ÇATALHÖYÜK 2004 ARCHIVE REPORT

CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIALS REPORTS

Phytolith

Emma Jenkins

Institute of Archaeology, University College London

Abstract

In 2004 the collection of phytolith samples for analysis continued. Samples were taken from all areas currently under excavation. In total 52 units were sampled: 19 samples from the 4040 Area; 1 from South Summit Area; 7 from the South Area; and 8 from the TP Area. In addition, 16 samples were taken from the excavation in the BACH Aea to be processed in addition to the BACH samples already in preparation for the publication.

Özet

2004 yılında da analiz için fitolit örnekleri alınmaya devam edilmiştir. Şu anda kazıların devam etmekte olduğu bütün alanlardan fitolit örnekleri alınmıştır. Toplam olarak 52 üniteden örnek alınmıştır: 19 örnek 40x0 alanından; 1 tane Summit alanından; 7 tane Güney alanından; ve 8 tane TP alanından. Buna ek olarak, BACH alanından da yayın için 16 tane örnek alınmış olup, analizlerine başlanmıştır.

2004 season

Some on site ‘rough' processing and analysis of priority samples was undertaken so that ‘feed back' could be given to the excavators. The methodology used in the ‘rough' sampling is as follows: 1. the sample from each unit was sub-sampled by weighing out 2 mg of sediment from the original sample. 2. The sand-sized particles were eradicated by sieving the sediment through a 125 μm mesh. 3. The clays were then removed by putting the samples in glass beakers and adding 15 ml of the dispersant Sodium hexametaphosphate (Calgon) to each of the beakers. Distilled water was added up to the height of 8 cm. At this height the particles greater than 5 μm settle in one hour. After one hour and ten minutes the suspense containing the clays was poured off. Subsequent pourings were undertaken at hourly intervals until the suspense was clear.   The sample was then pipetted onto a microscope slide and temporarily mounted with distilled water. It was found that this limited processing was adequate for assessing the presence/absence of different types and genera of phytoliths.

Eight samples were processed using this ‘rough' method and the following observations were made:

Unit (10088), 4040 Area
This unit was rich in phytoliths with many single and multi-celled forms present. The majority of these were from grass husks, with some being from large-seeded grasses. In addition, phytoliths from sedges (Cyperaceae) and reeds (Phragmites) were observed.

Unit (10089), 4040 Area
This unit was not as abundant in phytoliths as unit (10088). There appeared to be more phytoliths from the plant stems or leaves rather than the husks. There were no husks found that could be identified to genus, although common reed was present.

Unit (8882), 4040 Area
Again, this unit had many phytoliths with reeds, sedges, and grass husk phytoliths, including one barley husk, all being found.

Unit (100943), TP Area
This sample was also rich in phytoliths. Again, both reeds and sedges were both present as well as a phytolith from a barely husk.

Unit (7954), 4040 Area
This unit has grass phytoliths from both the stems/leaves and the husks of the plant. Reed was present in this unit. Diatoms were also observed.

Unit (7957), 4040 Area
This unit contained less phytoliths than unit (7954). Reeds and grasses were both present, as well as diatoms.

Unit (7844), 4040 Area
This unit was rich in phytoliths with grass and reed phytoliths being particularly abundant. Sedges were also present.

Unit (11029), 4040
Reed, sedge and multi-cells from grasses were all present in this unit.