Jenkins (microfauna); Nerissa Russell (bone tools)

Abstract

During the summer 2000 study season, zooarchaeological work focused on completing the East mound priority units selected for integrated analysis for the 2002 project publication. Recording of Building 1 material was completed, as was the selection from Building 5, Space 181, Kopal, and other areas which were chosen to provide representative samples of spatial and temporal variability. The list of animals identified remains the same as in previous seasons’ work, as do the trends observed in the relative proportions of taxa. More evidence was found to support the idea of animal (sheep/goat) penning in Space 181, and these early levels of the site also produced numbers of pathological sheep jaws which require further investigation. Samples of bird bone, eggshell, fish bone and microfauna were exported for identification and analysis by various specialists, and a major period of faunal analysis begins in November 2000.

Preliminary work on the West mound material showed that the range of taxa is similar to that found on the East mound. However, there seems to be an increase in the amount of sheep and goat at the expense of the less common fauna.

Özeti

2000 senesi mevsiminin zooarkeoloji çalışmaları, 2002 senesinde ortak calışma analizleri olarak basıma gireceğinden, Doğu Höyük öncelikli birimlerin analizlerinin bitirilmesi üzerine yoğunlaşmıştır. Bina 1 malzemesinin kayda geçmesi tamalanmış, aynı zamanda alansal ve zamansal çeşitliliği temsil etmek amacıyla Bina 5, Alan 181, Kopal ve baska bölgelerden de bir dizi örnek kaydı yapılmıştır. Belirlenen hayvanların listesi ve taksada gözlemlenen göreceli oranlar, önceki mevsimlerde yapılan çalışmalarla aynıdır. Alan 181’in ahır (koyun ve/veya keçi için) olarak kullanım fikrini destekleyen kanıtlar çoğalmıştır. Höyüğün bu erken tabaklarında, üzerinde daha fazla araştırma yapılması gerekilen, bir çok patalojik kuzu çenesi tespit edilmiştir. Kuş kemiği, yumurta kabuğu, balık kılçığı ve mikrofauna örnekleri çeşitli uzmanlar tarafından tanımlanmak ve incelenmek için ülkeden çıkarılmıştır.

Batı höyükte yapılan ilk çalışmaların sonuçları, burdakı taxanın dağılımı Doğu höyüğünkisine benzer olduğunu göstemiştir. Keçi ve koyun kemiklerinde bir artış ancak daha sıradışı faunada bir azalış görülmektedir.

Introduction

During the summer of 2000, identification and recording of animal bone material continued in the field laboratory at Çatalhöyük. The main aim of this ‘study season’ was to complete the recording of the 355 East mound priority units which had been selected for focused study and integrated analysed, and which will form the core material for the forthcoming project publication in 2002. The zooarchaeology field laboratory began work on 20^th July, and two team members, Stephanie Meece and Lisa Yeomans, continued work into November in order to achieve the target.

Recording of the remainder of the 355 units was not focused on any particular area of the site, but instead consisted of gap-filling across various areas and levels. For example, animal bone from all contexts excavated in Building 1 (North area) are now all recorded, as are the selection from Building 5 (also North area). Building 1 in particular allows for a detailed exploration of the use of space within a Çatalhöyük house. We have now also increased the samples recorded from the lowest levels excavated on the mound, from the dumps of Space 181 in the South area (the focus of 1999 excavations), which potentially represent the earliest occupation and are therefore of great interest. We also studied more samples from the offsite area, Kopal, also excavated in 1999. In general, patterns of animal representation noted for each area in previous seasons were confirmed by the further work. No new taxa were added to the genus/species lists presented in previous reports (Russell and Martin 2000; Frame, Russell and Martin 1999; Russell and Martin 1998).

Relative proportions of taxa

Faunal material is still being added to the database, and relative proportions of taxa may change slightly with future analyses, although general trends are unlikely to alter significantly. The tables presented here are based on material recorded up until early September 2000. There are over 130,000 fragments of animal bone and teeth recorded, of which over 14,000 are diagnostic to genus.

For the purposes of this report, the East mound has been divided into six broad analytical units: Summit; Building 1, North area; Building 5, North area; South area, levels VII-X and South area, Space 181 (pre level 12), and Kopal. Although the exact chronology of some of these areas remains unclear, it is probable that the ordering of the areas as described here reflects a sequence of later to earlier occupation on the mound.

Counts and percentages of the major food animals only (cattle, equids, sheep/goat, pig/boar and cervids) are presented in Table 5 to Table 8. Other taxa such as carnivores, lagomorphs, reptiles, birds and fish are not included. Table 5 and Table 6 show counts and percentages of the main taxa by the Number of Identified Specimens (NISP); Table 7 and Table 8 show counts and percentages calculated by Diagnostic Zones (DZs) (following Watson 1979). NISP counts can be inflated by high fragmentation of material, and by the presence of lots of horn cores or antlers in an assemblage. DZ counts are based on selected, standardly occurring parts of the skeleton (e.g. omitting horncores, antlers, additional metapodia and phalanges). The differences between the two forms of quantification are most noticeable with the Cervids, which are often represented only by antler fragments. Both types of count are needed to properly explore animal treatment.

Variations in taxonomic representation are difficult to interpret, because they may represent temporal trends, or contextual/spatial differences. For example, Building 1 and Building 5 represent primarily internal contexts, while Kopal, and perhaps also Space 181, are offsite; South area levels VII-X and Summit include both internal and external contexts. These sources of potential variation should be kept in mind for the following discussion.

Cattle

The proportion of cattle remains generally appears to increase through the sequence, constituting 13% (NISP) of the total in Space 181 and 47% in the Summit area (see Table 6). Contextual variation, however, clearly plays a part: the offsite Kopal area shows the highest proportion of cattle (51%) which may relate to the location of butchery, feasting or dumping activities, and there are relatively low proportions of cattle remains within both of the North area buildings (19%). We have previously noted how large carcass parts of cattle tend to be found in middens or primary house fills (although the importance of horn cores and skull parts in structural installations is clear); a detailed contextual analysis is therefore needed before assessing whether cattle really become more common through time at Çatalhöyük.

Equids

Equid remains tend to constitute a small percentage of the fauna overall. They are most common in the South area (6-8% NISP), and rare in the North and Summit areas (0.5-3%), and also in Kopal (2%). Within the equid category, we continue to recognise three morphological types that seem to relate most closely to Equus caballus (wild horse), Equus hydruntinus (European wild ass) and Equus hemionus (Asiatic half-ass or Onager). The impression is that the smaller wild asses dominate the South area assemblages while wild horse remains are infrequent. Small sample sizes of equid bones in the other areas of the site preclude a detailed exploration of this relationship, but it is clear that by the latter part of the sequence at Çatalhöyük, equids are not particularly important to the inhabitants as a food source. Interestingly, however, wild horse is present throughout the sequence.

Sheep/Goat

Sheep and goat remains dominate most areas of the site. In the lowest levels, in Space 181, they constitute almost 70% (NISP) and over 80% by DZ, demonstrating their importance possibly from the earliest occupation of the site (see Table 6 and Table 8). In the overlying levels in the South area (Levels VII-X) they decline in importance slightly, although relative proportions rise again in the North area, where they constitute >60% by NISP (>80% by DZ). In all areas, sheep remains greatly outnumber those of goats (see Table 9). The small size of the sheep bones hints at their domestic status, and the overall picture of their dominance suggests that the inhabitants of Çatalhöyük were heavily reliant on these animals as staples for meat. The Kopal area sees the lowest proportions of sheep/goat (27% NISP, 19% DZ) which is likely to result from particular food preparation, consumption and discard activities being spatially discrete.

In 1999, several shed deciduous sheep/goat premolars were recorded from ‘penning’ deposits in South area Space 181. Further deciduous premolars were recorded this year from penning deposits from Space 181, lending more support to the idea that caprines were kept for part of their lives at least in these ‘between-building’ areas on site. These deposits also contained the articulated skeletons of three foetal lambs, probably stillborn animals left where they were delivered, indicating that pregnant ewes were also confined in this area.

Some interesting developmental pathologies were observed this season from unit 5290 in Space 181. Numerous sheep/goat mandibles exhibited a condition whereby the roots of the developing permanent molars were growing downwards before the tooth had begun erupting into the jaw. This resulted in the roots puncturing the mandibular ramus and seemingly leading to infection/exostoses in many cases. These developmental abnormalities require further study, but an initial impression is that the jaws show a disjuncture between the timing of permanent tooth eruption and deciduous tooth wear/shedding; this may be a genetic anomaly transmitted within a small, inbred population, or may result from tooth crowding with reduction in mandible size, or may be the consequence of poor nutrition.

Pig/Boar

The proportions of Sus scrofa are relatively low in each area, ranging from 1-12% NISP. They are highest in the offsite Kopal area, and lowest in the North and Summit areas. Their greater frequency in Kopal is interesting since the other likely offsite area in Space 181 has only 4%. It is quite likely, therefore, that treatment of pig/boar carcasses is spatially varied, and that onsite contexts may not be an accurate reflection of their use. At present, we are assuming that Sus remains belong to wild boar on the basis of their large size.

Cervids

This category includes red deer, fallow and roe, but since most skeletal elements are antler pieces (either worked or fragmented) it is often difficult to distinguish which of the larger cervids (red or fallow) are represented. Cervids show the largest discrepancy between NISP and DZ counts, because of the high proportion of antler pieces (which are not counted as DZs). This is particularly so in North area Building 1 which has 13% cervid by NISP and none by DZ. The antler fragments in this structure may well represent either installations or by-products of working. The South area has 3-8% cervids by NISP which again decrease by DZ. The 8%+10% of cervids in the offsite Kopal area indicate that there are a significant number of postcranial elements included here, and may show deer butchery or consumption activities in this location.

Both cervids and pigs seem to be represented by all body parts in the earlier deposits from Kopal and Space 181. Later, the deer especially are present mainly as cranial remains. Either they are processed differently from other taxa, with the meaty parts left off-site or on the periphery, or in later periods they are no longer hunted near the site and only selected parts are brought in from a distance for their symbolic and technological value.

Further Work

Having completed the recording of the units selected for analysis, over the next several months we will be conducting a more thorough and integrated analysis of the animal bone than we have to date. It is clear that we need to explore further the contextual variation at the site, if for no other reason than to sort out how much of the variability is attributable to change through time. We will be examining variation at multiple scales: by context, space, building, and level. Lisa Yeomans will begin several months as a research assistant in November to undertake the preliminary stages of this analysis. This will include examination of morphometric variation in the assemblage and comparisons to other assemblages in the region; the construction of mortality profiles; seasonality studies; and the analysis of variation in the treatment of animal remains.

Microfauna by Emma Jenkins

The analysis of the microfauna from Çatalhöyük recommenced for the first time since 1996. Due to the number of years in which no analysis had been conducted, there was a large backlog of samples to work through. The samples consisted of the heavy residue from the flotation material which had been sieved through 4mm, 2mm and 1mm sieves and the bone sorted from the rest of the material. The main aim for this season was to separate the identifiable micromammal and amphibian elements from the large bone fragments, unidentifiable elements and the birds, fish and other reptiles. These selected elements were then exported to Britain where analysis and detailed SEM work can be conducted.

Fish remains

Fish bones and scales are found in many contexts at Çatalhöyük, and are retrieved mainly through the flotation process (appearing in the heavy residue samples). Selected samples from all areas and levels of the site were exported this year for identification by Dr Wim Van Neer, Royal Museum of Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium.

Bird bones by Nerissa Russell and Kevin J. McGowan

There are relatively few bird remains at Çatalhöyük, but birds did form part of the diet and part of the symbolic sphere. This year we have exported most of the bird bone from the units so far studied, with the rest to come at the end of the season in early November. The bones are being identified with the aid of the reference collection at the Cornell Museum of Vertebrates. This work is currently in progress. At this time, we can observe that both waterfowl and raptors of various sorts are well represented. Body parts appear heavily skewed toward wings. The wing of a crane (Grus grus) recovered from space 73 outside Building 1 in the North area is substantially complete and bears cut marks that may indicate it was used as part of a costume. When we have completed the identifications, we will be able to carry out taphonomic and contextual analyses of the bird material.

Bird eggshell

Bird eggshell fragments are commonly found in the heavy residue fractions from flotation samples. Selected eggshell samples have been exported for identification and analysis which will be supervised by Jane Sidell, English Heritage/Institute of Archaeology, University College London.

Bone Tools by Nerissa Russell

During the 2000 field season, I recorded bone tools found at the end of the 1999 season, those found in faunal units analyzed this year and not recognized in the field, and those excavated from the West and BACH areas in 2000. In addition, I spent two days in the Konya Archaeological Museum recording bone tools from earlier seasons that had been sent to the museum before I could record them. Save for any tools that were found in units analyzed after I left, this should complete the recording of known bone tools from the new excavations to date.

These additional tools have not changed the overall picture much, but there was one addition. Both BACH and the West mound yielded a few bone points made by abrading a metapodial so as to flatten the distal condyles substantially on two or more sides. This technique is known from elsewhere, but is not usually used at Çatalhöyük. Little has yet been analyzed from the West, so these may not be unusual there. They do stand out on the East mound in contrast to the vast majority of points. In general, bone tool manufacture techniques (as opposed to the form of the tools) are quite standardized at Çatalhöyük, so the occasional departures warrant further analysis.

BACH Area by Sheelagh Frame

Excavation continued during the 2000 season in the BACH area and the zooarchaeological analysis concentrated on the examination of the new material. The ‘priority’ unit sampling strategy was not used this season. Instead, due to the relatively small amount of bone excavated, the entire assemblage from the 2000 season was analyzed. Most of the excavated material came from graves and a few midden units. In total over 13,000 bone fragments were studied, approximately 10% of which could be identified to taxon. The range of common species was the same as in previous years; sheep, goat, cattle, pig, dog and equid. Sheep and goat made up over 90% of the assemblage and the ratio of sheep to goat is 2:1. These unusual figures are probably due to sampling basis caused by the small amount of bone and the restricted contexts excavated. Other possible biases are discussed briefly below. No new mammalian species were identified. However, one of the bird bones is probably an eagle. Positive identification of this and other bird bones will be done this year in the United States.

The Grave Fills

All of the grave fills appear to be Neolithic backfill. There was no apparent difference between the individual layers of fill identified by excavators within a single grave pit (presumably above, around and below the skeleton?), or between different graves. In every case the condition, fragment size and composition of the bones was typical of house fill and it does not appear that anything was added to these graves or that the grave fill was processed in any way. Comparison of the grave fill with sample of the house fill taken from immediately beside the graves would confirm this.

The midden units

In addition to the grave fills there were a number of units that do not appear to be house fill, but are more typical of middens. All of them are quite small, but are apparently from small, but dense deposits. Most of these units are horizontal lenses from the midden found outside the house wall in the NW corner of the excavation trench. It is possible that some of these units are also from inside the house, either concentrations in certain parts of the house, or the scattered remains of activities carried out within the house just prior to abandonment. Information regarding the relative position of these units and their volume will help sort out these problems.

Taken together these units appear similar to the ‘courtyard’ middens identified in the South area. These are middens which contain evidence for a wide range of activities carried out either in the courtyard or in nearby houses and they are distinct from the specialized deposits found elsewhere. None of the individual units appear to be a distinct feasting deposits although there is the suggestion that a feasting deposit was spread across several excavated lenses. This would also explain the very high number of sheep and goat and the unusual sheep to goat ratio. In a small sample such as this one a feasting deposit, which has a proportionally large number of identifiable bones and a few individuals would skew the overall ratio of taxa.

West Mound by Sheelagh Frame

This year excavation was resumed on the Chalcolithic period West Mound at the Çatal Höyük site. Due to the short season, a limited amount of time was available for analysis of the animal bone but some preliminary work was carried out before the end of the season. It is important to emphasize that these results are likely to be substantially changed when the analysis is complete. Since this work was seen as the beginning of a complete analysis no attempt was made to use either a representational or a random sampling strategy. Instead I examined all the bones from the first excavated level that came from secure contexts as identified by the excavators. Most of these appeared to be prehistoric back fill of the excavated houses. Some exceptions are discussed below. The quantification methods and recording system used were the same as those used in the analysis of the animal bones from the East mound. These issues are discussed in more detail in earlier archive reports (Martin and Russell 1997, 1998.)

A total of 7051 bone fragments were examined, 18% of which could be identified to taxonomic categories. (see Table 10). The taxa represented are sheep, goat, cattle, pig, dog and two sizes of equid. Roe deer, red deer, hare, hedgehog, badger as well as unidentified medium and small carnivores were all represented by one or two bones each. The sample also included a small number of bird bones and a tiny number of fish and amphibian bones. Although12 mammalian species were identified, 3 species represent 95% of the sample (using diagnostic zones. See Watson 1979). Sheep and goat are overwhelmingly predominant, making up 82 % of the total. The next most common bones are cattle (13 %) with the remaining 5 % of the assemblage being made up primarily of equid, and dog. The ratio of sheep to goat is about 5:1. There are also small amounts of human bone in most contexts, possibly from the nearby graves.

Although the range of taxa is similar to those found on the east mound there seems to be an increase in the amount of sheep and goat at the expense of the less common fauna. Interestingly the percentage of cattle bone in the assemblage remains unchanged. The distribution of taxa seems to indicate a concentration on a few species and the elimination of most of the hunted or trapped animals. However, as mentioned above this is a very small sample from a limited set of contexts and further study may well reveal a different pattern.

Sheep and goat were the only taxa that produced more than one measurable bone, but the measurements are significant. Both the sheep and the goat seem to be larger than their Neolithic counterparts from the east mound. If further osteometric studies bear out the apparent size increase in the west mound, it could indicate deliberate breeding of these animals in order to increase their size. Taken together with the increasing percentage of sheep and goat and the vanishing amount of wild animals, there is a suggestion of an increasingly narrow pattern of animal exploitation based on a few domesticated species. The preliminary mortality profile of the sheep and goat also supports the idea of intensive management of herd productivity. It should be noted that although the cattle bones generally appear to be domestic size, there are no measurable bones from this year’s analysis and it is possible that they were wild.

Virtually all of the bones analyzed this year came from house fill. A few units were identified as pits, but the analysis of the bones from these units tends to support the idea that the pits were filled in with the same material as the abandoned houses. None of the pits appeared to have any bones related to the use of the pit. The bones in the house fills were largely characteristic of post-butchery remains, with small amounts of post-consumption waste and worked bone. The long bones were cracked for bone marrow, but did not appear to have been used to produce bone grease as has been suggested for the Neolithic tell remains. This may however, be due to the restricted type of units examined rather than to a cultural pattern. In general the bones appear to have been fairly rapidly buried with little carnivore ravaging. None of the areas examined produced the density of bone that would suggest that these abandoned houses were used for midden areas for significant periods of time. However, they may have been briefly used as discard areas, especially for the discard of primary butchery waste.

There are a few units which to not fit this general pattern. One of the units, 3464, is a very coherent unit and appears to represent one or two discrete butchering events. Most of the bones in this unit appear to have come from a few individual sheep or goats and they include 4 hyoid bones, one with cut marks. Hyoids are paired throat bones that are rarely found archeologically due to their fragility. Cut marks on the hyoid bones are often caused by butchering practices directed at removing the tongue. Most of the remains in 3464 are post-butchery, with the edible parts of the animal removed and discarded elsewhere. The unit may represent a temporary surface in the fill, which was at least occasionally used as an area to butcher animals. The bones were rapidly buried, so the surface cannot have been exposed for long after these bones were deposited. If 3464 does represent a temporary surface in the fill it would suggest that these house fills were not created all at once, but gradually built up over time. 3457 is also a bit unusual in the number of complete bones or large bone fragment. However, there is no clear relationship between the bones apart from their relative completeness. They may represent bones selected for later use in tool making, but none of them have any evidence of having been worked.

Three other units, 3488, 3489 and 3490, are worth examining in a bit more detail as they were identified as possible hearths or burnt floors by the excavators. 3490 appears to be fairly typical fill. However, 3488 and 3489 are atypical. Between 20% and 25% of the bone fragments are burnt which, although higher than the usual 5-10%, is much less than you would expect for a hearth. The rest of the bone consists of small mixed fragments mainly from sheep sized animals. This material is not particularly trampled or rolled in fact most of the edges are sharp and the surfaces clean, but it is more mixed than the surrounding fill. These do not appear to be typical floors or floor sweeping such as those identified in the east mound, which generally show a range of trampling, rolling and mixing, but they may be the garbage related to domestic and/or consumption activities including the ashes from the oven/hearth.

References

Frame, S., N. Russell and L. Martin (1999) Animal Bone Report / Hayvan Kemiği Raporu 1999.

Russell, N. and L. Martin (2000) Neolithic Çatalhöyük: preliminary zooarchaeological results from the renewed excavations, in (eds) M. Mashkour, A. Choyke, H. Buitenhuis and F. Poplin, Archaeozoology of the Near East IV, 164-170. Groningen: ARC Publicatie 32.

Russell, N. and Martin, L. 1998 Çatalhöyük Animal Bone Report 1998.

Watson, J.P.N. 1979 The estimation of the relative frequencies of mammalian species: Khirokitia 1972. Journal of Archaeological Science, 6, 127-37.

Tables

Table 5: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük by NISP

Table 6: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as % NISP

Table 7: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as DZ<

Table 8: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as % DZ

Table 9: Breakdown of sheep/goat, sheep and goat, by DZ count (left) and DZ% (right)

Table 10: Mammalian Species Distribution West Mound

Faunal Remains / Fauna Kalıntıları - Tables

Table 5: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük by NISP

Table 6: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as % NISP

Table 7: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as DZ

Table 8: Relative proportions of the main food animals at Çatalhöyük as % DZ

Table 9: Breakdown of sheep/goat, sheep and goat, by DZ count (left) and DZ% (right)