Çatalhöyük is a key Neolithic site located in south central Turkey. It is one of the largest and best studied early agricultural settlements in Southwest Asia, and it has also revealed a significant record of symbolic expression, such as wall paintings. Çatalhöyük, in fact, comprises two mounds, an East mound where most excavations have been focused and a smaller West mound of early Chalcolithic date. Çatalhöyük was originally excavated in the early 1960s by James Mellaart, but archaeological fieldwork subsequently stopped and recommenced only in 1993 under the overall direction of Ian Hodder – see Hodder (2006) for a summary.
In summer, the alluvial and marl plain dried out, and the Çarşamba river returned to its main channel, which ran next to Çatalhöyük. The strong wet-dry seasonal contrast in river and wetland hydrology has been confirmed by stable carbon and oxygen isotope analyses on samples taken across the surface of large Unio mollusk shells found on-site; the results for sequential samples showed isotopic variations explainable by seasonal fluctuations in local water levels as the bivalve’s shell grew (Bar-Yosef Mayer et al., 2012). The river “flooding phase” at Çatalhöyük appears to have prompted a nucleated rather than dispersed settlement pattern on the Çarşamba fan, for only this single large site is known during the ceramic Neolithic, whereas several smaller settlements existed during both the preceding aceramic Neolithic and subsequent early Chalcolithic periods. The distinctive lifeways at Neolithic Çatalhöyük may, in consequence, have been partly an adaptation to specific hydro-environmental conditions.
The “flood phase” at Çatalhöyük can be linked to a period of wetter climate in the eastern Mediterranean during the early Holocene, and its ending coincides with the well-known 8.2 ka BP cold, dry climatic event. However, lake isotope data show that wetter climatic conditions in central Turkey had started by 9500 BC and continued until ∼4500 BC, thus spanning a longer time period than the Çarşamba flood phase. Its timing must therefore have been affected by local factors, such as river avulsion and a changing depocenter, as well as regional climatic changes. Its onset, for example, would have been affected by a change in river course from an easterly to a northerly orientation when the Çarşamba broke through a sand spit of the former Konya lake (Figure 1).
More recent geoarchaeological fieldwork has been extended to include the nearby predecessor aceramic Neolithic site of Boncuklu, as well as further analysis of the sediment fill at and around Çatalhöyük, e.g., the sourcing of mudbricks and lime plasters (Love, 2012; Doherty, 2013). A new program of coring and ditch sectioning around the mounds took place in 2007–2009 in order to build a picture of the site environs at higher spatial resolution. At this fine spatial scale, the Neolithic landscape would have been a mosaic of upstanding marl hummocks, seasonally wet flood basins, and riparian zone river channels, some of which would have provided microhabitats suitable for more intensive “garden-scale” crop cultivation (Charles et al., 2014).
Çatalhöyük lies close to the volcanic terrain of Cappadocia, from where it obtained obsidian for lithic artifacts. A tephra layer found in eastern Mediterranean lake and marine cores has been linked geochemically to one of the Central Anatolian stratovolcanoes and dates to the ceramic Neolithic (Zanchetta et al., 2011; Schmitt et al., 2014). This may provide an explanation for an enigmatic wall painting at Çatalhöyük, which has been interpreted as showing a twin-peaked volcano erupting above a settlement.
- Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. E., Leng, M. J., Aldridge, D. C., Arrowsmith, C., Gümüş, B. A., and Sloane, H. J., 2012. Modern and early-middle Holocene shells of the freshwater mollusc Unio, from Çatalhöyük in the Konya Basin, Turkey: preliminary palaeoclimatic implications from molluscan isotope data. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(1), 76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Charles, M., Doherty, C., Asouti, E., Bogaard, A., Henton, E., Larsen, C. S., Ruff, C. B., Ryan, P., Sadvari, J. W., and Twiss, K. C., 2014. Landscape and taskscape at Çatalhöyük: an integrated perspective. In Hodder, I. (ed.), Integrating Çatalhöyük: Themes from the 2000–2008 Seasons. Los Angeles: UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. Çatal Research Project 10. British Institute at Ankara Monograph 49. Monumenta Archaeologica 32, pp. 69–87.Google Scholar
- Doherty, C., 2013. Sourcing Çatalhöyük’s clays. In Hodder, I. (ed.), Substantive Technologies at Çatalhöyük: Reports from the 2000–2008 Seasons. Los Angeles: UCLA Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press. Çatal Research Project 9. British Institute at Ankara Monograph 48. Monumenta Archaeologica 31, pp. 51–66.Google Scholar
- Driessen, P. M., and De Meester, T., 1969. Soils of the Çumra Area, Turkey. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation Wageningen, Agricultural Research Report 720. Wageningen: Pudoc.Google Scholar
- Hodder, I., 2006. The Leopard’s tale: revealing the mysteries of Çatalhöyük. New York: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
- Roberts, N., Boyer, P., and Parish, R., 1996. Preliminary results of geoarchaeological investigations at Çatalhöyük. In Hodder, I. (ed.), On the Surface: Çatalhöyük 1993–95. Cambridge/London: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research/British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, pp. 19–40.Google Scholar
- Roberts, N., Boyer, P., and Merrick, J., 2007. The KOPAL on-site and off-site excavations and sampling. In Hodder, I. (ed.), Excavating Çatalhöyük: South, North and KOPAL Area Reports from the 1995–99 Seasons. Cambridge/London: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research/British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara. Çatalhöyük Research Project 3. British Institute at Ankara Monograph 37, pp. 553–572.Google Scholar